INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9307725
Memory comparison theory: Some preliminary evidence for the social distortion of memory. (Volumes I and II)
Betz, Andrew Louis, III, Ph.D.
The Ohio State University, 1992
UMI 300 N. ZeebRd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 MEMORY COMPARISON THEORY: SOME PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE FOR THE SOCIAL DISTORTION OF MEMORY
VOLUME I
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
by
Andrew L. Betz, III, B.A., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University 1992
Dissertation Committee: Dr. Thomas M. Ostrom Approved by Dr. John J. Skowronski Dr. William von Hippel Dr. Neal F. Johnson Adviser Department of Psychology ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my wife for her love and support during the difficult years we experienced in producing this document. I wouldalso like to thank my advisor Tom Ostrom, for without his timely assistance it is clear that this document would not have been produced. Also deserving of thanks are the members of the Ohio State Social Cognition Research Group for their collective wisdom, constructive criticism, and role in forcing critical thought. John Skowronski deserves acknowledgement for the many phone hours we logged discussing aspects of the data and theory contained herein. Lastly, I would like to formally thank the members of my dissertation committee. VITA
March 2, 1964 ...... Born - Toledo, Ohio. 1987 B.A., Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio. 1990 ...... M.A., Social Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 1987-1988 ...... Graduate Fellow, The Ohio State University. 1988-1990 ...... Graduate Teaching Associate, Introductory Psychology The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 1990 ...... Graduate Research Associate, College of Business, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 1990-1991 ...... Statistical Consultant, Psychology Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1991-1992 ...... Graduate Research Associate, Technical Support Group, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. PUBLICATIONS Betz, A.L., Gannon, K.M: ., and Skowronski, J.J. (in press). The moment of tenure and the moment of truth: When it pays to be aware of recency effects in social judgments. Social Cognition. Thompson, C.P., Skowronski, J.J., and Betz, A.L. (paper accepted for publication). The partial use of temporal information in dating personal events. Memory and Cognition. Ward, P.T., Betz, A.L., and Bickford, D.J. (in press). Overhead surgery or media hyperbole? An examination of manufacturing employment structure in high and low tech industries, 1983 and 1989. Journal of High Technology Management Research. Skowronski, J.J., Betz, A.L., Thompson, C.P., Walker, W.R., and Shannon, L. (in press). The impact of differing memory domains on event dating processes in self and proxy reports. In Schwarz, N., and Sudman, S. (Eds.) Autobiographical memory and the validity of retrospective reports. New York: Springer-Verlag. iii Ostrom, T.M., Betz, A.L., and Skowronski, J.J. (1992). Cognitive representation of latent variables. In Schwarz, N., and Sudman, S. (Eds.) Order effects in social and psychological research. New York: Springer-Verlag. Krosnick, J.A., Betz, A.L., Jussim, L.J., Lynn, A.R., and Stephens, L. (1992). Subliminal conditioning of attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 18. 152-162. Skowronski, J.J., Betz, A.L., Thompson, C.P., and Shannon, L. (1991). Social memory in everyday life: Recall of self-events and other- events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 60. 831- 843.
FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Psychology Studies in Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... ii VITA ...... iii LIST OF F I G U R E S ...... vii CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION...... 12 II. Memory Comparison Theory ...... 20 III. STUDY 1 ...... 41 M e t h o d ...... 42 O v e r v i e w ...... 42 S u b j e c t s ...... 43 Materials...... 43 Design and P r o c e d u r e ...... 43 C o d i n g ...... 48 Analytic strategy ...... 48 Results...... 49 D i s c u s s i o n ...... 56 IV. STUDY 2 ...... 64 M e t h o d ...... 66 O v e r v i e w ...... 66 S u b j e c t s ...... 67 Procedure...... 67 Results ...... 69 Discussion...... 81 V. STUDY 3 ...... 84 M e t h o d ...... 85 O v e r v i e w ...... 85 S u b j e c t s ...... 85 Procedure...... 85 Results ...... 86 Discussion...... 98 VI. STUDY 4 ...... 101 M e t h o d ...... 102 S u b j e c t s ...... 102 Procedure...... 103 Results ...... 105 D i s c u s s i o n ...... 126
v VII. GENERAL DISCUSSION ...... 128 LIST OF REFERENCES...... 133 APPENDICIES A. STIMULUS MATERIALS - STUDIES ONE THROUGH FOUR ...... 137 B. FIGURES - STUDIES ONE THROUGH F O U R ...... 146
vi LIST OF FIGURES FIGURES PAGE 1. Mean accuracy at levels of feedback and item memorability, Study 1 147 2. Mean accuracy at levels of feedback and recoded item memorability, Study 1 147 3. Mean yielding as a function of recoded item memorability and social consensus, Study 1 ...... 148 4. Mean change as a function of recoded item memorability and social consensus, Study 1 148 5. Accuracy at levels of social consensus, recoded item memorability, and initial accuracy, Study 1...... 149 6. Yielding at levels of item memorability and social consensus, Study 2 149 7. Yielding at levels of item memorability and social consensus for distractor delay of 2.5 min, Study 2 ...... 150 8. Yielding at levels of item memorability social consensus for distractor delay of 10 minutes, Study 2 ...... 150 9. Mean change as a function of item memorability and social consensus, Study 2 151 10. Source memory as a function of item memorability and social consensus, Study 2 151 11. Yielding at levels of item memorability and social consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 2 152 12. Mean change as a function of item memorability and social consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 2 ...... 152 13. Yielding at levels of item memorability and social consensus controlling failure to encode, Study 2 153 14. Yielding at levels of item memorability and social consensus, adjusted for covariate and failure to encocde, Study 2 ...... 153 15. Change at levels of item memorability and social consensus controlling failure to encode, Study 2 ...... 154 16. change at levels of item memorability and social consensus, adjusted for covariate and failure to encocde, Study 2 ...... 154 17. Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability, Study 3...... 155 vii Change at levels of social consensus and item memorability, Study 3 ...... 155 Change at levels of social consensus and task order, Study 3 ...... 156 Change at levels of social consensus and task order for delay of 2.5 minutes, Study 3 ...... 156 Change at levels of social consensus and task order for delay of 10 minutes, Study 3 ...... 157 Change at levels of item memorability and distractor delay, Study 3 ...... 157 Source memory as a function of item memorability and social consensus, Study 3 ...... 158 Source memory as a function of distractor delay and social consensus, Study 3 ...... 158 Yielding at levels of item memorability and social consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 3 . . . . 159 Mean change as a function of item memorability and social consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 3 . . 159 Change at levels of item memorability and distractor delay, adjusted for covariate, Study 3 . . . 160 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability controlling failure to encode, Study 3 ...... 160 Yielding at levels of item memorability and distractor delay controlling encoding failure and source memory, Study 3 ...... 161 Change at levels of social consensus and item memorability controlling encoding failure, Study 3 . . . 161 Change at levels of item memorability and distractor delay controlling encoding failure, Study 3 . 162 Change at levels of social consensus and item memorability controlling encoding failure and source memory, Study 3 ...... 162 Change at levels of item memorability and distractor delay controlling encoding failure and source memory, Study 3 ...... 163 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability, Study 4 ...... 163 viii Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting, Study 4 ...... 164 Yielding at levels of social consensus and task order, Study 4 ...... 164 Yielding at levels of source discounting and task order, Study 4 ...... 165 Change at levels of social consensus and item memorability, Study 4 ...... 165 Change at levels of item memorability and source discounting, Study 4 ...... 166 Change at levels of social consensus and source discounting, Study 4 ...... 166 Change at levels of social consensus and task order, Study 4 ...... 167 Source memory deviation from linear item memorability at levels of task order and source discounting, Study 4 ...... 167 Source memory deviation from linear social consensus at levels of task order and source discounting, Study 4 ...... 168 Source memory at levels of item memorability and social consensus with cued-recall first, Study 4 ... . 168 Source memory at levels of item memorability and social consensus with source memory task first, Study 4 ...... 169 Source memory at levels of item memorability and social consensus when source information is discounted . 169 Source memory at levels of item memorability and social consensus when source information is not discounted ...... 170 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability adjusted for covariate, Study 4 ...... 170 Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting adjusted for covariate, Study 4 ...... 171 Yielding at levels of source discounting and task order adjusted for covariate, Study 4 ...... 171 Yielding at levels of social consensus and task order adjusted for covariate, Study 4 ...... 172
ix Yielding at levels of source discounting and task order, controlling encoding failure, Study 4 . . 172 Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting controlling encoding failure, Study 4 . . 173 Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting with story anticipation controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 173 Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting without story anticipation controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 174 Yielding at levels of item memorability and source discounting controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 174 Yielding at levels of social consensus and task order controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 175 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability with source memory task first controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 175 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability with cued-recall task first controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 176 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability with source discounted controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 176 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability with source not discounted controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 177 Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 177 Yielding at levels of item memorability and source discounting adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 178 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability with source discounted, adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 178 Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability without source discounted, adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 179
x 66. Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting with story anticipation, adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 179 67. Yielding at levels of social consensus and source discounting without story anticipation, adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 180 68. Yielding at levels of social consensus and task order, adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 180 69. Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability with source memory task first, adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 181 70. Yielding at levels of social consensus and item memorability with cued-recall task first, adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 181 71. Yielding at levels of source discounting and task order adjusted for covariate and controlling for encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 182 72. Change at levels of social consensus and task order controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 182 73. Change at levels of social consensus and source discounting controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 183 74. Change at levels of social consensus and source discounting with low-memorable items controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 183 75. Change at levels of social consensus and source discounting with high-memorable items controlling encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 184 76. Change at levels of social consensus and source discounting controlling for encoding failure and source memory, Study 4 ...... 184 77. Change at levels of social consensus and source discounting with high-memorable items, controlling for source memory and encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 185 78. Change at levels of social consensus and source discounting with low-memorable items, controlling for source memory and encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 185 xi 79. Low change - high change at levels of social consensus and source discounting with story anticipation, controlling for source memory and encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 186 80. Low change - high change at levels of social consensus and source discounting without story anticipation, controlling for source memory and encoding failure, Study 4 ...... 186
xii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
The psychological study of memory has a rich tradition dating back to the 19th century research by Ebbinghaus (1964/1885). Ebbinghaus' contributions are difficult to overestimate. His discovery of the logarithmic forgetting curve in which recall declines rapidly at first but then much more gradually over time is discussed in virtually every introductory psychology text. Furthermore, experimental methodologies he developed, for example savings, are still being used a century later (e.g., McGrath, 1984). In light of these achievements, it is important to note that Ebbinghaus' procedures for studying memory were conducted in social isolation. Ebbinghaus best and only subject was himself. This isolation was for the purpose of methodological precision, but a consequence, intentional or otherwise, was to view cognitive processes as devoid of social forces. This view was not shared by all early memory researchers, however. Consider a quote from Bartlett, who alluded to the social nature of memory in his 1923 book,
We shall see that the attempt to find the beginning of social customs and institutions in purely individual experience may be essentially a mistaken one. In general terms our problem is to account for a response made by an individual to a given set of circumstances of which the group itself may always be one. (p. 11)
This quote is certainly ironic given that Bartlett's later serial reproduction studies are rightfully regarded as a landmark in the development of modern-day cognitive psychology (Bartlett, 1932). The
12 13 serial reproduction studies had one subject read "The War of the Ghosts" and then repeat it to a second subject, who repeated it to a third subject, and so on. There results are widely cited as evidence for schematic influence on memory, but it is generally unknown that Bartlett actually sought a sociological approach to memory. A contemporary of Bartlett, Halbwachs, also stressed the role that social organizations play in memory, although somewhat more forcefully. Halbwachs took an extreme view: That memory was an inherently social enterprise, and the study of memory ignoring the social component was misguided (Halbwachs, 1980/1950). Essentially, Halbwachs notion was that members of society each experience their own selective view of history, and that memory in the group is sustained by the common interests and interactions among individuals. Despite these pioneers, the social aspects of memory have been surprisingly underinvestigated. The use of the term "surprisingly" stems from the fact that there are valid reasons, from what we already know about conformity effects, to believe that others should influence an individual's memory. For example, nearly forty years ago Deutsch and Gerard (1955) pointed out the distinction between normative influence and informational influence. According to Deutsch and Gerard, normative influence occurs when others conform to obtain social rewards and avoid social sanctions. On the other hand, informational influence occurs when there is "...an influence to accept information obtained from another as evidence about reality" [p 629, italics theirs]. It is entirely plausible that informational influence might affect memory, even if the informational influence led to inaccuracies. In fact, the truly savvy reader might recall that Deutsch and Gerard's 1955 paper contained a "memory" condition replicating the Asch (1955) conformity effect. In this condition, subjects saw line lengths which were then covered from view. Five seconds later the experimenter then began the usual Asch procedure of asking participants for their 14 responses. Deutsch and Gerard's data indicate that conformity was higher in the "memory" condition than in the plain sight condition, but given that there were no distractor tasks we are left uncertain as to exactly what aspect of memory was involved. Similarly, Iscoe, Williams, and Harvey (1963) found that subjects' estimates of metronome clicks could be socially influenced: Apparently auditory memory is subject to conformity, but this was not the focus of their research and their results only hint at the relationship. Another reason to suspect that memory might be socially influenced resides in the relationship between stimulus ambiguity and conformity. Social influence was long ago shown to be particularly effective with ambiguous stimuli (e.g., Sherif, 1935). If memory for episodic information is roughly equated as ambiguity, then conformity should be particularly strong when item memorability is low. Alternatively, item memorability can be reframed as self-doubt. In this perspective, items low in memorability should lead to greater self-doubt than items high in memorability. Tesser, Campbell, and Mickler (1983) found that greater self-doubt was associated with greater conformity. Framing item memorability as self-doubt, the same conclusion can be drawn from these data as well. In retrospect, it is remarkable that these promising results of social influence on memory were not more aggressively pursued. But historically, conformity research in the Asch (1952) tradition of line- length judgments has been concerned with situational factors such as the size of the majority and resultant conformity pattern (e.g., Gerard, Wilhelmy, and Conolley, 1968; Chapko, and Revers, 1976; Rosenberg, 1961; Latane and Wolfe, 1981). At issue in these studies was whether increasing social pressure led to linear or curvilinear patterns of conformity. Even Cohen (1963), who matematically modelled the conformity process in the line-judgment task, was interested in trend effects of social influence over time. 15
The general lack of investigation into memory issues has not been addressed by small groups researchers, either, for their work has focused on topics only tangential to the distortion of memory. For example, literature reviews by Davis, Laughlin and Komorita (1976) as well as Helmriech, Bakeman, and Scherwitz (1973) indicate that small groups researchers have been focused on topics ranging from leadership skills (e.g., Yuker, 1955), the interdependency of group members' personalities with leadership style (Fiedler, 1964), attraction towards a group (Berschied and Walster, 1969), and group process effects on decision-making (e.g., Janis, 1972; Janis and Hoffman, 1971). About the closest program of research involving the cognitive aspects of social influence has been conducted by Hammond and his colleagues (Hammond, Wilkins, and Todd, 1966; Hammond and Summers, 1972). Their view is that much of human conflict is cognitive, and that the process of conflict resolution can be fruitfully studied from an interpersonal learning perspective. In a typical study (see Rappoport and Summers, 1973, for a review), individuals are trained to use certain cues to make a judgment. Later in the experiment, these cues are no longer valid and a new set of cues must be learned. The individual is thus forced to learn not only a new set of cues, but must grapple with the initial (and wrong) cue usage from fellow subjects. The interpersonal learning perspective is completely congruent with social memory phenomena, although this particular avenue of research has not been approached from this framework. Despite the lack of a theoretical grounding, there are at least a few empirical studies that have looked into the relationship between the output of individuals' memories and the collective memory of a group. Consider an early study by Yuker (1955). Yuker had subjects read, interestingly enough, the very story Bartlett used in his serial reproduction studies: The tale of the "War of the Ghosts." Subjects then individually recalled as much of the story as they could. 16
