Table 2 Probe Results - Mean Proportion of Trials Participants Chose Go Items Over No-Go Items.

From: The Cue-Approach Task as a General Mechanism for Long-Term Non-Reinforced Behavioral Change

Experiment

Go cue

Training Runs

Mean Proportion Go items were Chosen

First session

Follow-up Session

High-Value

Low-Value

High-Value

Low-Value

Exp. 1: Faces

Auditory

12

52.4%, p = 0.343

57.1%, p = 0.023

—

—

Exp. 2: Fractals

Auditory

12

66.3%, p = 2.4E−4

61.1%, p = 0.009

56.7%, p = 0.068

54.9%, p = 0.208

Exp. 3: Positive IAPS

Auditory

12

59%, p = 0.011

61.2%, p = 0.007

—

—

Exp. 4: Negative IAPS

Auditory

12

51.6%, p = 0.582

50.5%, p = 0.877

—

—

Exp. 5: Snacks

Visual

20

61.7%, p = 0.001

55.6%, p = 0.096

56.9%, p = 0.038

53.2%, p = 0.317

Exp. 6: Snacks

Auditory Aversive

20

58.4%, p = 0.030

61.2%, p = 0.002

59.4%, p = 0.031

59.0%, p = 0.066

Exp. 7: Faces

Auditory

20

69.8%, p = 8.8E−9

68.5%, p = 2.3E−4

66.8%, p = 4.8E−5

62.1%, p = 0.027

Exp. 8: Fractals

Auditory

20

62%, p = 0.003

66.9%, p = 8.5E−5

60.8%, p = 0.03

60.8%, p = 0.032

Exp. 9: Positive IAPS

Visual

20

61.5%, p = 1.4E−6

66.7%, p = 1.2E−9

—

—

Exp. 10: Negative IAPS

Visual

20

55.8%, p = 0.116

53.3%, p = 0.322

—

—

  1. Reported p values indicate a significant deviation from chance level (mean proportion = 50%, odds-ratio = 1) in a two-tailed repeated-measures logistic regression analysis.