55
0.31%±0.02% SEM, paired t-test with 11 degrees of freedom, p=0.0001). The response
in the STSms to each of the Six trials types was also entered into a three-factor mixed-
effect ANOVA with stimulus modality (tactile, auditory, tactile-auditory) and intensity
(weak, strong) as fixed factors and subject as a random factor. The most significant
effect was modality (F(2,22)=10.3, p=0.0007) driven by the increased response to
multisensory stimulation. There was also a significant effect of intensity (F( 1,11)=16.1,
p=0.002), reflecting a larger response to strong compared with weak stimuli
(0.37%±0.02% vs. 0.29%±0.02%). The interaction between modality and intensity was
not significant (F(2,22)=0.1, p=0.9) showing that the degree of multisensory
enhancement did not differ between weak and strong multisensory trials.
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. The Variable-Rate Decision for Multiple Inputs with Multiple Management Zones
3. The name is absent
4. Biological Control of Giant Reed (Arundo donax): Economic Aspects
5. Improving behaviour classification consistency: a technique from biological taxonomy
6. The name is absent
7. Income Mobility of Owners of Small Businesses when Boundaries between Occupations are Vague
8. Transport system as an element of sustainable economic growth in the tourist region
9. The Structure Performance Hypothesis and The Efficient Structure Performance Hypothesis-Revisited: The Case of Agribusiness Commodity and Food Products Truck Carriers in the South
10. The name is absent