Afterwards, subjects were grouped together to collaboratively recall the story. Yuker found that the collaborative recall was superior to that of even the best individual in the group, and concluded that collaboration generally benefitted accuracy. More recent research using essentially the same general paradigm was conducted by Stephenson and his colleagues (Stephenson, Clark, and Wade, 1986; Clark and Stephenson, 1989). Their studies were performed to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of permitting multiple- witness testimony in courtrooms. Specifically, they exposed subjects to an audio tape of police interrogating a crime victim, and then had subjects recall the contents of the tape either alone, in dyads, or in groups of four. The results showed, as Yuker had some thirty years previously, that the collaborative recall of a group was substantially better than that of individuals. In fact, the group recall was superior to the best individuals', suggesting that group testimony may provide one way of uncovering episodic detail that surpasses individual recall. However, their data also illustrate how startlingly overconfident groups can be, even on items for which the group recall was wrong. These two studies concluded that group memory was superior to that of individuals. However, exactly why this is the case is unanswered. Three possible mechanisms accounting for the superiority in group memory were identified in a review of the group memory literature by Hartwick, Sheppard, and Davis (1982; see also McGrath, 1984). These researchers argued that first of all, groups can pool information, and individual group members may have idiosyncratic memory for details leading to occasional nonredundancies. Second, groups are capable of error correction whereas individuals are not. Finally, groups are generally recognized as being better decision makers than individuals, and recall can be viewed as another type of decision. In fact, Hinsz (1990) recently applied a decision-making perspective to group memory data. In this particular study, subjects 17 viewed a videotape of a job interview, answered recognition memory questions, and completed confidence ratings for each of the items. Next, subjects were randomly assigned to respond to a second (but different) recognition test either alone or as part of six member groups. The group members were encouraged to discuss the material before answering, and the group response was recorded by a single member. Again, confidence ratings were taken for each item. Hinsz found evidence that the three processes of information pooling, error correction, and effective decision-making all contributed to the group superiority. Furthermore, subsequent analyses indicated that the degree of consensus favoring a response alternative, the correctness of a response alternative, and member confidence in responses also played a role. One difficulty with the studies discussed above is that they do not provide insights into cognition at the level of the individual when in groups. One novel approach to social memory addressing this angle was developed by Wegner in his Transactive Memory model (1986; Wegner, Wegner, Erber, and Raymond, 1991). Briefly, Transactive Memory is founded upon the idea that other people can serve as our external sources for memory. We can refer to others in much the same way as we refer to textbooks, using others to provide us information about our environment. But this reference process is not simply a one-way street. Just as we use others' memories, they in turn use ours. In this way a transactive memory system is built, and presumably each member of a group assumes responsibility for information within their own particular area of expertise. Some evidence for this was provided recently in Wegner, Erber, and Raymond (1991). In their study, subjects who had been in close dating relationships for at least three months were told that the experiment involved a memory task to be completed by pairs. Some subjects were paired with their partner while others were paired 18 with an opposite sex stranger. About half the subjects were provided a memory structure (e.g., one subject remembered history items while the other remembered food items), while for the others no structure was provided. All subjects studied the lists without communicating. If a transactive memory system in fact develops over time, then memory in the natural pairs should exceed the impromptu pairs when no structure is assigned. This should occur because partners would know what material was their responsibility and what material was their partners'. However, because of interference effects, this pattern should be reversed when structure is assigned arbitrarily. In that case, naturalistic pairs should have inferior recall relative to impromptu (assigned) pairs. Wegner et al. (1991) in fact found this to be the case. Even with Wegner's contribution, the difficulty with the current literature is that the feedback group members receive is largely uncontrolled, leading to a situation where disentangling the simultaneity of cognitive and consensus effects is difficult, if not impossible. Exactly how does memorability interact with social influence? One way to answer this question is to isolate subjects' cognitive processes yet supply them with social inputs from the group. A techinque for accomplishing this involves a methodological parallel of the Cructhfield studies of the 1950s. In a typical Crutchfield study, five subjects were seated at a table separated by partitions. Crutchfield was then able to provide false feedback to all five subjects in a single experimental session, a procedure considerably more economical than Asch's in that the use of confederates was avoided altogether (Crutchfield, 1955; Krech, Crutchfield, and Ballachey, 1962; Asch, 1955; Asch, 1956). Extending Crutchfield's techinque into the social domain of memory can benefit both the conformity literature and the cognitive (memory) literature alike. A demonstration that social influence can affect 19 memory show that others' memories can serve as valid inputs into an individual's memory. The fact that social influence may affect memory either when memories conflict or later, during a query of long-term memory, points out that there may be temporal aspects of conformity that have been previously ignored. If in fact others can influence a person's memory, then presumably any theory of social influence can make predictions concerning how those effects should manifest themselves. As a matter of convenience given its postulate form, and to an extent as a matter of personal preference, Festinger's Social Comparison Theory is conceptually translated below (Festinger, 1954). Briefly, Social Comparison Theory is a motivational theory that posits people seek comparisons with others to determine what their abilities are and whether their opinions are "correct." It predicts abilities are measured by reference to external standards whereas the "correctness" of opinions can only be derived by comparison with others relatively similar to oneself. Translating this into Memory Comparison Theory extends the original theory into the domain of interpersonal memory. Following a brief introduction, each postulate from Social Comparison Theory and Memory Comparison Theory is presented, followed by a commentary for that postulate. CHAPTER II MEMORY COMPARISON THEORY
Despite the fact the that everyday social interaction is replete with instances of joint recollection there is surprisingly little research, and even less theorizing, about this phenomenon. The following conceptual translation of Social Comparison Theory (c.f., Albert, 1977) provides an initial theoretical framework to conceptualize the relationship between social influence and memory for episodic detail. Within this framework, social comparisons are thought of as memory comparisons, posited to occur when two or more individuals collectively attempt to recall information and then become aware of the others' memory. In general, the social forces affecting social comparisons should also affect memory comparisons. Because memories are reconceptualized as malleable under social influence, episodic memories should often behave like opinions. In this case, an assertion about a memory is really an opinion about what one believes happened. However, memory can often be tested for veridicality against records. When this is true, memories may be less subject to social influence. This is because the evaluation of the memory may be withheld until the external standard is brought to bear (see Clark and Stephenson, 1989). In the remainder of the discussion Social Comparison Theory will be designated S.C.T. and Memory Comparison Theory will be designated M.C.T. MCT pertains to episodic memory. The predictions and later Btudies that test those predictions are made in this light. Although other types of memory (e.g., semantic) may be subject to social influence, the
20 21 theory was not written for other domains of memory. The extent to which MCT applies to these areas, and the extent to which these domains are subject to social influence, remain to be determined.
Hypothesis I
S.C.T.: There exists in the human organism a drive to evaluate his opinions and abilities. M.C.T.: There exists in the human organism a drive to evaluate the accuracy of their memory.
Commentary. The first hypothesis (M.C.T.) states that individuals seek to determine that their memories are accurate. This postulate does not imply that individuals actively engage in assessing the accuracy of their memory all the time. Conditions under which people engage in these processes remain to be specified. Also, it is worth noting that memory comparisons need not be a slave to an overarching goal of accuracy. For example, people may engage in group recall of past events for the sheer enjoyment of recalling good times, and accuracy may even be secondary in such a situation.
Hypothesis II
S.C.T.: To the extent that objective, nonsocial means are not available, people evaluate their opinions and abilities by comparison with the opinions and abilities of others. M.C.T.: To the extent that: (a) objective nonsocial means are not available, and (b) there exists some degree of doubt about a memory trace, people evaluate the accuracy of their memories by comparison with the memories of others. 22
Commentary. The hypothesis specifies that the absence of objective standards necessitates comparison processes. Furthermore, it logically follows that the hypothesis only applies when there exists some degree of doubt about the accuracy of recall in an individual. If someone was absolutely certain that their memory was correct (even if it was not), there would not be a need to engage in comparison processes. For example, people are usually quite certain of their birthdate, and such people would be very unlikely to engage in memory comparisons about when they were born. Precisely what conditions trigger sufficient self-doubt to invoke memory comparison processes remain to be determined. It does seem safe to assume that they will depend on the strength of the memory trace. It is interesting to note that essentially the same argument about certainty can be made for the evaluation of opinions and abilities within Social Comparison Theory. If someone is absolutely certain that they are correct, social comparisons are not likely to be conducted.
Corollary 11(A)
S.C.T.: In the absence of both a physical and a social comparison, subjective evaluations of opinions and abilities are unstable. M.C.T.: In the absence of both a physical and a social comparison, and in the presence of some degree of doubt about a memory trace, subjective evaluation of the accuracy of one's memory is unstable.
Commentary. Again, self-doubt about a memory trace is implicated in M.C.T., and in principle this should be the case for S.C.T. Presumably the relationship between self-doubt and the stability of subjective evaluation is inverse and monotonic. 23
Corollary 11(B)
S.C.T.: When an objective, non-social basis for the evaluation of one's ability or opinion is readily available, persons will not evaluate their opinions and abilities by comparison with others. M.C.T.: When an objective, non-social basis for the evaluation of the accuracy of one's memory is readily available, persons will not evaluate the accuracy of their memories by comparison with others.
Commentary. This corollary states that memories will be evaluated against external records (e.g., newspapers, diaries), when external records are in fact readily available. Stated slightly differently, opinions (even opinions about abilities) that can be evaluated against external standards will be so evaluated. Whether Festinger intended to conceptualize Social Comparison Theory as a general theory of opinion comparison, within which opinions about ability are a mere subset, is uncertain given the language of this corollary.
Corollary III
S.C.T.: The tendency to compare oneself with some other specific person decreases as the difference between his opinion and ability and one's own increases. M.C.T.: The tendency to compare memories with some other specific person decreases as the difference between their memory and one's own increases.
Commentary. This corollary implies that as memories for an event diverge, the likelihood of comparison decreases, presumably in an inverse monotonic fashion. The term "difference" simply refers to a perceived discrepancy between two memories for something. The magnitude 24 of this discrepancy is subjectively judged, and cases where the subjective discrepancy judgment is "large" should result in a lessened tendency to compare memories relative to cases where the subjective discrepancy judgment is "small." Presumably subjective discrepancy judgments would roughly correspond to objective discrepancy. So, if Person A remembers Jane's age as 25, Person B remembers Jane's age as 23, and Person C remembers Jane's age as 12, then Person A should be more likely to compare memory with Person B than with Person C.
Corollary III(A)
S.C.T.: Given a range of possible persons for comparison, someone close to one's own ability or opinion will be chosen for comparison. M.C.T.: Given a range of possible persons for comparison, someone possessing a memory or memories close to one's own will be chosen for comparison.
Commentary. In slightly different terms, comparison others will be selected such that the subjective discrepancy between memories is minimal or nonexistent. More concretely, individuals will have an natural bias towards comparing with others who have an similar memory for an event.
Corollary III(B)
S.C.T.: If the only comparison available is a divergent one, the person will not be able to make a subjectively precise evaluation of his opinion or ability. M.C.T.: If the only comparison available is a divergent one, the person will not be able to make a subjectively precise evaluation of the accuracy of their memory. Commentary. If the only comparison memory available is subjectively judged to be divergent, then the person will be unable to make a subjectively precise evaluation of the accuracy of their memory. "Divergent" is key to this postulate, and it minimally refers to a subjective discrepancy between memories. Presumably the greater the divergence between memories, the less able a person would be to make a subjective evaluation of the accuracy of their memory.
Derivation A.
S.C.T. Subjective evaluations of opinions and abilities are stable when the comparison is available with others who are judged to be close to one's own opinion and ability. M.C.T. Subjective evaluations of the accuracy of memories are stable when the comparison is available with others who are judged to possess memories close to one's own.
Commentary. This derivation, in conjunction with other postulates (e.g., Corollary IIIA), implies that social support for a memory recalled by several people simultaneous may lead to erroneous conclusions about what really occurred. The derivation does not state that others must possess accurate memories close to one’s own, just memories close to one's own. This derivation can perhaps explain the surprisingly high confidence ratings exhibited by the subjects in the Stephenson et al. (1986) studies, confidence ratings exhibited even when the group recall was wrong.
Derivation B.
S.C.T.: The availability of comparisons with others whose opinions or abilities are somewhat different from one's own will produce tendencies 26 to change one's evaluation of the opinion or ability in question. M.C.T.: The availability of comparisons with others whose memories are somewhat different from one's own will produce tendencies to change one's evaluation of the memory in question.
Commentary. The strict translation is awkward given that this derivation does not by itself predict on which dimension(s) the evaluation of the memory will occur. In conjunction with Hypothesis I, though, the accuracy of the memory is certainly one possible dimension. Because of this, the derivation becomes one of the keys for predicting that social forces will affect memory. Presumably, any theory of social influence could be used to derive predictions concerning the effect others have in inducing one to question a memory. Consider, for instance, Social Impact Theory (Latane, 1981). This would argue as the number (or strength and immediacy) of people possessing memories different from one's own increases, the likelihood of re-evaluating the accuracy of the memory increases as well. This effect should be particularly strong when an individual is less certain about a memory.
Derivation C.
S.C.T.: A person will be less attracted to a situation where others are very divergent from him than a situation where others are close to him for both opinions and abilities. M.C.T.: A person will be less attracted to a situation where others possess divergent memories than a situation where others possess similar memories.
Commentary. The derivation is saying that a situation in which a subjective discrepancy between memories is judged to be large will be less attractive that a situation in which a subjective discrepancy 27 between memories is judged to be small. A more concise statement might read as "A person's attraction to a situation is monotonically inverse to the perceived discrepancy between their memory and the memories of others."
Derivation D.
S.C.T.: The existence of a discrepancy in a group with respect to opinions and abilities will lead to action on the part of the members of that group to reduce the discrepancy. M.C.T.: The existence of a discrepancy in a group with respect to memories of individuals will lead to action on the part of the members of that group to reduce the discrepancy.
Commentary. The actions by members may result in persuasion attempts or seeking out of records to validate a claim. As the effort involved to validate a claim increases, the probability of actually doing so should decrease. This in turn implies enhanced persuasion attempts or withdrawal (see other hypotheses) from the group. In effect, this derivation predicts groups could factionalize according to assertions about episodic events.
Hypothesis IV.
S.C.T.: There is a unidirectional drive upward in the case of abilities which is largely absent in opinions. M.C.T.: There is a unidirectional drive toward greater accuracy in remembering that is largely absent for memories already held.
Commentary. The "unidirectional drive upward" in the case of abilities is possible because there are typically some external 28 standards against which abilities can be indexed. For opinions, however, this is not the case. The translation of this hypothesis into MCT points out that memories may sometimes be tested against external standards (records) and sometimes not. If records are available, then memories should be evaluated against them and should thus behave like abilities. On the other hand, if records are not available, then memories should behave like opinions. A strict translation of the hypothesis is difficult because it is not entirely clear what Festinger meant by the "drive upwards." One view is that people engage in an endless strive towards better performance on ability dimensions. If this is the case, then "better [memory] performance" can be equated with accuracy. The logical extension of this hypothesis is that a strive towards accuracy is "largely absent" when records are not available. In slightly different terms, the social distortion of memory is particularly likely when group participants are cognizant that their assertions cannot be verified.
Hypothesis V.
S.C.T.: There are nonsocial restraints which make it difficult or even impossible to change one's ability. These nonsocial restraints are largely absent for opinions. M.C.T.: There are nonsocial restraints which make it difficult or even impossible to change one's ability to remember. These nonsocial restraints are largely absent for the memories themselves.
Commentary. The hypothesis at first sounds silly, but the distinction between being able to remember and possessing a memory is important. This is because being able to remember something does not automatically mean someone is certain about the memory, even if it is correct. Thus, even though someone has the underlying ability to 29 remember, it does not mean that the memory the person possesses is necessarily impervious to social influence.
