Sentence examples for correspondence trial from inspiring English sources

As expected, the size of the correspondence effect in trial n (mean RT on incongruent trials mean RT on congruent trials) was smaller when trials were preceded by an incongruent trial than when trials were preceded by a congruent trial (interaction prime-target correspondence in trial n and prime-target correspondence trial n-1, F 1,41)  = 78.8; p<0.001).

Finally, we observed a 4-way interaction between prime-target correspondence in trial n, prime-target correspondence trial n-1, masking strength in trial n-1 and masking strength in trial n (F 1,41)  = 6.0; p = 0.019), indicating that conflict adaptation was largest when conscious primes in trial n-1 were followed by conscious primes in trial n.

Just as observed in RTs, conflict adaptation was stronger when trials were preceded by a weakly masked prime (conscious) than by a strongly masked prime (unconscious), as reflected in a 3-way interaction between prime-target correspondence in trial n, prime-target correspondence trial n-1 and masking strength in trial n-1 (F(1,41)  = 9.6; p = 0.004).

However, conflict adaptation was stronger when trials were preceded by a weakly masked prime (conscious) than by a strongly masked prime (unconscious), as reflected in a 3-way interaction between prime-target correspondence in trial n, prime-target correspondence trial n-1 and masking strength in trial n-1 (F(1,41)  = 17.1; p<0.0017.1

Overall, participants responded slower to incongruent than to congruent trials (main effect of prime-target correspondence in trial n, F 1,41)  = 355.3; p<0.001) and also slower after experiencing conflict in the previous trial (main effect of prime-target correspondence trial n-1, F 1,41)  = 216.8; p<0.001).

The PEs analysis revealed a main effect of Correspondence, showing that fewer errors were made in correspondence trials (0.5 %) than in noncorresponding trials (1.7 %), F 1,69)=19.106, p<.0001, MSE=2.730, η 2 p =0.22.

Mean RTs on correct trials and square rooted accuracy rates were entered into an ANOVA with within-subjects' variables of prime target correspondence in trial n (congruent vs. incongruent), masking strength in trial n (weakly masked vs. strongly masked), prime target correspondence in trial n-1 and masking strength in trial n-1 [see 12].

Participants made more errors on incongruent than on congruent trials (main effect of prime-target correspondence in trial n, F 1,41)  = 140.8; p<0.00140.8

Where necessary, clarification of data was obtained by correspondence with trial co-ordinators.

We tried to complement all missing data by correspondence with trial authors (via email).

The success of extrapolation strategies was related to the extent of identified correspondences between trial and test areas.