There was no significant group × complexity interaction for response accuracy [ F 2,56) < 1] or latency [ F 2,56) = 2.37, p <.10].
In [ 42], an extension of logic regression was also proposed to identify SNP interactions explanatory for the disease status, with two measures devised for quantifying the importance of these interactions for the accuracy of disease prediction.
They found no drug × genotype interaction for N-back accuracy but did for N-back RT, which was improved by tolcapone in Val- but not Met-COMT subjects.
These interactions were not present for accuracy (all Fs < 1).
There was also a significant interaction between group and task for accuracy, F4,86 = 10.293, P < 0.001, but not for reaction time, F4,86 = 2.325, P = 0.063.
Further, they found no interaction between group and emotion for accuracy, and the effects of intensity were similar across the groups.
Although the STRING database has information related to known and predicted protein-protein interactions, only known interactions were selected for this analysis, for accuracy.
No main or interaction effects of Picture were found for accuracy of responding.
No main or interaction effects of Picture were found for accuracy of responding in either NoGo or Go trials.
The lack of RT differences between conditions and also of any main effects or interactions involving the group factor, even for accuracy, suggests that the ERP differences reported below could not have been confounded by task or attentional demands.
