Table 2 Interaction effects in terms of response times (RT) and error rates obtained from the rmANOVAs with dopamine synthesis capacity in each ROI as a single covariate.

From: The cognitive effects of a promised bonus do not depend on dopamine synthesis capacity

 

Reward × information × DAsynth

Reward × DAsynth

F(1,42)

p

BFINC

F(1,42)

p

BFINC

RT

Left caudate nucleus

1.9

0.177

0.003

0.5

0.473

0.044

Right caudate nucleus

0.6

0.456

0.003

1.4

0.244

0.041

Left putamen

2.4

0.126

0.003

0.2

0.628

0.029

Right putamen

3.4

0.072

0.004

0.3

0.612

0.029

Left ventral striatum

1.5

0.234

0.003

0.4

0.546

0.030

Right ventral striatum

0.8

0.365

0.002

0.0

0.964

0.034

Error rate

Left caudate nucleus

0.5

0.492

0.003

0.4

0.526

0.041

Right caudate nucleus

0.3

0.600

0.017

0.2

0.623

0.065

Left putamen

0.2

0.658

0.018

0.0

0.946

0.068

Right putamen

0.7

0.417

0.019

0.2

0.666

0.076

Left ventral striatum

0.0

0.951

0.014

0.3

0.618

0.059

Right ventral striatum

0.3

0.618

0.015

0.0

0.961

0.065

  1. Note that Aarts et al. analyzed the interaction between congruency, reward, information and dopamine synthesis capacity on response times and error rates. Here, we show the equivalent interaction between reward, information and dopamine synthesis capacity on Stroop interference (i.e. the difference between incongruent and congruent trials).
  2. The dependent variable is Stroop performance (mean RT or error rate on incongruent trials minus mean RT or error rate on congruent trials). Values in italic was the interaction observed in Aarts et al. to be significant.
  3. p-values below a Bonferroni-corrected alpha-value of 0.0042 were considered significant.
Back to article page