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