Derivation Dl.
S.C.T.: When a discrepancy exists with respect to opinions or abilities, there will be tendencies to change one's own position so as to move closer to others in the group. M.C.T.: When a discrepancy exists with respect to memories, there will be tendencies to change one's own memory so as to move closer to others in the group.
Commentary. This is the fundamental derivation in predicting social influence on memory, because it states that people will change their memories so as to move closer to others in the group. Importantly, the derivation does not require that memory change towards a correct response, and social influence may thus lead to either improved or diminished accuracy. As with other hypotheses, there must be some degree of doubt in the person for there to be any change in memory. Within Memory Comparison Theory this is certainly a key derivation in predicting social influence on memory, but the importance of this derivation should not be overstated. In principle, any theory of social influence could be used to derive predictions about the effect of social influence on a person's memory. For example, such factors as strength of others, their immediacy, their number, and their unanimity should all play a role (e.g., Asch, 1955; Latane, 1981). In general, because memories are conceptualized as opinions, factors known to affect opinion change should affect memory change as well. The equating of memories and opinions, in conjunction with this derivation, suggests that the social influence on memory can be reframed 30 as a partial reflection on the cognitive processes underlying conformity. The role of cognitive processes in conformity appears to be a promising area for investigation, and memory is only one of the possibly many cognitive processes involved. Despite the vast literature on conformity, there is scant research on the role that cognitive processes play.
Derivation D2.
S.C.T.: When a discrepancy exists with respect to opinions or abilities, there will be tendencies to change others in the group to bring them closer to oneself. M.C.T.: When a discrepancy exists with respect to memories, there will be tendencies (i.e., attempts) to change others' memories to bring them closer to oneself.
Commentary. The hypothesis is straightforward. When there is a discrepancy group members will try and reduce it via persuasion or locating corroborating evidence. It remains to be determined under which conditions derivation D1 takes precedence over D2 and vice versa.
Derivation D3.
S.C.T.: When a discrepancy exists with respect to opinions or abilities there will be tendencies to cease comparing oneself with those in the group who are very different from oneself. M.C.T.: When a discrepancy exists with respect to memories, there will be tendencies to cease comparing one's memories with those in the group whose memories are very different from one's own. 31
Commentary. As with Derivation C above, the amount of discrepancy necessary to produce a cessation is unknown. Because in an absolute sense a memory about something episodic is either right or wrong, the likelihood of comparison cessation probably depends on factors in addition to discrepancy magnitude. For example, the certainty of a memory, the importance of a memory, and even individual differences in tolerance for discrepancy, akin perhaps to constructs such as tolerance for ambiguity, may also play a role.
Hypothesis VI.
S.C.T.: The cessation of comparison with others is accompanied by hostility or derogation to the extent that continued comparison with those persons implies unpleasant consequences. M.C.T.: The cessation of comparing ones memory with others' memories is accompanied by hostility or derogation to the extent that continued comparison with others' memories implies unpleasant consequences.
Commentary. The unpleasant consequences of continued comparison are likely to be threats to the self, particularly within the domain of intelligence or mental stability. This implies that the hostility or derogation will concentrate along the dimensions upon which the individual feels most threatened, namely, intelligence and/or mental stability.
Corollary VI(A).
S.C.T.: Cessation of comparison with others will be accompanied by hostility or derogation in the case of opinions. In the case of abilities, this will not generally be true. M.C.T.: Cessation of comparison of one's memory with others' memories 32 will be accompanied by hostility or derogation in the case of memories that cannot be verified against a record. In the case of memories that can be verified against a record, this will not generally be true.
Commentary. The corollary states that hostility will accompany cessation from comparison in the cases where memories cannot be verified against a record, but hostility will not accompany cessation from comparison in the cases where memories can be verified against a record. "Hostility" presumably means interpersonal conflict spilling past the memory under debate (e.g., ad hominem attacks). Presumably, derogation will only entirely cease when the memory actually has been verified against a record. There is no reason to suspect cessation in hostility until a comparison against a record has been performed. In fact, if one party is correct, it may be that there is a smugness that could engender either a residual, low-level hostility or, in a more extreme case, a change in the self-concept regarding the physical ability to remember among individuals within the group. It can be derived from this corollary that as doubt about a memory trace increases, willingness to derogate decreases in a relationship that should be inverse and monotonic. This is because people will be less willing to put a stake in memories for which they are uncertain relative to memories they are more sure about.
Derivation E.
S.C.T.: Any factors which increase the strength of the drive to evaluate some particular ability or opinion will increase the "pressure toward uniformity" concerning that ability or opinion. M.C.T.: Any factors which increase the strength of the drive to evaluate the accuracy of some particular memory will increase the pressure toward uniformity concerning that memory. Commentary. This derivation states that as the drive to evaluate the accuracy of some particular memory increases, the pressure towards uniformity within the group should increase as well. One example of this derivation might be a group of people who all witnessed a crime. In explaining the event to the police, each member is keenly aware of the importance of accurately remembering what happened, because incorrect recall could hamper police efforts to catch the criminal. Thus, in such a situation the strength of the drive could be thought of a pressure to "get the story straight." By implication, however, accuracy might be subjugated to unanimity.
Hypothesis VII.
S.C.T.: Any factors which increase the importance of some particular group as a comparison group for some particular opinion or ability will increase the pressures toward uniformity concerning that ability or opinion within the group. M.C.T.: Any factors which increase the importance of some particular group as a comparison group for some particular memory will increase the pressures toward uniformity concerning that memory within the group.
Commentary. The results of Stephenson et al. (1986) fit in here. In that study, subjects in the group conditions were asked to reconstruct an audio tape to the best of their collective ability. Thus, other members in the group are important because each member has the capacity to contribute unique information. One finding of Stephenson et al. was that confidence ratings of errors were remarkably high. This may have been due to the pressures toward uniformity noted above, or possibly (albeit unlikely) diffusion of responsibility among group members. In any event, the subjects in the Stephenson et al. experiment were aware that the purpose of the task involved group 34 memory. They knew that there was pressure to "get the story straight," and apparently subjects were willing to suspend their conflicting memory (or at least voicing their conflicting memory) in deference to the group. This hypothesis therefore makes the ironic prediction that the very group most likely to be concerned with accuracy (group eyewitness accounts) may be the most likely to make errors due to pressures towards uniformity.
Corollary VII(A).
S.C.T.: The stronger the attraction to the group, the stronger will be the pressure toward uniformity concerning abilities and opinions within that group. M.C.T.: The stronger the attraction to the group, the stronger will be the pressure toward uniformity concerning memories within that group.
Commentary. Because the pressure towards uniformity increases with attraction to the group for both abilities and opinions (in SCT), the translation is simple. Regardless of whether memories are verifiable against records or not, as attraction to the group increases the pressure towards uniformity increases as well. This corollary also places limitations on Hypothesis IV, which concerned the unidirectional drive toward greater accuracy. This is because it is possible that attraction to the group could result consensus-building to the extent that members may not feel a need to verify memories, even if records in fact exists and are easily obtainable. On the other hand, attraction to the group might result in a willingness to sacrifice the effort involved in verifying a memory. 35
Corollary VII(B).
S.C.T.: The greater the relevance of that opinion or ability to the group, the stronger will be the pressure toward uniformity concerning that opinion or ability. M.C.T.: The greater the relevance of that memory to the group, the stronger will be the pressure toward uniformity concerning that memory.
Commentary. "Relevance" is a fairly diverse term that might cover such phenomena as accountability or necessity for the group to function. This corollary states that situations increasing relevance about a memory should engender social pressure towards uniformity. The pressure for unanimity might result in social consensus leading to greater accuracy or lesser accuracy. For example, multiple-witness testimony provides a strong desire to be accurate. On the other hand, friends may collaboratively seek to distort details of past conflicts to smooth over current, better relations.
Hypothesis VIII.
S.C.T.: If persons who are divergent from one's own opinions and ability are perceived as different from oneself on attributes consistent with the divergence, the tendency to narrow the range of comparability becomes stronger. M.C.T.: If persons who posses memories divergent from one's own are perceived as different from oneself on attributes consistent with the divergence, the tendency to narrow the range of comparability becomes stronger.
Commentary. Attribute differences include, but are not limited to intelligence, expertise, or even state-dependence. The range of comparability refers to the range of people with whom you will compare memories and consider their memories as possibly valid. For example, an average person is not likely to be persuaded by someone mentally retarded, at least relative to Nobel Prize winners. The hypothesis could be interpreted as stating that individuals consider source credibility when engaging in memory comparison. If we allow that individuals might consider source credibility, then the social influence on memory can be directly linked to the vast literature on attitude change. Furthermore, it becomes possible to reconceptualize the typical eyewitness testimony experiment in terms of source credibility. One can imagine subjects responding to eyewitness suggestions not because of demand in the sense that they would like to "help out" the experimenter, but instead because it would be a rational decision given the situation (e.g., "Gee, I don't remember seeing a stop sign, but the experimenter implied one was there. The experimenter's seen this video probably dozens of times and is almost certainly right.").
Hypothesis IX.
S.C.T.: When there is a range of opinions or abilities in a group, the relative strength of the three manifestations of pressures toward uniformity will be different for those who are close to the mode of the group than for those who are distant from the mode. Specifically, those close to the mode of the group will have stronger tendencies to narrow the range of comparisons and much weaker tendencies to change their own position compared to those who are distant from the mode of the group. M.C.T.: When there is a range of memories in a group, the relative strength of the three manifestations of pressures toward uniformity will be different for those who are close to the mode of the group than for those who are distant from the mode. Specifically, those close to the 37 mode of the group will have stronger tendencies to narrow the range of comparisons and much weaker tendencies to change their own memory compared to those who are distant from the mode of the group.
Commentary. The "three manifestations" Festinger refers to are Hypotheses VI(A) Derivation E., Hypothesis VII (including VII[A) and VII[B]), and Hypothesis VIII. However, it seems that in the case of MCT Hypothesis VIII, narrowing the range of comparison others, would play a particularly powerful role. This is because once several individuals agree about a version of reality they provide one another a feeling of validation. For the deviant, however, the memory conflict may be especially likely to be perceived as a challenge. Thus, if a record exists, the deviant would be more motivated to verify their memory, at least relative to mode persons. If a record did not exist, the deviant would derogate/be derogated. These predictions could be made from the effects of competition noted in Goethals and Darley (1986) and Festinger (1954).
Key differences between SCT and MCT.
There are several differences between SCT and MCT that warrant comment at this point. Each of these will be discussed in turn.
The opinion/ability distinction and its role in memory. One of the confusing aspects of SCT and MCT centers on the "opinion/ability" distinction and how that distinction relates to memory. SCT explicitly mentions that opinions or abilities will be evaluated against nonsocial standards whenever possible (Hypothesis II), but upon reflection it is not entirely clear how an opinion about anything other than an ability could be nonsocially evaluated. For example, deciding which is the "best" color for new carpeting will always contain a degree of 38 subjectivity. This distinction between opinions and abilities gives rise to the perception that abilities will always be evaluated against nonsocial standards and opinions otherwise. It may be worthwhile to think of all evaluations in SCT as evaluations of opinions, with abilities being merely a special subset in that they can be tested against nonsocial standards. When evaluations are always of opinions, the translation to memory becomes direct. Either there is some record of an event or there is not. If there is, then the accuracy of the memory is tested against the nonsocial standard, otherwise, memory comparisons occur.
Is it the ability to remember or evaluating memory like an ability? Hypothesis V distinguishes the "ability to remember" from possession of a memory. There are certainly individual differences in the ability to remember things, and people who have the ability to remember are (by definition) correct in their recollections. But being able to correctly remember something does not in itself make one's event memory immune to social influence. Other factors such as certainty about a memory may also play a role, even if the recollection is correct. "Evaluating memory like an ability" simply refers to the idea that memories can sometimes be evaluated against records.
The role of information processing in explaining how social forces produce change. MCT ties into information processing theories by first arguing that episodic memories are a subset of opinions, and that they are often subject to social influence. This approach explicitly acknowledges that our memories are often not perfect and that information from others can serve as valuable inputs into memory. When others provide information about an event, the validity of that information is weighed against one's own recollections about the event and a judgment about what really happened is rendered. A person may or 39 may not then decide to change their memory. It is recognized that the attempt to equate memories and opinions may not extend to the logical extreme. For example, it is possible to distinguish between memories and opinions on a dimension such as truth value, where truth value refers to the extent to which we believe that an event reflects episodic memory. Past research (Johnson and Raye, 1981) indicates that sometimes we cannot reliably discriminate between actual events and imagined events - their truth value is the same. However, because of the differing nature of memories and opinions, it is likely that we are almost always aware that opinions are not part of the episodic trace. That is, opinions do not have a truth value.
The role of corroborating evidence. The commentary for Derivation D2 notes that people might seek out corroborating evidence to either support or refute their position in an influence attempt. Such behavior is probably most likely when the person believes that such information actually exists, supports the position espoused, and is not too difficult to obtain. However, it may under some circumstances be sufficient to convince someone a record actually exists without having to actually look it up (e.g., if the person being persuaded initially resists but truly has little certainty).
The role of uncertainty in SCT and MCT. If the phenomenological experience of "feeling correct" truly reflects recall accuracy then metacognitive indices designed to tap subjective accuracy should covary with objective accuracy. One index, the Feeling of Knowing measure, has in fact obtained empirical support, although such metacognitive measures are by no means perfect, either (Nelson, 1988; Nelson, McSpadden, Fromme, and Marlatt, 1986). Perhaps the safest conclusion is that people are generally aware of what they do and do not remember, but there is plenty of room for error. 40
MCT explicitly relies on people's sense of uncertainty as a precursor to memory comparison because people convinced that they are correct are unwilling to compare with others at all. Even if such people could be forcibly exposed to information from others they would simply regard that information as wrong. Because MCT so explicitly relies on uncertainty it might appear that this is a qualitative difference between MCT and SCT. Upon further reflection, however, the difference is probably quantitative. People who are absolutely certain about their opinions, like people who are absolutely certain about their memories, will also reject the opinions of others. In an absolute sense, it may be true that the threshold to reach a "reject all external inputs" status is higher for opinions than for memories, but in principle the threshold exists. Hence, although SCT does not explicitly acknowledge "opinion uncertainty" as being a critical precursor to comparison, it logically follows that without opinion uncertainty no comparisons would ever occur. With these hypotheses in mind, a series of four experiments were conducted to test some of them. The studies extend the group memory literature by studying not the output of the group, but instead the effects that social forces have on the memories of individuals. CHAPTER III STUDY 1
The scene is perhaps so common that it escapes notice: A group of friends are sitting together and reminiscing about "the good old times." As they collectively recall historically distant episodes in which they all played a role, each contributes another slice in remembering an event. Probably all group members correctly remember the major components in an episode: The players, the problem, and the resolution. But the small details are often lost in any given person. Might that person be convinced of an episode's detail if the others unanimously agreed about the detail in question? We know from past conformity research that groups can very powerfully impact the overt responses of individual members. Such group influence demonstrations have run the gamut from undeniably incorrect line length judgments (Asch, 1955) to people's judgments about the movement of stationary points of light (Sherif, 1935). Surprisingly, though, there has been very little research concerning the effects that others have on memory processes. This study extends the study of social influence into the area of memory by testing Memory Comparison Theory's derivations that when a discrepancy exists with respect to memories, there will be tendencies in the individual to change their memory so as to move closer to others in the group. Furthermore, it follows from Social Impact Theory (Latane, 1981) that the likelihood of memory change will be highest when the pressure to change is highest.
