Skip to main content

Table 3 Mean energy (±SD) for each presentation and participant group and t statistics for significant energy differences between presentations (Bonferroni corrected p-values for multiple comparisons)

From: Auditory repetition suppression alterations in relation to cognitive functioning in fragile X syndrome: a combined EEG and machine learning approach

Presentations Controls FXS ≤ 42 NVIQ FXS > 42 NVIQ
1 213.2 (± 16) 207.6 (± 16.2) 216.5 (± 25.9)
2 192.2 (± 9.8) 202 (± 16.1) 223.5 (± 17.7)
 1 vs. 2 t(471) = 7.5, p = 0.0001   
3 199.8 (± 11.8) 195.3 (± 14.5) 220 (± 29.5)
 1 vs. 3 t(304) = 4.2, p = 0.001   
4 195.3 (± 10.8) 201.2 (± 22.1) 186.9 (± 8.2)
 1 vs. 4 t(258) = 5.6, p = 0.0001   
 2 vs. 4    t(74) = 5.2, p = 0.004
 3 vs. 4    t(101) = 2.7, p = 0.0001
5 201.6 (± 10.8) 190.8 (± 16.7) 192.7 (± 22.2)
 1 vs. 5 t(249) = 3.6, p = 0.013   
6 195.4 (± 12.3) 193.1 (± 18.1) 195.1 (± 19.4)
 1 vs. 6 t(247) = 5.5, p = 0.0001   
7 198.7 (± 14.7) 191.3 (± 15.5) 192.6 (± 19.2)
 1 vs. 7 t(247) = 4.5, p = 0.0001   
8 195.3 (± 16.9) 192.9 (± 13.7) 186.7 (± 18.6)
 1 vs. 8 t(247) = 5.6, p = 0.0001   
 2 vs. 8    t(44) = 2.8, p = 0.009
9 202.1 (± 14.6) 202.2 (± 23.7) 185.7 (± 11.5)
 1 vs. 9 t(247) = 3.4, p = 0.023   
 2 vs. 9    t(42) = 3.7, p = 0.015
 3 vs. 9    t(43) = 2.4, p = 0.043
10 196.7 (± 13.7) 213.4 (± 30.9) 188.7 (± 21.7)
 1 vs. 10 t(247) = 5.1, p = 0.0001   
 2 vs. 10    t(42) = 2.3, p = 0.038