This interaction was driven by the differences between performance on neutral trials and misleading trials across the three groups.
In addition, participants were marginally more accurate on neutral trials compared to misleading trials (M = 0.42, t(131) = 1.71, P = 0.08).
As expected, misleading errors of commission were more likely to occur after the presentation of misleading details in the synopsis than spontaneously on consistent or neutral trials.
In addition, participants were more accurate on neutral trials compared to misleading trials (M = 0.47, t(131) = 4.86, P < 0.01, d = 0.49).
On neutral trials, both words are neutral.
Again, no difference between fearful and neutral trials was found.
None of the neutral words used for the filler trials were presented on threat or neutral trials.
Filler trials were comprised of neutral word pairs similar to the neutral trials but were not followed by dot probes.
In arrhythmic, neutral trials, the ISI between balls varied randomly between 100 700 ms, providing no temporal prediction.
In arrhythmic (neutral) trials, intervals between successive balls varied randomly, providing no prediction for the duration of the occlusion period.
The worry condition was associated with faster responses to probes in the attended location for threat than neutral trials, t 55) = 3.10, p<0.005, d = 0.19 (Figure 1A).