41 42
But memory change should only occur when subjects have some doubt (uncertainty) about a memory trace. As discussed earlier, if subjects are certain that they are correct, then social pressure will have no effect. Conversely, social pressure should be especially effective in inducing memory change when doubt is maximal. One way to manipulate doubt is to pretest items and determine the items' memorability beforehand: Items subjects routinely remember well are likely those very items for which subjects have little doubt. On the other hand, items subjects do not remember well are probably items about which subjects have considerable doubt. From this, Memory Comparison Theory can make predictions that: (a) memories will change towards the group in step with increasing social pressure, and (b) memories will change inversely to item memorability. Unfortunately, without foresight it is impossible to know, in any given set of stimuli, when item certainty is sufficient for people to ignore social influence. Because of this, a failure to obtain an interaction of social pressure and item memorability is not troubling. However, if an interaction did emerge it should follow a fan pattern: The movement induced by high social pressure should be greater in low-memorable items than high-memorable items.
Method
Overview. Groups of up to eight subjects were run in individual cubicles. Subjects were told that they were participating in a study of the relationship between memory and impression formation. Subjects read a story, completed a distractor task, and then took a multiple choice test. However, during the multiple choice test the subjects were ostensibly shown responses from five others to "gain [the subject's] insights as to the types of information other people use in forming impressions." The feedback was arranged so that across three levels of 43 item memorability (high, low, and unseen) subjects received others' responses that were completely accurate, partially inaccurate, and completely inaccurate. After a second distractor task, subjects then were given a surprise cued-recall task. Finally, subjects were asked a series of questions designed to detect suspicion, debriefed, and then dismissed. Subjects. 104 introductory psychology BtudentB at The Ohio State University participated in partial fulfillment of course requirements during the Summer quarter of 1991. Materials. Subjects were run on IBM PCs or equivalent clones of either XT or AT class. Custom software written for these experiments was used on all computers. Two 1090-word stories (listed in Appendix A) were developed for the study by selecting thirty items from a story about the life of a fictional character, John K. For each of the thirty items, an alternative fact was developed. For example, "John K. was born in Princeton, Indiana," or "John K. was born in Princeton, Illinois." These alternatives were then randomly assigned to story type. Design and Procedure. Groups of up to eight subjects, typically ranging between six and eight, were ushered into a hallway and were briefly told that the study they were about to participate was studying the relationship between memory and impression formation. Subjects were told that once they got into the cubicles they were to carefully follow the instructions on the computer, and that the computer would pace them through the various phases of the experiment. At this point, the experimenter asked if there were any questions. After answering any questions, subjects were randomly assigned to the between-subject conditions and began the experiment. 44
Upon entering the cubicles, subjects sat down and read the instruction screen as follows,
Thank you for participating in this study. Today we would like you read a story about eomeone. Please read the story carefully. Later, we will be asking you for your impression of this person. After you finish reading a screen, follow the directions to continue with the next screen. Be sure you are ready for the next screen, because once a screen is gone you cannot go back to reread it. When you are ready, you may begin.
Subjects next read the story at their own pace. When they were finished, they began the first distractor task with instructions as follows,
In the next phase of the experiment, you will be given states and will be asked to supply their capitals. You may remember many of these but you may not remember all of them. That is fine. Just take your best guess for each state. To supply your answer, just type the capital and then hit
In this phase of the study, subjects were given a randomly ordered sequence of the fifty states. The random sequence was the same for all subjects. Subjects worked on this task for 2.5 minutes before the multiple choice phase began. The multiple choice phase provided subjects with the bogus feedback, and thus was critical. Based on the pretest data of fifty subjects collected during Spring Quarter, 1991, nine items were selected for use. Six of these items were actually presented in the story, but three items were not. For the seen items, memorability was defined in terms of percentage of participants getting an item correct. Thus, three items were defined as "high memorable," while three items were defined "low memorable." The unseen items were selected based on the pretest response profiles, specifically those items with maximum dispersion across the four possible multiple-choice alternatives. The unseen items that had as close to 25% of the responses for each option 45
"A," "B," "C," and "D" as possible were retained for the experiment. This suggests that these items were the most ambiguous, and subjects were most likely to be haphazardly guessing. All selected items are listed in Appendix A. Three feedback types were used, and for the high- and low- memorability items each was based on accuracy and inaccuracy with respect to the story. Because of this, the feedback was necessarily not contingent on the subjects' responses. The feedback types were: (a) High Consensus Accurate, indicating the others responded accurately, (b) Low Consensus Inaccurate, indicating that two other subjects responded accurately but the rest did not, and (c) High Consensus Inaccurate, indicating that all others were unanimous but wrong. The feedback was arranged so that, across the two levels of seen- item memorability (high- and low-memorability), subjects received each feedback type (High Consensus Accurate, Low Consensus Inaccurate, High Consensus Inaccurate) exactly one-third of the time on the six critical items. The feedback on the unseen items followed a similar pattern: the others were unanimous on two-thirds of the critical trials and not unanimous on one-third of the critical trials. However, because for the unseen items no information was actually presented, the feedback provided new information without regard to the story. The exact response profiles of the others are listed in Appendix A. In all cases within levels of item memorability, the feedback type was randomly assigned to the items. This random assignment was unique for each subject. Thus, the complete design for the first study was a Story Replication (Story A or Story B) X Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen) X Feedback Type (High Consensus Accurate, Low Consensus Inaccurate, High Consensus Inaccurate) with repeated measures on the last two factors. Before beginning the multiple choice part, subjects were led to believe that they would be hooked up to a computerized local area network to occasionally see the responses of other subjects. They were 46 told that we were doing this because we were interested as to their insights regarding the types of information that other people use in forming impressions. The instructions read as follows,
In the next part of the experiment, your computer will be attached to a Local Area Network that will include others participating in this experiment. We will then be asking you to remember facts from the story you just read. We are interested in what people remember and how this information is used in forming impressions. Sometimes the computer will present the responses of other people on the Network. Pay close attention to these responses. The reason is that we're interested in using your insights to help us understand how memory and impressions are related. We will be asking you about your observations later. Please note that the responses you will see are randomly ordered each time that they are tabulated. This means that the position of the responses you see does not imply that they are always from any one person. They are completely random.
Subjects were next exposed to a few computer screens of text designed to mimic a typical login sequence one might encounter when accessing a computer network such as the Internet. Once the "login" process was complete, subjects began taking the multiple choice phase. In the multiple choice part, subjects were given a 30-item multiple choice test. The order of the thirty questions was randomly determined for each subject. Subjects were presented a stem and four possible alternatives: Subjects simply typed in their response to proceed to the next question (see Appendix A). On the critical nine items, the computer displayed "TABULATING..." below the stem and response options, paused about 2 seconds then displayed the feedback from five others for fifteen seconds. The feedback was given in terms of the letter of the response the "others” had chosen, and each of the others' feedback was presented on a new line, thus presenting the feedback in a vertical column. Subjects completed all 30 items, were shown a screen that ostensibly disconnected them from the Local Area Network, and then advanced to the second distractor task. Specifically, this distractor task asked subjects to mentally subtract seven from a series of four-digit numbers. The instructions 47 stressed accuracy over speed. The subjects were given instructions as follows:
In the next experimental phase we will present you various numbers. Your task will be to mentally subtract 7 from each of these numbers, type in the response, and then press
Subjects worked on this task for 2.5 minutes before going on to the next phase of the experiment. At this point, subjects were then given a surprise cued-recall test. After the second recall task, subjects then were shown the following,
In this study we are investigating how several aspects of memory are related to impression formation. For example, earlier you were given a recognition test. However, we are also interested in the relationship between recall and impression. In the next phase of the experiment, you will be given a cued-recall task. To respond, simply type in your response and then hit
The task presented subjects with the stems from the multiple choice phase, and subjects were asked to type in their response. The cued- recall served as the key dependent measure in this experiment. Each subject received a new random sequence for the cued recall questions. Subjects answered all thirty items, and then began the impression rating phase of the experiment. The twelve impression rating dimensions were taken directly from the Wyer and Srull category accessibility studies (Wyer & Srull, 1979; Srull & Wyer, 1980). In this task, subjects were presented the twelve dimensions and indicated their impression on a scale of 1 to 7, 1 being labelled "NOT AT ALL," while 7 was labelled, "EXTREMELY." Because this 48 task was designed to support the cover story, no counterbalancing of dimension sequence was used. Thus, the scales were presented in the same order for all subjects as follows: hostile, thoughtful, narrow-minded, interesting, dislikeable, intelligent, considerate, dependable, boring, kind, unfriendly, and selfish. After subjects indicated their impression, the software automatically proceeded to the next item. Finally, the subjects were given three open-ended questions, and subjects responded by simply typing their responses into the computer and hitting return. After five lines, the computer automatically moved to the next question. The first question was designed to promote the cover story that we were interested as to the types of information others use in forming their impressions. Thus, participants were asked, "We would like your insights into what types of information the other people used in the experiment." Second, subjects were then asked "What do you think this study is about?" a question used as the principal test of suspicion. Lastly, subjects were asked "Did you use the feedback from other subjects in formulating your responses? If yes, please elaborate. If no, why not?" After this, the subjects were told that the experiment was over and they were then debriefed, given their course credit, and dismissed. Coding. The cued-recall responses from the six seen items were coded for accuracy, where accuracy reflects whether subjects correctly remembered the material from the story correctly or not. The following coding scheme was used: 0 = inaccurate cued-recall, and 1 = accurate cued-recall. Analytic strategy. For consistency across analyses, the data from this and the following studies were analyzed using regression because of occasionally unequal cell sizes and an often overspecified model relative to the amount of data and limited computer memory capacity available. The specific analytic approach is a variant of the within- 49 subjects regression discussed by Cohen and Cohen (1983). In Bimple terms, each effect is tested against the residual error and the issue of nonindependence of observations is controlled by dummy coding for subjects. Unless otherwise noted, all regression models control for nonindependence by dummy coding for subjects. To avoid redundancy, the dummy coding may not be mentioned in every analysis.
Results
One subject was eliminated from the analyses due to an equipment failure. Five others were deemed suspicious and hence were excluded from all analyses reported below. Thus, there were 98 subjects whose data were analyzed. First of all, quotes from four representative subjects serve to support the Hypothesis II, Corollary III(B), Derivation B, which read, "The availability of comparisons with others whose memories are somewhat different from one's own will produce tendencies to change one's evaluation of the accuracy of the memory in question." The quotes were in response to the question, "Did you use the feedback from other subjects in formulating your responses? If yes, please elaborate. If no, why not?" and are as follows:
(a) "Some of my answers I changed to match what the other people had answered. After I thought about it for awhile, their answers seemed more accurate," (b) "Yes, when everyone else answered the question with the same answer I figured they were right and I used the information," (c) "I only used the information from the other subjects when it appeared that I was completely wrong," and perhaps most succinctly, 50
(c) "When I put a different answer than everyone else, I figured I was wrong."
These quotes show two things: First, they demonstrate that subjects paid attention to the feedback. Second, as predicted, the feedback indeed led subjects to question the accuracy of their own memories. Memory Comparison Theory also predicts that subjects should move their memories so as to be reduce discrepancies with others (Derivation Dl). In this experiment, the discrepancy reduction should lead to a greater number of accurate cued-recalls in the High Consensus Accurate condition but a lower number of accurate cued-recalls in the High Consensus Inaccurate condition. Furthermore, the likelihood of an accurate cued-recall should be greater for high-memorability than for low-memorability items. To test these predictions, the accuracy scores from the six critical (seen) items were entered into a regression with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Feedback (High Consensus Accurate, Low Consensus Inaccurate, High Consensus Inaccurate), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability), and their interactions as regressors. The subject dummy codes were also entered and served to eliminate the issue of nonindependence of observations. The results indicate that the Feedback effect was significant, F(2,480) = 9.79, p < .0001. The means show that, as predicted, accuracy was highest in the High Consensus Accurate condition (M = .87), middling in the Low Consensus Inaccurate condition (M = .75), and least in the High Consensus Inaccurate condition (M = .69). The feedback effect was decomposed into its polynomial trends and the results indicate that the linear component was highly significant (F(1,480] = 18.90, p < .0001) while the quadratic effect was nonsignificant (F[l,480] = 0.68, p = .41). 51
The item memorability prediction was also evaluated in this analysis, and surprisingly, it was not significant, F(l,480) = 0.35, p = .55. In fact, the means are were reversed, with mean accuracy in the low memorability condition (M = .78) actually greater than mean accuracy in the high memorability condition (M = .76). The cued-recall means are graphed at levels of Item Memorability and Feedback in Figure 1. The results indicated that no other effects were significant, including the Story Replication X Feedback interaction, F(l,480) = 1.54, p = .22, showing that the Feedback effects are equally strong across two separate stories. The summary of this and all subsequent analyses are listed in Appendix B. The failure of the Item Memorability effect to achieve significance is puzzling. One possible reason for this result is that the pretest data simply did not reflect the item memorability observed in the first experiment. In fact, an inspection of the item memorabilities showed that what was expected to be high-memorable was not, at least relative to what was expected to be low memorable. To provide a fairer test of the Item Memorability effect, item memorability in the six critical items was recoded based on the percentage of initially correct multiple- choice responses observed in this experiment. The redefined items are listed in Appendix A. With the six critical items recoded, a second analysis of the Accuracy measure was conducted using a model identical to the last. In this analysis, the recoded Item Memorability effect should produce a significant difference between the high and low memorability items. It did, F(1,480) = 13.06, p = .0003, and the means showed that accuracy was greater for items high in memorability (M = .83) than for items low in memorability (M = .71). As before, the Feedback effect was significant, F(2,480) = 10.04, p < .0001, and a polynomial decomposition of the feedback effect found that only the linear component was significant, F(1,480) = 19.48, p < .0001. There was also a marginal interaction of 52
Feedback by Item Memorability, F(2,480) = 2.48, p = .08. The means are depicted in Figure 2 and perhaps the simplest interpretation is that the Low Consensus Inaccurate condition is particularly effective in inducing inaccuracy in the low-memorable items. No other effects of interest were significant. Despite the fact that this analysis confirms the role of social influence in introducing error, it is not really well-coordinated to the predictions of Memory Comparison Theory. This is because it is not entirely clear that the High Consensus Inaccurate condition actually led subjects to reduce discrepancy by moving to the responses of others (c.f., Derivation Dl). To better test the predictions, it is necessary to recode the independent variable of feedback from one of accuracy to one of social agreement or disagreement. For each of the nine critical trials a new independent variable was created by determining whether the others unanimously agreed, non-unanimously disagreed, or unanimously disagreed with the subject. This new variable is called Social Consensus and it has levels called High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, and High Consensus Disagree. It should be acknowledged that in this experiment this independent measure is necessarily post-hoc. The difficulties inherent in this measure include an uncontrolled number of agreements and disagreements across subjects and the concern that certain subjects may be disproportionately contributing to certain conditions. However, with these concerns in mind the analysis was carried forward. The Social Consensus independent variable suggests two dependent measures that can be coded from the cued-recall data. The first of these is Yielding, which reflects whether subjects moved directionally towards the group. That is, did subjects change their responses so as to exactly coincide with the others? This dependent variable was coded 0 = no yielding, 1 = yielding. The second dependent measure is whether subjects changed their responses at the point of cued-recall at all, 53 regardless of direction. This variable is Change. and it was coded 0 = no change, 1 = change. Each of these variables were analyzed separately. Memory Comparison Theory predicts that social influence should affect subjects' later cued-recall. In the case of the Social Consensus independent measure, the likelihood of yielding or change should be greater when subjects experience pressure to do so. This pressure is greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition. On the other hand, subjects should experience pressure to not change when others unanimously agree, as in the High Consensus Agree condition. Because yielding reflects movement towards the group, any analyses using yielding as a dependent measure must exclude the High Consensus Agree condition (i.e., you cannot "move" towards the group if the group already agrees with you in the first place). Thus, the predictions for Yielding and Change are that: (a) each will increase as social pressure increases, and (b) each will decrease as item memorability increases. Yielding. The yielding scores were entered into a Story Replication (Story A or Story B) X Item Memorability (Recoded High, Recoded Low, Unseen) X Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree) within-subjects regression dummy coding for subjects. As predicted, the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(1,544) = 25.11, p < .0001. The means depicted in Figure 3 show that yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .36) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .18). The Item Memorability effect was also significant, F(2,544) = 18.23, p < .0001, and the means indicated that yielding was highest for the unseen items (M = .41), moderate for the low-memorability items (M = .23), and least for the high-memorability itemB (M = .18). A polynomial decomposition of the Item Memorability effect found that both the linear and quadratic effects were significant [F(l,544) = 31.27, p < .0001 for the linear effect; F(l,544) = 4.38, p = .04 for the quadratic effect]. 54
The reliable quadratic memory effect suggested that the yielding difference between high and low memorable items was not statistically significant. A subsequent Tukey test corroborated this suspicion: Mean yielding for the unseen condition was different from both the high- memorable and low-memorable conditions, but the high-memorable and low- memorable conditions were not different from each other at the .05 criterion level. No other effects of interest were significant. Change. The change scores were also entered into a Story Replication (Story A or Story B) X Item Memorability (Recoded High, Recoded Low, Unseen) X Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree) within-subjects regression. As predicted, the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(2,768) = 51.09, p < .0001, and the means showed that change was greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .46), moderate in the Low Consensus Disagree (M = .26), and least in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .08). The Item Memorability effect was also reliable in this analysis, F(2,768) = 12.11, p < .0001. The means showed that change was highest when the item was previously unseen (M = .41), moderate for low-memorability items (M = .28), and lowest when items were highly memorable (M = .20). Trend tests on both the Social Consensus and Item Memorability effects showed that in both cases the linear effects were significant (F[l,768] = 99.08, p < .0001 for linear Social Consensus; F[l,768] = 24.21, p < .0001 for linear Item Memorability). However, the Social Consensus and Item Memorability main effects were qualified by a Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction (F[4,768) = 5.54, p = .0002), depicted in Figure 4. The simplest interpretation of this interaction is that the effects increasing Social Consensus appear to be particularly powerful on the unseen items. Accuracy and Social Consensus.As mentioned previously, the feedback subjects received in this experiment was based on pretestdata and was not tailored to the individual subjects' responses. A consequence of this is that subjects may have occasionally received pressure to change to a correct response while at other times received pressure to change to an incorrect response. To test this possibility, the accuracy scores were entered into a third analysis, this time using the Social Consensus independent measure in the regression model. Furthermore, to fully capture the "agree/disagree" aspect of the Social Consensus effect it is necessary to code for the initial accuracy of subject's multiple choice responses and include this as an additional independent measure. In this particular model it makes sense to predict that: (a) cued-recall accuracy will depend on Initial Accuracy, and (b) Social Consensus should interact with Initial Accuracy. This interaction should occur because subjects who are initially correct and receive agreement should be extremely accurate whereas subjects who are initially accurate and receive disagreement should be less accurate. On the other hand, subjects who are initially inaccurate and receive agreement should be quite inaccurate, but subjects who are initially inaccurate and receive disagreement (i.e., social pressure to change to a correct response) should be more accurate. Thus, the complete statistical model was Story Replication (Story A or Story B) X Initial Accuracy (Initially Correct, Initially Incorrect) X Item Memorability (Recoded High, Recoded Low, Unseen) X Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree) within-subjects regression. The results showed that, as expected, the Initial Accuracy predicted later accuracy, F(1,468) = 89.77, p < .0001. The means indicated that final accuracy was greater when subjects were initially accurate (M = .87) than when they were initially inaccurate (M = .41). There was also a Social Consensus main effect F(2,468) = 4.47, p = .01, and the means showed that accuracy was greatest in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .86), moderate in the Low Consensus Disagree 56 condition (M = .75), and least in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .72). However, these two main effects were qualified by a significant Initial Accuracy X Social Consensus interaction, F(2,468) = 16.45, p < .0001, the means of which are depicted in Figure 5. The interacting pattern of means shows that as social pressure to change a response increased, subjects were more likely to change to an correct response than an incorrect one. No other effects were significant.
