Posted at 23:49h
in
by admin
A few quantities of ANOVA actions were utilized to handle fMRI study
In the earliest (subject) level, half a dozen skills products have been defined. These types of contained positive cued products, negative cued samples, natural low-connection cued trials, self-confident uncued products, negative uncued examples, and you can neutral non-attachment uncued trials. The newest start go out try chosen when the target photos were exhibited. From the next (group) top, T-testing were chosen for evaluation. The new examine photos (neutral sdc cued examples-feelings cued trials to possess attentional involvement, feelings uncued examples-simple uncued trials to own attentional disengagement) out-of several teams was basically the newest type in investigation. To decide if or not there's extreme activation corresponding to for every compare, a reversed p = 0.05 and the amount endurance of team size = 20 voxels to your height (intensity) were utilized because endurance.
Behavioral data
In repeated measures ANOVA of 2 (group) ? 2 (cue validity) ? 3 (emotion valence), a significant main effect of cue validity was observed (Fstep 1,29 = ; p < 0.001); a significant main effect of emotion valence was observed (Fdos,62 = ; P < 0.01); the interaction of cue validity and attachment style reached significance (F2,62 = 4.25; p < 0.05) (Table 2 and Fig. 2).
Attentional engagement and disengagement were analyzed by repeated ANOVA of 2 (attachment style) ? 3 (valence). Testing attentional engagement in the cued situation, the main effect of valence reached significance (Fdos,62 = 8.20; p < 0.01), the attentional engagement effect of positive emotion was ms (p < 0.01) and the attentional engagement effect of negative emotion was ms (p < 0.01). The difference between the two groups did not reach significance. Testing attentional disengagement in the uncued situation, the main effect of valence reached significance (Fstep one,29 = 5.24, p < 0.05). Further data showed the RT of neutral ( ms) was slower than positive emotion ( ms) and negative emotion ( ms), which means they did not show attention disengagement to attachment emotion.
When considering different emotion themes of parent-child and romantic images in the cued situation, no attentional engagement effect was found. In the uncued situation, the repeated ANOVA of 2 (group) ? 3 (valence) ? 2 (attachment theme) showed that the main effect of valence reached significance (Fdos,62 = 4.23; p < 0.05); the main effect of theme also reached significance (Fdos,62 = 6.85; p < 0.05); the interaction of attachment styles ?