Exact(3)
Importantly, the classic pattern of the masked-priming paradigm was reproduced: Relative to congruent primes, an incongruent prime increased RTs for longer prime durations (standard compatibility effect), whereas for shorter prime durations, the pattern reversed (negative compatibility effect).
The introduction of a prime increased the response bias of the VH+ group to the levels of the HC and VH– groups (i.e., the significant difference between VH+ and VH– was eliminated).
As intended, Study 2 included a broader range of participant ages, BMI status and socio-economic status (as indicated by highest educational qualification), and further analysis revealed that the prime increased preference for fruit only in hungry and more educated participants, as seen in Study 1.
Similar(57)
First, the amount of repetition priming increased as prime duration increased.
DNA priming increased the frequency and magnitude of cellular and humoral immune responses, but there was no effect of rAd5 dosage on immunogenicity endpoints.
For short SOAs (100 and 200 ms), however, they found preferential priming from upright primes compared to rotated primes, and for an SOA of 500 ms the size of priming increased linearly across the three prime orientations (0°, 90°, 180°).
These results can be interpreted as evidence that decreased lexical activation with nonword primes increased the probability of assigning the dominant stress, and of making stress errors on words with the less frequent stress pattern.
Compared to rAd5 alone, DNA priming increased the frequency of IFN-γ ELISPOT response after the rAd5 boost, but the difference was not statistically significant 6 weeks after rAd5 administration.
The primes increased fruit preference in more educated and hungry individuals.
Moreover, the incubation of cells with anti-TLR4 or anti-CD11b mAbs followed by endotoxin priming increased fMLP-induced ROS production.
As might be expected, preferences for outpatient priming increased when women could return to their own home, and decreased with more trips to hospital and longer travel time.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com