Discussion
The first study was designed to test two main hypotheses. First of all, did memories change inversely with item memorability? The data showed that original pretest data did not reflect the item memorabilities observed in this particular study. Recoding item memorabilities among the six critical (actually seen) items led to some support for the prediction that change should vary inversely with item memorability. However, in some analyses the difference between high- memorable and low-memorable was not statistically significant. Because of this, new items based on this experiment's results were chosen for subsequent studies. These items are noted in Appendix A. Second, this study sought to show that social influence can have a reliable effect on individuals' cued-recall responses. Analyses in which the accuracy of the feedback was manipulated all showed that subjects exposed to inaccurate feedback had less accurate cued-recalls than subjects exposed to accurate feedback. Furthermore, subjects were more likely to change their cued-recall responses to match the group when their initial response was incorrect. This implies that despite an initial failure in recognition memory, subjects had some amount of episodic information still available. Recoding the feedback to a new independent measure, Social Consensus, provided support for other postulates of Memory Comparison 57
Theory. Specifically, yielding and change were highest when items were previously unseen and lowest when items were not only seen, but highly memorable. Furthermore, the Social Consensus effect led to the greatest yielding and change when consensus was unanimous in disagreement. Generally speaking, the results from this study indicate that memories will indeed behave like opinions. It is clear that social forces impacted upon the memories of the subjects in this study, but it is not clear exactly when the social forces played their role. There appear to be three possibile mechanisms, and each will be discussed in relation to social influence and findings from the eyewitness testimony literature. (1) First is a normativelv determined mechanism. In this case, subjects might respond the way they did to gain social approval from others. Subjects store their own belief along with the beliefs of others. Later, when motivated to access their memory, the responses of others become available. The impact of the social influence is brought to bear at the point of recall, and the subject's original response is then compared with the responses of the others. Because the subject responds only to gain social approval, the subject does not believe the others are actually correct. This is represented by the statement, "I believe the answer is X, but everybody else said Y so I ’ll say Y." Schematically, this mechanism can be represented by the following:
(E — > M,) — > (M2) — > (M3 — > R(xSI))
Where E represents an initially entry into the memory system, Ml represents the subject's initial belief, M2 represents the beliefs of others, M3 represents the subject's belief at a later point in time, R represents the recall, and SI represents the impact of social influence. In this model, the social influence has its impact at the point of recall but not later memory: Thus, the subject does not believe what the 58 others said is correct yet responds congruent with social influence. Exactly how would this mechanism tie in with previous findings from cognitive psychology? Consider a fairly representative study from the eyewitness testimony literature for a moment. Loftus, Miller, and Burns (1978; see also Loftus and Loftus, 1980) exposed subjects to a videotape of an automobile accident. In the video, a car runs a yield sign and impacts with another car. After seeing the video, subjects were questioned about whether they had seen certain a traffic sign. Half the subjects were questioned with an indefinite article (e.g., "Did you see a stop sign?") while for other subjects the definite article was used (e.g., "Did you see the stop sign?"). After this, subjects were then tested over their memories for the video using a forced-choice paradigm. In this test, one of the items was actually shown while the other was the suggested item. The results indicated that subjects questioned with the definite article later reported seeing the suggested item to a greater extent than subjects questioned with the indefinite article. There has been a great deal of controversy about these findings, if for no other reason than the rather baleful implications they bring to a keystone of our judicial system. Two issues surrounding these and similar findings have preoccupied the cognitive literature. First, exactly what cognitive mechanism accounts for these results? Second, do subjects really believe that they saw things only suggested by an experimenter? The normatively determined mechanism underscores the possibility that one reason subjects may appear suggestible is that they could be responding simply for social approval. Before the next two models of social influence on memory are presented, it will help to briefly review the two ways psychologists have conceptualized the cognitive processes underlying the eyewitness suggestibility effect (c.f., Belli, Windschitl, McCarthy, and Winfrey, 1992; Lindsay, 1990). The impact of the suggested details can be 59 classified as either trace-impairing or retrieval-impairing, and each view has its supporters. The trace-impairing hypotheses argue that the suggested information affects the original memory trace, while retrieval-impairing hypotheses argue that the suggested information blocks access to the original memory trace. Each of these hypotheses is discussed in turn below. The retrieval-impairing hypothesis is essentially a retroactive interference effect. This particular explanation has been recently forwarded by Chandler (1989; 1991), who argued that retrieval impairment should be maximal when the interfering information is more accessible than the original memory trace. Presumably anything that would enhance the accessibility of the interfering trace should led to retrieval- impairment. Thus, such factors as the delay between the presentation of original information and interfering information, or alternatively, multiple presentations of interfering information should contribute to the effect. The results of an experiment by Zaragoza (1991) in which children were presented the suggested details twice did not support the accessibility argument. At this point the retrieval-impairing model has received some, but not unanimous support. Trace-impairment hypotheses state that the suggested information actually weakens, changes, or even overwrites the original memory trace. Certainly the strongest case of the trace-impairment hypothesis is the "overwrite" model proposed by Loftus and Loftus (1980). However, in a series of experiments by McCloskey and Zaragoza (1985; see also Zaragoza, 1991), subjects were run in what has become known as the "modified" eyewitness testimony experiment. In the modified experiment, some subjects at the recall stage are given the usual forced-choice between old items and suggested items. However, for other subjects the forced-choice is between old items and novel items. McCloskey & Zaragoza's (1985) results replicated Loftus, Miller, and Burns (1978) in the appropriate condition. But when subjects were forced to choose 60 between the original item and a novel item, subjects were quite able to select the original item. Given the convincing nature of McCloskey and Zaragoza's data, the two models of social influence on memory proposed are consistent with a dual-trace model of suggested events. It should be acknowledged that the trace-impairment proponents could likely develop equally valid models to account for others' influence on an individual’s memory. However, these studies are not designed to pit the trace-impairment and retroactive-interference processes in competition. As Lindsay (1990; Lindsay and Johnson, 1989) pointed out, the cognitive issues underlying the eyewitness suggestibility effect are orthogonal to whether subjects believe the suggested information. (2) Second is a source-retrieval mediated mechanism. This model assumes the same basic process as the normatively-determined model above. That is, subjects store their own beliefs about an episodic detail along with the beliefs of others. When later accessing their memory, the beliefs of others are accessed as well. However, the key difference is that subjects believe the information from the others is in fact veridical. This mechanism is represented by the statement, "I thought the answer was X, but everybody else said Y, so it really must be Y." Schematically, this mechanism can be represented by the following:
(E — > M,) — > (Mj) — > (Mj(xSI) — > R)
Where E represents an initially entry into the memory system, Ml represents the subject's initial belief, M2 represents the beliefs of others, M3 represents the subject's belief at a later point in time, R represents the recall, and SI represents the impact of social influence. In this model, the social influence has its impact on the later memory, so the recall is influenced by the others. However, in contrast to the 61 prior model, in this case the subject does believe what the others said is correct. Although this particular mechanism resembles informational conformity in the classic sense of Deutsch & Gerard (1955), such an explanation is cognitive imprecise. Exactly when does the individual in the present task accept the information from the others as evidence about reality? Is it necessarily at the point of cued-recall? Consider the third possible mechanism below. (3) A third possible mechanism is non-mediated memory. In this process, the impact of the social influence occurs when the subjects encounter the responses of others. Subjects access their beliefs about an episodic detail and are forced to consider the others' beliefs as well. Subjects then decide the others are correct and store the new belief along with the source information. Importantly, memory for source information may be independent of memory for episodic detail. In this case, subjects may not correctly remember what the others said at the point of cued recall but nonetheless change their responses to match that of the group. This is represented by the thought, "I believe the answer is Y [but do not correctly remember what the others said]." Schematically, this mechanism can be represented by the following:
(E — > M,) — > (M2(xSI) ) — > (M3 — > R)
Where E represents an initially entry into the memory system, Ml represents the subject's initial belief, M2 represents the beliefs of others, M3 represents the subject's belief at a later point in time, R represents the recall, and SI represents the impact of social influence. In this model, the social influence has its impact at the point memories conflict. The subject decides at that moment the others are correct. Later recall does not involve any further decisions about the accuracy of the others. 62
Considering memories like opinions and focusing on the point in time at which external information conflicts with memory refocuses the eyewitness suggestibility paradigm through social components that are largely unexplored (c.f., Zaragoza, 1991). For example, source credibility was earlier mentioned as a potential contributor to the social distortion of memory. Given the perspective of Memory Comparison Theory it is unsurprising that Ceci, Ross and Toglia (1987) found evidence that the prestige of an individual contributed to the eyewitness suggestibility effect in children. Nor is it unsurprising that Dodd and Bradshaw (1980) found that misleading suggestions about a car accident were believed when authored by a neutral witness but disbelieved when authored by the driver at fault. In theory source credibility, as well as many of the effects known to change attitudes, should work in both children and adults. The rich variety of social factors carry a great potential for designing experiments in which source memory dissociates from memory change. However, the present study was unable to distinguish among these three possibilities. It could be argued that the conditions of this first study do not suggest that the effect is normatively mediated. To begin, subjects responses were anonymous, they were isolated in cubicles, and it is difficult to believe that anyone felt motivated to respond for social approval on a surprise cued-recall test after they had disconnected from the Local Area Network. Nonetheless, until disproven it remains a possible mechanism for the observed effects. The same can be said for the source-retrieval mediated model. It is entirely plausible that the subjects simply remembered what the others said and used that as a guide for responding on the cued-recall task. Finally, the non-mediated model might also account for the results, but it is untestable in this study. The non-mediated model is intriguing, for it suggests that others may affect our memory without our awareness. A second study was conducted to discriminate among these three models CHAPTER IV STUDY 2
This study was conducted to determine whether the non-mediated memory model can account for the findings observed in the last chapter. The key to providing support for this mechanism is to show that subjects are unable to remember the source information during later stages of the experiment. That is, if subjects are unable to remember the what others said and yet are still socially influenced, then the non-mediated memory model would get support. On the other hand, if subjects are able to later remember what others said then either the normatively-determined or the source-retrieval-mediated models could not be ruled out. To determine whether subjects could remember source information during the later stages of the experiment, a source memory task was added after the cued-recall task. In this task, subjects were queried concerning their recollections about the others' memories for each of the thirty items. This memory for source data is valuable in two aspects. First, the memory for source can be used as a statistical covariate in analyzing the effects others have on memory, thus statistically controlling for the effect that memory for source plays in cued-recall. If the effects of Social Consensus remains after controlling for memory for source, then the non-mediated memory model would receive support. A second value of these data is that they provide an explorative look into the relationship between Social Consensus and memory for source. To give the non-mediated model the best possibility of emerging, a second between-subjects factor was added. This factor borrows from the
64 65 sleeper effect observed in attitude change {Hovland, Lumsdaine, and Sheffield, 1948). Specifically, the sleeper effect occurs when individuals who, after the passage of time, show attitude change to persuasive messages despite the fact that the source information was discredited. One mechanism proposed to explain this is a dissociation between the persuasive message and a discounting cue presented immediately after the persuasive message (Kelman and Hovland, 1953). More recently, differential decay between the persuasive message and the memory for source was proposed as an alternative explanation for the sleeper effect (Greenwald et al., 1987). In any event, all studies find that a critical component of the sleeper effect phenomenon is the passage of time. Accordingly, this study varies the delay between the time that subjects take the multiple-choice test and the cued-recall test. If source memory really does decay different than episodic memory, then presumably longer delays will decrease source memory to the point that only episodic memory remains. Accordingly, for some subjects the multiple-choice to cued-recall delay was extended from 2.5 minutes to ten minutes. Finally, this study will seek to address one potential criticism of the social influence effect observed in the last study. Specifically, it is possible that the Social Consensus effects obtained may be largely driven by those items on which subjects were initially wrong. One variant of this criticism is that the effect may be primarily due to the unseen items, because the only time subjects encountered any information about these items was when they received feedback from the others. Either way, the argument boils down to the idea that subjects who did not get a multiple-choice item right did not encode the story information at all. In such a scenario it is easy to imagine these subjects changing their responses, especially if given social pressure to do so. Even if this were the case, the results could still show that 66 others have a demonstrable impact on memories. However, such data would be unable to suggest that people will abandon their memories for the memories of others. A "strong" test of the social influence effect can be conducted by analyzing only those items for which the multiple-choice responses subjects gave were correct, by definition excluding unseen items (see Christiaansen and Ochalek, 1983, for a similar analysis). This approach, however, is still somewhat imperfect for two reasons. First, subjects are forced to make a multiple choice response, thus giving rise to the possibility that even on some items where there was a failure to encode the subjects may simply guess correctly (c.f., McCloskey and Zaragoza, 1985a). Secondly, any analyses excluding multiple-choice incorrect items may differentially include subjects more or less susceptible to social influence for reasons unrelated to the experiment (e.g., item certainty, subject intelligence). These possibilities need to be acknowledged in advance given that such analyses are post hoc. However, with these caveats in mind, excluding initially incorrect items appears to be at least a first approximation to controlling for failure to encode. In sum, this study is designed to replicate the finding that memory can be socially influenced. Furthermore, with different items a separate test of the item memorability effect can be performed, hopefully showing that social influence is less likely on high-memorable than low-memorable items. Finally, the study will provide a first test of the non-mediated model of social influence on memory and allow insight into the relationship between social influence and memory for source.
