117
Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to
analyze these new variables. Group was again the between
subject factor and task (shock minus shock-control and
reward minus reward-control). The full ANOVA table, Table
C-56, is presented in Appendix C.
The results revealed a main effect for group [F(3,43) =
6.534, P < .01 and task [F(1,43) = 16.499, P < .001]. The
interaction of group by task approached significance
[F(3,43) = 2.814, P = .0504].
Because the LH NCS and RH NCS were not significantly
different from one another [T(1,22) = -1.034, P = .3125],
these groups were combined. Exploration of the main effect
of group using independent t-tests with a Bonferroni
correction requiring a P < .017 for significance revealed
that the difference between the percentage of responses
between the control and stimulus trials was significantly
smaller for both the LHD group (mean=1.25, sd=5.49) [T(1,34)
= -2.86, P < .01] and the RHD group (mean=-.227, sd=3.25)
[T(1,33) = 3.28, P <.01] compared to the CONS (mean=10.83,
sd=10.88). There were no significant differences between
the two patient groups [T(1,21) = .776, P = .4465]. A table
of the t-tests, Table C-57, is presented in Appendix C.
The main effect of task revealed that subjects had a
greater difference between the percentage of responses
during the shock compared to shock-control trials