(Recognition Statement 5)[ 1].
As preliminary analysis confirmed a significant main effect of recognition statement type (p < 0.001) and a significant 3-way interaction between recognition statement type, recognition statement valence and training group (p < 0.001), we conducted separate 2 × 2 × 2 ANOVAs for target and foil ratings.
As our first mixed-measures ANOVA analysis showed a significant 3-way interaction between recognition statement type, recognition statement valence and training group [F 1,42) = 15.67, p < .001], we conducted separate 2 × 2 × 2 ANOVAs for target and foil ratings.
I don't rule out recognition statements from several states in the region, in addition to Nauru,"' he told the Interfax news agency.
This would be demonstrated in a significant three-way interaction reflecting the same pattern of findings described above, that was not modified further by the type of recognition memory statement (disambiguated statement vs. foil statement).
This comprised a 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 ANOVA with scenario valence condition (positive vs. negative) and scenario ambiguity condition (ambiguity present vs. ambiguity absent) as the between subjects factors, and recognition memory statement valence (positive vs. negative) and recognition memory statement type (disambiguated statement vs. foil statement) as the within subject factors.
Consistent with the position that present findings represent the genuine acquisition of an interpretive bias, a significant four-way interaction was observed between scenario valence condition, scenario ambiguity condition, type of recognition memory statement, and valence of the recognition memory statement, F 1, 74) = 5.09, p = .027, ηp2 = .064.064
Consistent with the Ambiguity Resolution Account a significant three-way interaction was indeed observed between scenario valence condition, scenario ambiguity condition, and recognition memory statement valence F 1, 74) = 8.79, p = .004, ηp2 = .11.11
If the resolution of ambiguity is not necessary to achieve change in biased interpretation, as suggested by the Emotional Valence Account, then we would expect a significant two-way interaction between scenario valence and recognition memory statement valence, not further modified by scenario ambiguity condition.
Alternatively, the Ambiguity Resolution Account suggests that the presence of ambiguity is critical to modifying interpretive bias and therefore, a three-way interaction will be observed such that the two-way interaction involving scenario valence and recognition memory statement described would only be evident in the ambiguity present condition and not in the ambiguity absent condition.
These were subjected to a 2 × 2 × 2 mixed model ANOVA with scenario valence condition (positive vs. negative) and scenario ambiguity condition (ambiguity present vs. ambiguity absent) as between-subject factors, and recognition memory statement valence (positive vs. negative) as the within subject factor.