Method
Overview. In this study subjects received the same paradigm as before except that after the cued recall part of the experiment they 67 were asked to identify the responses of the other participants. These data can be entered as a covariate to determine whether source memory necessarily mediates the social influence on cued-recall. If source memory is not necessary for social influence to have an effect, then the non-mediated model would receive support. Subjects. 104 introductory psychology students at Ohio State University, Columbus Campus, participated during the autumn quarter of 1991. Subjects received course credit in partial fulfillment of course requirements. Four subjects were deemed suspicious on the basis of the open-ended protocols and were excluded from all analyses. Procedure. The procedure was identical to the first study, with the following exceptions. First, given that memory for source should decay over time, an additional between-subjects factor was added to the design, with subjects being randomly assigned to all between-subject conditions. As before, some subjects received a two minute and thirty second delay between the multiple choice task and the cued-recall task. But for other subjects the delay was increased to ten minutes. Presumably longer delays should adversely affect memory for source, thus optimizing conditions for the non-mediated model. The second difference concerned the nature of the second distractor task. Specifically, the second distractor task was changed (based largely on subjects' postexperimental complaints) from the arithmetic task to a word-seek puzzle, listed in Appendix A. Subjects worked on this task for 2.5 or 10 minutes, depending on the condition they were assigned. Third, because the high-memorable and low-memorable items were not statistically different in the first experiment, new items were selected for use. Specifically, items for use in the second study were selected on the basis of the percentage correct during the multiple-choice phase from data obtained in the first study. These new items then constituted the high and low memorable items for the second and all subsequent 68 studies. Fourth, the feedback profiles were tailored to the responses of each subject. Despite the encouraging data indicating subjects will more often change to a correct than incorrect response, the decision was made to push the limits of the social influence on memory effect by always pressuring subjects towards an incorrect response. Based on the multiple-choice data from the first study, subjects always received pressure to change to the most popular incorrect response different from the subjects' own response. By tailoring the feedback to each subject, the Low Consensus Disagree condition was more precisely defined so that one other participant agreed with the subject, three others disagreed with the subject but agreed among themselves, and two final subjects each responded different from everyone else. There was therefore a total of six others' responses. As an added benefit of tailoring the response profiles, each subject encountered an equal number of High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, and High Consensus Disagree feedbacks. As before, feedback type was randomly assigned to items within levels of memorability. Finally, following the cued-recall phase subjects were given a recognition task in which they were asked to identify what the others had said on each item. After the cued-recall phase subjects were immediately shown a screen as follows:
In this part, please try to remember the feedback the computer gave you. In the screens that follow, we will show you the multiple-choice items you responded to earlier. DO NOT RESPOND TO THESE ill!! WE ALREADY HAVE YOUR MEMORY FOR THESE ITEMS 1 Instead, we'll show you the items and responses to remind you of them. Immediately UNDER the items and responses, we will ask you to indicate what you remember about the feedback. That is, did most others answer A, B, C or D? Or, was this an item where the computer did NOT present you with the TABULATED FEEDBACK of others? 69
So, remember, we willshow you all the multiple-choice items again, and we wantyou to tell us WHAT THE MAJORITY ANSWER OF THE FEEDBACK was IF FEEDBACK WAS GIVEN. Your choices are on the BOTTOM half of the screen - respond to the BOTTOM HALF OPTIONS ONLY 1111 The top item is only there to remind you of the question. Remember, you are not recalling the story - you're trying to recall the feedback, if feedback was given. Ready?
Subjects were then shown a fresh screen for each item, an example which is listed in Appendix A. On the top half of the screen was the phrase, "When you saw the question:" followed by the multiple-choice stem and the four possible responses. In the center of the screen was a dashed line, denoting a dividing line between the top-half and bottom-half of the screen. On the bottom half of the screen subjects saw a stem that read, "What was the most frequent response of the others?" and below that were possible options, "(a) most said a," "(b) most said b," through "(e) others responses were not given." Subjects then simply typed in the response they believed appropriate. The sequence in which the thirty source memory items were presented was randomized for each subject.
Results
Four subjects were deemed suspicious based on their open-ended protocols and were deleted from all analyses reported. Therefore, the data from 100 subjects were retained for analyses reported. One purpose of this study was to show that the Social Consensus effect would replicate. To test this, the yielding and change variables were analyzed separately. A second purpose of this experiment was to investigate the relationship between source memory and social influence, and how source memory relates to social influence on memory. Each of these is discussed in turn below. Yielding. Of interest in the yielding analysis is whether the general findings about Social Consensus and Item Memorability 70 replicated. To answer this question, the yielding data were entered into a regression with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. The subject dummy codes were also entered and served to eliminate the issue of nonindependence of observations. The finding that Social Consensus affects yielding was replicated F(1,480) = 33.11, p < .0001. As expected, the means showed that yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .29) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .12). Furthermore, the selection of new items was successful in producing a significant Item Memorability effect, F(2,480) = 36.85, p < .0001. The means showed that yielding was highest in the Unseen condition (M = .38), moderate in the Low-memorable condition (M = .15), and lowest in the High-Memorable condition (M = .09). A polynomial decomposition of the Item Memorability effect showed that both the linear and quadratic effects were significant [£(1,480) = 65.85, p < .0001 for linear; £(1,480) = 7.86, p = .005 for quadratic]. However, these two main effects were qualified by a Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction (£[2,480] = 6.75, p = .001], the means of which are depicted in Figure 6. One interpretation of these data is that the effect of high social pressure is equally powerful for seen items but not unseen items, suggesting a ceiling effect on yielding for seen items. Precisely why this pattern of means does not precisely match the pattern observed in the first experiment is unclear, but it may be partly due to the selection of different critical items for this experiment. No other effects reached significance, although the Social Consensus X Item Memorability effect marginally interacted with Distractor Delay E(2,480) = 2.68, p = .070. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 7 and 8. The means indicate the 71 yielding was greater at the longer distractor delay for unseen and low- memorability items. However, for high-memorability items the yielding decreased as distractor delay increased. One possible reason for these results is that the subjects' original memory traces of the episodic detail may compete with later source information. In this scenario, when subjects attempt to remember something, they use whatever becomes available, even if they are unable to attribute its source. Presumably the memory trace from high-memorable items decays less rapidly than the source memory for low-memorable items. When subjects engage in a cued- recall task, they use the first thing that comes to mind: In this case, their own original memory. Change. The change measure was also entered into a regression with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. The expectation was that both the Social Consensus and the Item Memorability effects would emerge in this analysis. They both did. The Social Consensus effect was significant, F(2,768) = 12.01, p < .0001, indicating that change increased as social pressure increased (M High Consensus Agree = .23, M Low Consensus Disagree = .32, M High Consensus Disagree = .40). A trend analysis showed that only the linear component of the Social Consensus effect was significant (F[l,768) = 24.01, p < .0001). The Item Memorability effect was also significant, F(2,768) = 45.10, p < .0001, showing that change was maximally likely for unseen items (M = .50), of middling likelihood for Low Memorability items (M = .28), and was least likely for Seen items (M = .17). A trend analysis on the Item Memorability effect found the linear trend significant and the quadratic trend marginally so (F[l,768] = 87.18, p < .0001 for linear; F[l,768] = 3.02, p = .083 for quadratic). 72
However, these main effects are qualified by an Item Memorability X Social Consensus interaction, F(4,768) = 2.98, p = .02, depicted in Figure 9. As with the yielding measure, the simplest interpretation of the interaction is that the effect of Social Consensus is stronger on unseen items than on seen items (i.e., either High Memorability or Low Memorability). No other effects of interest were significant. Source memory. The source memory data provide an initial test of the Distractor Delay effect. If source memory decays in the span from 2.5 to 10 minutes, then source memory should be less accurate at the longer period. To test this empirically, the source memory data were coded as follows: 0 = incorrect source memory, and 1 = correct source memory. These source memory values from the critical nine responses were then entered regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), and Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree) and their interactions as regressors. The data showed that Distractor Delay was nowhere near significant, F(1,768) = .04, p = .840, with source memory essentially identical in the 2.5-minute (M = .61) and 10-minute (M = .62) conditions. One possible reason why the Distractor Delay failed is that the interval was simply too brief. The source memory data can also answer questions about the relationship between social influence and memory for source. For example, were subjects able to remember the source information, and if yes, when were they more likely to do so? With respect to source memory and social influence no explicit predictions were made, although intuition suggests that source memory should be especially accurate when the others' responses are less ambiguous, or more bluntly, all the same. In fact, this intuition was supported by the data, the Social Consensus effect being reliable, F(2,768) = 72.12, p < .0001. The means, depicted in Figure 10, showed that source memory was very good in the High 73
Consensus Agree condition (M = .67), only fair in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .38), but was best of all in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .79). Unsurprisingly, a polynomial decomposition found that the quadratic Social Consensus effect was significant, F(1,768) = 132.27, p < .0001. However, somewhat unexpectedly the linear Social Consensus effect was reliable as well, F(l,768) = 11.96, p = .0006, indicating that source memory was more accurate in the High Consensus Disagree condition than in the High Consensus Agree condition. Quite likely the relatively accurate source memory for these two conditions is due to the unambiguous nature of the conditions. But the difference between them may be due to the possibility that unanimous disagreement is particularly attention- getting. As with Social Consensus, there were no specific predictions about the relationship between accurate source memory and Item Memorability. Intuition would suggest that source memory would be increasingly accurate with item uncertainty, because subjects could use others to inform them about items about which they were unsure. The results showed that the Item Memorability effect was significant in this analysis, F(2,768) = 8.53, p = .0002. The means showed that source memory was most accurate when items were unseen (M = .70), middling when items were high-memorable (M = .59), and least accurate when items were low-memorable (M = .56). Apparently subjects indeed paid extra attention to source information with the unseen items, suggesting that they used the others to provide them information about items which they knew nothing. However, the logical extension of this argument is that subjects would have second-best source memory for the low-memorable items, because these should evoke the second-most uncertainty. This was not supported by the data. A Tukey test found that source memory for the high-memorable items and low-memorable items was nonsignificantly different at the .05 criterion level. However, source memory for both 74 the high-memorable and low-memorable items was reliably different from the unseen items. Perhaps the safest conclusion is that item uncertainty does appear to play a role in accurate source memory, but item certainty alone does not account for everything. No other effects of interest were significant. Controlling for memory for source in yielding. The memory for source data can be used to provide support for the non-mediated model. Specifically, the memory for source data can be used as a covariate in the general linear model, thus controlling for the source memory when determining the significance of other effects. Accordingly, the yielding data were entered into a regression with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. Furthermore, the source memory measure was included as a covariate. The results showed that the source memory covariate was significant, F(l,479) = 10.32, p = .001, indicating that the subjects' source memories during the later stages of the experiment reliably covaried with yielding. This suggests that subjects may have used the responses of others as a guide in formulating their cued-recall responses, a process that would support either the normatively- determined model or the mediated-memory model discussed earlier. But was this the only process operating? The answer is no. Including the source memory measure, and therefore controlling for source memory, did not eliminate the Social Consensus effect, F(l,479) = 12.22, p = .0005. The adjusted means show that yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .26) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .15). The conclusion from these results is that a non mediated memory mechanism is at least partly responsible for the Social Consensus findings. The Item Memorability effect was also significant in this particular analysis, £(1,479) = 31.31, p < .0001. The adjusted means showed that yielding was least for the high-memorable items (M = .10), middling for low-memorable items (M = .16), and greatest for unseen items (M = .37). A trend analysis showed that both the linear and quadratic components of the Item Memorability effect were significant (£[1,479] = 57.28, p < .0001 for linear; (£[1,479] = 6.00, p = .015 for quadratic). However, the these two main effects are qualified by a Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, £(2,479) = 6.81, p = .001. The adjusted means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 11 and show that the effect of Social Influence increased yielding for high-memorable and unseen items, but increasing Social Influence apparently had no effect of low-memorable items. This pattern of means is not appreciably different from those observed without the covariate. Controlling for memory for source in change. The memory for source data were also used as a covariate in analyzing change. The change measure was entered into a regression with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. As before, the source memory measure was included as a covariate. Perhaps the most striking result is that the source memory covariate was not significant, £(1,767) = .22, p = .643, leading to the conclusion that source memory did not play a role in change at all. However, because memory for source was reliably predicted by both Social Consensus and Item Memorability, source memory must necessarily be collinear with these effects when simultaneously regressing on yielding or change. Such collinearity can lead to the seeming paradox that source memory does not account for a significant amount of variance when in the same simultaneous equation as Social Consensus and Item 76
Memorability. In any event, the other effects have source memory partialled out, and if the Social Consensus effect remains then the non mediated model gains more support. The results showed that indeed the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(2,767) = 12.09, p < .0001. The adjusted means indicated that change was least in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .24), moderate in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .31), and greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .41). Polynomial contrasts showed that the linear Social Consensus effect was significant (£[1/767] = 24.18, p < .0001) but not the quadratic Social Consensus effect (£[1,767] = .08, p = .782). Similarly, the Item Memorability main effect was also significant, F(2,767) = 44.89, p < .0001. The adjusted means showed change highest for unseen items (M = .50), moderate for low-memorable items (M = .28), and least for the high- memorable items (M = .17). A polynomial decomposition of the Item Memorability effect found a significant linear effect (F[1,767] = 86.99, p < .0001) and a marginal quadratic effect (F[l,767] = 3.15, p = .076). However, these two main effects must be interpreted in light of a Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(4,767) = 2.98, p = .019. