Therefore, to summarize the effects of all these factors on accuracy, the accuracies (r) were analysed using the following linear model rm,n,o,p = datasetm + datasetm.methodn + datasetm.breedo + datasetm.polygenicp + em,n,o,p.
The accuracy results were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA with factors of task (in-between, intensity), homology (none, total, partial), and delay (no delay, intermanual delay).
Following transcription and checking for accuracy, interview data were analysed using two forms of analysis: open coding and focused coding [ 27, 28].
Validation data were analysed using the two-tailed Mann–Whitney U-test and diagnostic accuracy compared by receiver operating characteristic analyses.
The data were analysed using multiple logistic regression models and summarized using measures of discrimination, accuracy, and fit.
Reaction times and response accuracy were analysed in SPSS 11.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago) using repeated measures analysis of variance and using Greenhouse Geisser correction for non-sphericity where appropriate.
For study 2 and study 3, RT and accuracy data were again analysed using a repeated measures ANOVA with the factors stroking type, side and congruency.
The transcripts were reviewed by the interviewer for accuracy and were analysed by the first author using NVivo software.
To increase accuracy all samples were analysed twice in two independent experiments using six interplate control samples for normalization.
