On each trial two items were presented and subjects were asked to touch the item that had appeared as the prime on the previous trial.
In order to help the participants visualize the balance-imbalance of the contributions of doctor and patient, the scales for the two items were presented visually as one scale balanced symmetrically around the mid-point, representing equal contributions (Fig. 1).
Controlling for swap errors effectively diminished the patients' impairment when two items were presented [ t 9) = 1.3, P = 0.11 ; individual level: Patient 1 versus controls: Z = 0.7; Patient 2: Z = 1.5; Patient 4: Z = 0.3].
Two items are present in peritoneal dialysis, where there has been an important cross-talk between experimental and clinical studies on the mechanisms of fluid transport and on biocompatible dialysis solutions.
Only seven items were present in 50% or more of the observations, whereas eight items were observed in less than 50% of the consultations in the EAP group.
As the two items are presented closer together, mutually suppressive competitive interactions increase and this results in decreased N2pc amplitude.
Study participants were separated into three groups and six items were presented to them in a classroom setting.
The four items were presented with the response options: strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, somewhat agree, strongly agree, dont know/ not sure, or refused to answer; and items except traffic safety for bicycling were reverse scored.
For the 2005 sample the same six items were presented and participants indicated their agreement for each on a 6-point Likert-type scale with response options ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).
In the fast condition, the name of the target stimulus was first acoustically presented from the computer to the patient together with a fixation point in the centre of the screen for 1500 ms. After the auditory presentation, an array of four items was presented on the screen and lasted until the response was made by touching the screen.