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 12. The simplest interpretation of this interaction is that increasing social pressure was particularly powerful in producing change on unseen items, but considerably less so for low-memorability items. Failure to encode. It is possible that the Social Consensus effect is due primarily to those items which subjects failed to encode. If this were the case, then subjects may logically use others to provide them information they did not already know. On the other hand, if subjects did encode the story, then disagreement from the others pits memories against one another. In this case yielding would represent an abandonment of a memory for the memory of others. Although the latter case would be a more impressive finding, either makes sense. A first 77 approximation of controlling for a failure to encode was conducted by restricting the analysis to those multiple-choice items that a subject answered correctly. This analysis does not, nor could it, control for lucky guessing. But it does allow some assurance that subjects indeed encoded the original material. Controlling for failure to encode in the yielding analysis. This analysis was restricted to items upon which subjects were correct during the multiple choice phase of the experiment. If subjects reliably yielded in this analysis, then there is reason to believe that they abandoned memories for the memories of others. To test this possibility, the yielding scores were entered into a regression model with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. The results showed that the Social Consensus effect was marginally significant, F(l,172) = 3.28, p = .072, the means indicating that yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .13) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .06). It appears that subjects indeed yielded even when they had originally encoded the information. Somewhat surprisingly, the Item Memorability was not significant, F(l,172) = 2.18, p = .142, indicating that yielding was statistically equal for both high-memorable (M = .07) and low-memorable (M = .13) items. In this case the nonsignificant Item Memorability effect probably represents an error of insensitivity. The means lined up as expected, suggesting that with greater power reliable differences would be obtained. Finally, there was a significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(l,172) = 4.64, p = .033. The means are depicted in Figure 13 and show that the effects of Social Consensus on yielding appear to increase for high-memorable items but not low- 78 memorable items. One possible reason for this pattern of means is that subjects were willing to abandon their memories for low-memorable items even under relatively low social pressure to do so. Yielding for low- memorable items may be essentially flat across Social Consensus because of ceiling effects. No other effects were significant in this analysis. Controlling for failure to encode and memory for source in the yielding analysis. The last analysis found that even when subjects got the multiple choice items correct yielding was marginally more likely under high social pressure than low social pressure. If the nonmediated model holds, then initially correct subjects who yield may not specifically remember what the others said. To test this possibility, a yielding analysis was conducted restricted to only those items on which subjects were initially correct. Furthermore, the memory for source measure was entered into the regression model along with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. The results show that the source memory covariate was significant, F(l,171) = 5.49, p = .020, indicating that memory for source covaried with yielding. Presumably subjects had access to the source information and used it as a guide in formulating their cued-recall responses. However, they did not do so at levels of Social Consensus (F[1,171] = .23, p = .632). Despite the fact that mean yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .11) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .09), these means were not reliably different. Initially correct subjects who yielded apparently did so only by remembering what the others had said. Item Memorability was marginally significant, F(l,171) = 3.32, p = .070. As expected, yielding was higher in the low-memorable condition (M = .13) than in the high-memorable condition (M = .06). However, 79 these two main effects must be interpreted in light of a significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability main effect, F(l,171) = 5.74, p = .018. The pattern of adjusted means shown in Figure 14 was unexpected: The effect of Social Consensus increased for high-memorable items but decreased for low-memorable items. The reason why this pattern emerged is unclear. It shows that when people are initially correct about low- memorable items they are more influenced by a non-unanimous group than a unanimous group. No other effects of interest were significant in this analysis. Controlling for a failure to encode in the change analysis. The same concerns about failure to encode apply for the change measure as well. The change scores for those items upon which subjects were initially correct were entered into a regression model with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. If Social Consensus was effective at getting people to change their memories, then increasing social pressure should result in greater change. This did not happen, however, as Social Consensus was not significant, F(2,310) = 1.10, p = .334. A trend analysis found that neither the linear nor the quadratic effects were significant (F[l,310] = 1.08, p = .299 for linear; (F[l,310] = .99, p = .321 for quadratic). The means showed that change was least in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .11), highest in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .16), and moderate in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .15). The means lined up in roughly the expected order, implying that greater power might pick up differences. Such extra power was not needed for the Item Memorability effect, as it was easily significant, F(l,310) = 11.62, p = .001. The means showed that mean change was higher for low-memorable items (M = .22) 80 than for high memorable items (M = .09). Change was therefore more likely for low-memorable than for high-memorable items, even for items on which subjects were originally correct. These main effects were qualified by an Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(2,310) = 6.04, p = .003. The means are depicted in Figure 15 and indicate to a large extent the unexpected pattern observed in the previous two analyses. For some reason the Low Consensus Disagree condition had an unusually powerful impact on subjects' memories for the low-memorable items. No other effects were significant. Controlling for failure to encode and memory for source in the change analysis. The role of source memory in mediating change was assessed, controlling for failure to encode. If the non-mediated model holds, then Social Consensus effects would remain reliable after controlling for source memory. To test this possibility, the change scores were entered into a regression model with Story Replication (Story A, Story B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen), their interactions, and the source memory covariate as regressors. The results showed that the source memory covariate was significant, F(l,309) = 4.40, p = .037, indicating that subjects' memory for source reliably varied with their cued-recall change. Subjects apparently had access to their memories of what the others had said and used it as a guide, even when they were initially correct. The Social Consensus effect predicts that subjects should change more as social pressure increased. However, given that Social Consensus was not reliable when controlling only for a failure to encode, it is not surprising that it was not reliable here, either (F[2,309] = .66, p = .520). But the means again lined up pretty much as expected, with greatest change in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .19), moderate change in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .16), and 81 least change in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .14). Given these means, the failure to pick up even a linear Social Consensus effect may be just an error of insensitivity (F[l,309] = 1.30, p = .255 for linear Social Consensus; F[1,309] = .00, p = .984 for quadratic Social Consensus). Such error of insensitivity was not the case with Item Memorability, F(1,309) = 10.29, p = .002, which showed that change was higher for low-memorable items (M = .22) than for high-memorable items (M = .11). This main effect was qualified by a Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(2,309) = 5.49, p = .005. The adjusted means are depicted in Figure 16 and do not differ appreciably from the last few figures. Subjects in this experiment, for some reason, were especially likely to change or yield when items were low-memorable and social pressure was low. No other effects of interest were significant.
Discussion
The second study was designed to demonstrate three things. First of all, it sought to replicate the finding that Social Consensus and Item Memorability reliably affects later cued-recall responses. Second, it sought the determininants of source memory, and the role that source memory plays in yielding and change. Analyses that controlled for source can provide some indication of the mechanisms underlying the Social Consensus effect observed in the first experiment. Finally, the study attempted to control for subjects failing to encode the story information. The results showed that Social Consensus indeed affected later cued-recall responses, and that this effect was moderated by Item Memorability. The exact pattern of means did not match the first study, however, and it is not entirely clear why. It may be that the items selected for this study are susceptible to ceiling effects on Social 82
Consensus. Without further data to corroborate this somewhat unexpected pattern, these means should probably best be interpreted with caution. This experiment found that both Social Consensus and Item Memorability were determinants of source memory. Specifically, source memory was best when subjects faced unanimous disagreement, pretty good when subjects faced unanimous agreement, and worst when subjects faced nonunanimous disagreement. Furthermore, source memory was better for unseen items than for seen items. These results are not surprising, given that we know from the conformity literature people will use others to inform them about the environment and a unanimous group is seen as particularly informative (e.g., Asch, 1952; Deutsch & Gerard, 1955; Allen and Wilder, 1980). Nonetheless, these source memory data appear to be a first in linking the source memory issue with social influence phenomena. Another potential determinant of source memory investigated in this study was that source memory might differentially decay relative to episodic memory. More specifically, if source memory and episodic memory decay differentially, then two things should happen. First, source memory should become less accurate over time. Second, the non mediated model should become more likely at longer durations because subjects' episodic memory should reflect the others' responses, but without accurate source memory available. In succinct terms, the Distractor Delay effect did not work in this experiment. This null finding is probably due to the short difference between conditions. Generally speaking, source memory also played a role in subjects' cued-recalls. Except for the first change analysis, memory for source reliably covaried with both yielding and change. This can be taken as evidence that subjects had access to source information at later stages of the experiment, and they used this information as a guide in generating cued-recalls. But controlling for source did not eliminate the effects of Social Consensus, except for those analyses also controlling for a failure to encode the story. If any generalizations can be made from these data, it appears that the non-mediated model received support in cases where subjects did not originally encode the story information. The significant source memory covariate in (the majority) of these analyses also lends support to the normative and/or mediated-memory models, implying that both a non-mediated and a mediated-memory process play a role. Controlling for a failure to encode found the source memory covariate reliable, indicating support for either a normative or a memory-mediated model. Despite the generally encouraging results of this study, it is worth noting that when the cued-recall task always preceded the source memory task. The problem is that performing the cued-recall task first may have somehow affected source memory, perhaps through source confusion. By focusing first on the cued-recall response an individual might pay less attention to source detail, giving the non-mediated model a less rigorous test than it might get otherwise. Conversely, asking subjects to remember source information first may make them especially aware of who said what. If the non-mediated model emerged under such circumstances, then it would pass a more stringent test. The third study was conducted to accomplish this goal. CHAPTER V STUDY 3
The third study was conducted for two reasons. First, the study sought to determine whether manipulating the order of the cued-recall and source memory tasks would affect memory for source and subsequent yielding and change. If focusing on cued-recall responses first leads to source confusion, then accurate source memory should be greater when the source memory task precedes the cued-recall task. An alternative or complementary possibility is that placing the source memory task first might serve to remind subjects of who said what. If subjects indeed use others as a guide, having this knowledge available should lead to greater yielding and change in these conditions. Second, the study sought to replicate the findings from the previous two studies. However, from the last study we know that the means of the Social Consensus effect were in the expected direction for the yielding and change analysis, controlling for source memory and failure to encode. The lack of significance may be have resulted from insufficient statistical power. Accordingly, more subjects were run in the experiment in order to increase the likelihood of finding reliable differences in the more fine-grained analyses. In sum, the overall design of this experiment was a Story Replication (Story A, Story B) X Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes) X Task Order (Cued-Recall first or Source Memory first) X Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High Memorability, Low Memorability, Unseen) with repeated measures on the last two factors. The predictions of this experiment
84 85 include: (a) that the general finding that Social Consensus and Item Memorability affect later cued-recall responses, (b) that source confusion would lead to less accurate source memory when the cued-recall task preceded the source memory task, and (c) that more accurate source memory would lead to greater yielding and change when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task.
Method
Overview. The third study sought to control for any task performance decrement by manipulating the position of the cued-recall task relative to the source memory task. The overall design was identical to the second experiment, except that half the subjects were randomly assigned to complete the cued-recall task before the source memory task whereas the other half were randomly assigned the reverse. Subjects. 170 introductory psychology students at Ohio State University, Columbus Campus, participated during the later part of autumn quarter, 1991. Subjects received course credit in partial fulfillment of course requirements. 15 subjects were deemed suspicious on the basis of the open-ended protocols and were excluded from all analyses. Procedure. The procedure was identical to the second experiment, except that half of the subjects were randomly assigned to complete the cued-recall task prior to completing the source memory task. The other half of the subjects were assigned to the reverse, completing the source memory task before the cued-recall task. Thus, the design was a Story Replication (A,B) X Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes) X Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first) X Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree) X Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen) with repeated measures on the last two factors. 86
Results
The cued recall responses were coded for yielding and change as before, and these dependent measures were entered into a series of regressions as discussed below. Yielding. The yielding scores were entered into a within-subjects regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the subject dummy codes as regressors. One purpose of this experiment was to replicate the general finding that Social Consensus affects later yielding, and it did so, F(1,735) = 64.07, p < .0001. As before, the mean yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree (M = .34) than in the Low Consensus Disagree (M = .14). Furthermore, the Item Memorability effect was reliable F(2,735) = 62.52, p < .0001, and a trend analysis found the linear component significant F(l,735) = 121.26, p < .0001, and the quadratic effect nearly significant, F(1,735) = 3.79, p = .052. The means of the Item Memorability main effect revealed that yielding was highest for the unseen items (M = .42), middling for the low-memorable items (M = .20), and lowest for the high-memorable items (M = .09). However, these two main effects interacted reliably, F(2,735) = 5.53, p = .004. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 17 and show a pattern reminiscent of the first experiment rather than the second. There was no indication of any ceiling effects in yielding for high-memorable and low-memorable items observed in this experiment. Exactly why this pattern matched the first experiment and not the second is not entirely clear. Perhaps fewer subjects in the second experiment led to less stable means. 87
A second purpose of this experiment was to determine whether Task Order gave subjects differential access to source information. If it did, then yielding should be higher when the source memory task was first. But the results found Task Order nonsignificant, F(l,735) = .10, p = .750, and the means were, for all practical purposes, virtually identical (M for Source Memory task first = .245; M for Cued Recall task first = .235). One might argue that evaluating the Task Order main effect is unfair, given that we know source memory is typically poor in the Low Consensus Disagree condition while excellent in the High Consensus Disagree condition. This concern hinges on the logic that allowing people to try and access source memory first may not have an effect if they can not remember what the others said anyway. If that were the case, then any benefit of placing the source memory task first would be greater in the High Consensus Disagree condition than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition. This conclusion was not supported, however, as the Social Consensus X Task Order interaction was not significant, F(l,735) = 0.00, p = .96. No other effects of interest were significant. Change. The change scores were also entered into a regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the subject dummy codes as regressors. As with the previous analysis, one purpose of the this study was to replicate the finding that Social Consensus can reliably affect later cued-recall. The Social Consensus effect was significant in this analysis, F(2,1176) = 58.98, p < .0001, and orthogonal polynomial contrasts found that both the linear and quadratic effects were significant (F[l,1176] = 111.48, p < .0001 for linear; (F[l,1176] = 6.48, p = .011 for quadratic). The means indicated that change was greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .20), moderate in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .41), and maximal in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .50). Similar to previous analyses, the Item Memorability effect was reliable, F(2,1176) = 79.09, p < .0001, the means showing that change was greatest for unseen items (M = .51), moderate for low-memorable (M = .43), and least of all for high-memorable (M = .18). Trend analyses found that both the linear and quadratic Item Memorability effects were significant (F[1,1176] = 144.76, p < .0001 for linear; (F[l,1176] = 13.41, p = .0003 for quadratic). These two main effects must be interpreted in light of a significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(4,1176) = 8.97, p < .0001, the means of which are depicted in Figure 18. Perhaps the simplest interpretation of this interaction is that the effect of Social Consensus was very dramatic for unseen items, and to a somewhat lesser extent, for low-memorable items. For high-memorable items, the Social Consensus effect was present but smaller. This analysis allows another chance for the Task Order effect to emerge. In the case of change as a dependent measure, only the Social Consensus X Task Order interaction should be interpreted. Here is why: If placing the source memory task first truly aids source memory, then change should be less for the High Consensus Agree condition when the source memory task is first than when it is last. On the other hand, change should be greater for the High Consensus Disagree condition if the source memory task is first than when it is last. In both cases, this Social Consensus X Task Order prediction stems from the idea that having a clear recollection of others' memories will affect cued- recalls. The interaction was not significant, F(2,1176) = 1.77, p = .17, although the cross-over pattern of means depicted in Figure 19 does fit with expectations. Somewhat unexpectedly, there was a marginally significant Social Consensus X Task Order X Distractor Delay interaction, F(2,1176) = 2.64, p = .072. The means are shown in Figures 20 and 21 and indicate that the advantage of having the source memory 89 task in the High Consensus Disagree condition occurred for delays of 2.5 minutes. At 10 minutes this advantage was reversed, and change was greater when cued-recall came first. For the High Consensus Agree condition, the advantage of having source memory first was greater at the delay of 10 minutes. At the shorter delay, there was no difference in change among Task Order. One possible reason for this pattern of data is that memory for source could decay differently for High Consensus Agree and High Consensus Disagree conditions. Such a differential decay could moderate any benefits that might accrue if the source memory task were first. There was one other surprise in the data. There was a significant Item Memorability X Distractor Delay interaction, F(2,1176) = 3.00, p = .050. The means of this interaction are shown in Figure 22. The pattern of means indicated that at the 2.5-minute delay, change was low for high-memorable items but about equal for the low-memorable and unseen items. At the 10-minute delay, change systematically increased as item memorability decreased. One partial explanation is that subjects simply better-remembered the others' responses for the low- memorable items at the shorter delay. But this does not explain why the unseen items have lower change at shorter durations, either. In sum, this result should also be viewed cautiously until further evidence is obtained. No other effects of interest were significant. Source Memory. The source memory data lay at the heart of this experiment's purpose. The source confusion hypothesis argues that placing the cued-recall task confuses subjects as to the actual source of their memories. An alternative and complementary view is that placing the source memory task first might benefit subjects by first letting them straighten out who said what. Either way, these hypotheses both predict that source memory should be superior when the source memory task precedes the cued-recall task. Quite simply, it did not turn out that way. The source memory data were entered into a 90 regression model with Story Replication, Distractor Delay, Task Order, Source Memory, Social Consensus, Item Memorability, and their interactions as regressors. The Task Order effect was not significant, F(1,1176) = .01, p = .91. The means were virtually identical whether the source memory task was first (M = .62) or the cued-recall task was first (M = .62). In simplest terms, the source confusion hypothesis did not get support. As with the previous source memory findings, there was a reliable Social Consensus effect, F(l,1176) = 103.22, and polynomial contrasts found that both the linear and quadratic components of this effect were significant (F[l,1176] = 46.00, p < .0001 for linear; F[l,1176] = 160.45, p < .0001 for quadratic). In accordance with earlier findings, the source memory was moderately good in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .63), worst in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .41), and best of all in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .83). The Item Memorability similarly replicated earlier findings, F(2,1176) = 3.30, p = .037. The In this particular analysis, accurate source memory was roughly identical for high-memorable (M = .61) and low-memorable items (M = .59), but was best of all for the unseen items (M = .66). Trend analyses on these means found that the linear effect was significant (F[l,1176] = 4.01, p = .05) but not the quadratic effect (F[1,1176] = 2.60, p = .11). The means for the Social Consensus and Item Memorability effects are depicted in Figure 23. Finally, there was an unexpected Social Consensus X Distractor Delay interaction, F(2,1176) = 3.37, p = .04. The means are shown in Figure 24. The pattern of means indicate that as the delay interval increased, source memory got better in the High Consensus Disagree condition and worse in the High Consensus Agree condition. This result is difficult to explain given that accuracy actually improved over time for the items in one condition. This result was not obtained in the last experiment and should be replicated before any conclusions can be 91 safely drawn. There were no other effects of interest. Controlling for source memory in the yielding analysis. This experiment provides a second test of the earlier finding that, even when controlling for source memory, the effects of Social Consensus on yielding can still emerge. Accordingly, the yielding data were entered into a regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the source memory measure as a covariate. The results of this analysis found that the source memory measure was significant, F(l,734) = 52.67, p < .0001, indicating that memory for source reliably covaried with yielding. Presumably subjects had access to the responses of others and at times used those responses as a guide in generating their cued-recall responses. But controlling for source memory did not eliminate the effect of Social Consensus, either, P(l,734) = 13.53, p < .0001. The adjusted means indicated that yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .29) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .19). There was also an Item Memorability effect, F(2,734) = 60.97, p < .0001, showing that mean yielding was least for the high-memorable items (M = .10), moderate for the low-memorable items (M = .21), and greatest for the unseen items (M = .41). A trend analysis on the Item Memorability effect showed that the linear effect was significant (F[1,734] = 119.65, p < .0001) but not the quadratic effect (F[1,734] = 2.43, p = .12). However, these Social Consensus and Item Memorability main effects reliably interacted, F(2,734) = 8.35, p = .0003. The means of this interaction are revealed in Figure 25, and the pattern closely resembles the pattern of yielding obtained in the previous analysis excluding the covariate. Briefly, the effect of Social Consensus is stronger at lesser levels of Item Memorability, particularly in the case of unseen items. No other 92 effects of interest were significant in this analysis. Controlling for source memory in the change analysis. The change index was also entered into a regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued- Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the source memory measure as regressors. As seen in previous change analyses, the source memory covariate was not significant, F(l,1175) = 1.06, p = .30. Regardless of whether the nonsignificance is due to collinearity or the possibility that source memory really does not play a role in change, the remaining effects have source memory controlled. A significant Social Consensus effect controlling for source memory would support the non-mediated model. Paralleling earlier findings, the regression produced a significant Social Consensus effect, P(2,1175) = 59.51, p < .0001. The adjusted means showed that change was least in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .21), moderate in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .41), and greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .50). A set of polynomial contrasts found that both the linear and quadratic components of this main effect were reliable (F[l,1175] = 111.48, p < .0001 for linear; F[l,1175] = 4.12, p = .04 for quadratic). However, the Task Order manipulation did not interact with Social Consensus in this analysis (F[2,1175] = 1.68, p = .19), suggesting that regardless of memory for source Task Order did not affect change in this experiment. The Item Memorability effect was significant, F(2,1175) = 79.50, p < .0001, showing that regardless of source memory change was inverse to item memorability. A trend test found that both the linear and quadratic effects were significant, (F[1,1175] = 145.72 for linear; (F[1,1175] = 13.03 for quadratic). Adjusted mean change was greatest for the unseen items (M = .51), middling for the low-memorable items (M 93
= .43), and was least of all for the high-memorable items (M = .18). The Item Memorability effect interacted with two other effects in this analysis. First, there was a Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction (F[4,1175] = 8.89, p < .0001), the adjusted means of which are depicted in Figure 26. The interaction pattern closely resembles the interaction pattern observed in the change analysis that did not control for source memory. The means show that Social Consensus is increasingly powerful for items that decrease in memorability. The Item Memorability effect also reliably interacted with Distractor Delay, F(2,1175) = 2.96, p = .052. The adjusted means of this effect are shown in Figure 27 and also closely resemble the means for the change analysis not controlling for source memory. Change asymptoted for low-memorability items in the 2.5-minute delay while systematically increasing as item memorability decreased in the 10- minute delay condition. No other effects of interest were significant. Failure to encode. A series of analyses were conducted controlling for failure to encode as before: Only those multiple-choice items upon which subjects were initially correct were retained for analysis. These analyses will provide insight into whether Task Order affects yielding or change when subjects actually read the story. Controlling for a failure to encode in the yielding analysis. An analysis on the yielding data was conducted by eliminating those multiple-choice items subjects incorrectly answered. The yielding measure was entered into a regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued- Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. In this particular analysis, the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(1,235) = 9.42, p = .002. Similar to previous analyses, the yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = 94
.16) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .07). There was also a significant Item Memorability effect, F(l,235) = 16.10, p < .0001, indicating that yielding was higher for low-memorable item (M = .20) than for high-memorable items (M = .06). Unlike the previous yielding analysis controlling for failure to encode, in this particular instance the Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction was not significant, F(l,235) = .10, p = .75. The means of this nonsignificant interaction are depicted in Figure 28. Curiously, this effect is not significant, given that the pattern of means resembles earlier yielding analyses within this study. The failure of the interaction to achieve significance may be due to a lack of statistical power. The Task Order manipulation was not significant, whether considered as a main effect or interacting with Social Consensus (F[1,235] = .01, p = .91 for Task Order main effect; F[l,235] = .16, p = .69 for Social Consensus X Task Order interaction). The source confusion hypothesis therefore did not receive any support when controlling for encoding failure. There was an unexpected Distractor Delay effect, F(l,235) = 8.20, p = .005, and the means showed that yielding was higher given short delays (M = .15) than given long ones (M = .08). This effect was moderated by Item Memorability, however, F(l,235) = 4.83, p = .03. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 28 and show that yielding is roughly equivalent for high-memorable items regardless of Distractor Delay. For low-memorable items, however, mean yielding drops substantially at longer Distractor Delays. These results suggest that trace decay may be greater for low-memorable than for high-memorable items. No other effects of interest were significant. Controlling for failure to encode and memory for source in the yielding analysis. A second analysis controlling for failure to encode was conducted, this time controlling for source memory as well. Specifically, the yielding measure was entered into a regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the source memory measure as regressors. First of all, the results showed that source memory covariate was significant, F(l,234) = 11.62, p = .001, and this can be taken as evidence that subjects used their memories of the others’ responses to guide them in generating their cued-recalls. However, as seen in previous analyses controlling for both encoding failure and source memory, the Social Consensus effect was not significant, F(l,234) = .51, p = .47. The means were in the right direction, though, with yielding higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .15) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .12). Also significant in this analysis was an Item Memorability effect, F(l,234) = 19.29, p < .0001, which showed that yielding was higher for low-memorable items (adjusted M = .21) than for high-memorable items (adjusted M = .06). The Task Order manipulation was not significant, F(1,234) = .04, p = .84, nor was there a Social Consensus X Task Order interaction, F(l,234) = .03, p = .87. Quite simply, Task Order did not affect yielding in this more fine-grained analysis. However, there was a significant Distractor Delay effect, F(l,234) = 8.64, p = .004. The adjusted means showed that yielding was greater at the 2.5-minute delay (adjusted M = .19) than at the longer, 10-minute delay interval (adjusted M = .09). This Distractor Delay effect reliably interacted with Item Memorability, F(l,234) = 5.31, p = .02. The pattern of adjusted means is depicted in Figure 29 and shows that as delay interval increased, yielding decreased faster for low-memorable items than for high-memorable items. This may be due to the possibility that trace decay is faster for low-memorable than high-memorable items. No other effects of interest were reliable. 96
Controlling for failure to encode in the change analysis. The change data were also analyzed controlling for encoding failure. The change data were entered into a regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued- Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. The results of this analysis showed that the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(2,440) = 6.31, p = .002. Subjects exhibited the least change in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .12), a moderate amount of change in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .20), and the greatest amount of change in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .23). Trend tests found that only the linear component of this main effect was significant (F[l,440] = 10.89, p = .001 for linear; (F[l,440] = 1.29, p = .26 for quadratic). Also significant was the Item Memorability effect, F(1,440) = 46.57, p < .0001, and the means found change greater for low-memorable (M = .32) than for high-memorable (M = .10). These two main effects interacted significantly, F(2,440) = 3.03, p = .05. The means for this interaction are depicted in Figure 30 and show that the effects of increasing social pressure were greater for low-memorable than for high-memorable items. Furthermore, in this analysis the influence of the Low Consensus Disagree condition was unusually strong for low-memorable items. The results indicated a significant Distractor Delay effect, F(1,440) = 9.63, p = .002. The means showed that change was greater in the 2.5-minute delay (M = .21) than in the 10-minute delay (M = .16). However, this main effect interacted with Item Memorability, F(1,440) = 12.35, p = .001. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 31 and reveal that as the delay interval increased, change for the high- memorable items remained roughly equal. However, for low-memorable items, change decreased as delay interval increased. This might be due 97 to differential trace decay for high-memorable and low-memorable items. Controlling for failure to encode and memory for source in the change analysis. One final analysis was conducted, this time using change as a dependent measure and controlling for encoding failure and source memory. The change data were entered into a regression model with Story Replication (A,B), Distractor Delay (2.5 minutes, 10 minutes), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the source memory measure as regressors. The results showed that the source memory covariate was nonsignificant, F(l,439) = .01, p = .92. While this suggests that subjects did not use the others' responses, it remains possible that this null finding may be due to collinearity among regressors. However, all effects reported have the source memory controlled. The surprise of this analysis is that the Social Consensus effect emerged, F(2,439) = 6.27, p = .002. The adjusted means revealed that change was greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .27), middling in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .25), and least in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .14). Polynomial contrasts found that the linear component of the Social Consensus effect was significant (F[l,439] = 10.25, p = .002), but not the quadratic component (F[1,439] = 1.17, p = .28). There was also an Item Memorability effect, F(l,439) = 46.44, p < .0001, which means that change was greater for low-memorable items (adjusted M = .33) than for high memorable items (adjusted M = .11). However, these main effects were qualified by a significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(2,439) = 3.02, p = .05, the means of which are depicted in Figure 32. One interpretation of these means is that the effects of increasing social pressure are greater for low-memorable than for high-memorable items. Furthermore, the effects 98 of moderate social pressure were particularly high for low-memorable items in this analysis. There was also a Distractor Delay effect, F(l,439) = 9.60, p = .002. The means showed that change was greater at shorter delays (adjusted M = .27) than at longer ones (adjusted M = .17). However, this effect interacted with Item Memorability, F(l,439) = 12.33, p = .0005. The means of this interaction are shown in Figure 33. The simplest interpretation of this effect is that as delay interval increased, change dropped off for low-memorable items but remained about equal for high-memorable items. No other effects of interest were significant.
Discussion
The third study sought to replicate the previous two studies and to introduce a Task Order manipulation counterbalancing the order of the cued-recall and source memory tasks. Source memory was expected to be more accurate when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. One possible reason for this expectation was that placing the source memory task first could serve to remind subjects about who said what, information that could then be used in the subsequent cued-recall task. Alternatively, placing the cued-recall first task could confuse subjects about the source of their memories. Either way, the Task Order effect should then emerge as a main effect for yielding or as a Task Order X Social Consensus interaction for yielding or change. Somewhat surprisingly, the Task Order manipulation simply did not affect memory for source. This result is quite counterintuitive and demands replication. Although Task Order was not significant, other manipulations did affect source memory. Social Consensus, as it did in the second study, affected source memory in this third experiment. The data showed that source memory was best when the others' responses were unanimous, and it 99 was best of all when the responses were unanimous but disagreed with the subject. Furthermore, source memory was superior for unseen items, suggesting that subjects were paying especially close attention to the others' responses on those items. The subjects could then use that information in formulating their cued-recall responses. Another purpose of this experiment was to replicate the finding that Social Consensus can reliably affect cued-recalls. The general finding that memories can be socially influenced solidly replicated, although the pattern of means for yielding and change more closely matched the first study than the second. Precisely why this happened is unclear, given that the same critical items were used for both the second and third studies. One possible explanation is that the smaller number of subjects in the second study led to some instability in the means. A variety of subanalyses were conducted to test the different mechanisms that might account for the yielding and change results. Capsulating these results, the subanalyses found that source memory reliably covaried with yielding but not with change. The Social Consensus effect was reliable except in analyses controlling for encoding failure, implying that subjects who were changing from a correct to an incorrect response only did so by remembering others' input. If any conclusions can be drawn about the Distractor Delay effect, it is that the original intent of the manipulation to degrade source memory at longer delays did not work. Source memory did not vary at levels of Distractor Delay, although there was a peculiar interaction with Social Consensus which hinted that delay may affect source memory differently depending on initial agreement or disagreement. More than likely, the delay interval will have to be increased dramatically before any degradation of source memory will occur. Interestingly enough, although Distractor Delay did not affect source memory, it did impact upon cued-recalls. In several subanalyses, as delay increased the 100 yielding and change decreased for low-memorable but not high-memorable items. One possible explanation for this result is that the willingness of subjects to ascribe themselves the memories of others decreased over the delay period, independent of their source memory for a particular item. In some ways, then, the Distractor Delay effect appears to be operating opposite to expectation: Subjects remembered the source information about equally well across delay periods. However, the impact of the others on cued-recalls declined for low-memorable (but not high-memorable) items. In summary, this third experiment replicated the result that others can reliably influence memory, and that this effect does not have to be mediated by memory for source. However, both the second and third studies provide evidence for this finding only correlationally. A fourth study was conducted to circumvent this limitation and to provide an initial test of another hypothesis from Memory Comparison Theory. Briefly, the fourth study borrows from Jacoby and Kelley's Logic of Opposition paradigm (Jacoby and Kelley, 1987), to determine if support for the non-mediated model can be obtained with a causal manipulation. The fourth study also tested an intriguing derivation from Memory Comparison Theory, that memories should be evaluated like abilities when records are available but like opinions when records are not. CHAPTER VI STUDY 4
One limitation of the non-mediated test from the previous two studies is that the tests were correlational. This study instead tested the non-mediated model by discounting the source information for some subjects. Presumably when subjects remember a response from the others, they should ignore it and use only their own memory of what they read in the story. If the cued-recall responses are mediated solely by source memory at the point of cued-recall, then warning subjects about the bogus nature of the others' responses should eliminate the Social Consensus effect entirely. However, if the non-mediated model holds, then warning subjects about bogus nature of the others' responses should decrease the Social Consensus effect on cued-recall, but not eliminate it. The reason it should decrease somewhat is that the mediated-memory model did receive abundant support in terms of a reliable source memory covariate from previous studies. Based on the covariate findings of the past two studies, it was predicted that discounting the others' responses would weaken but not eliminate the effect of Social Consensus on cued-recall. The fourth experiment expands beyond a more rigorous test of the three models discussed earlier. Specifically, this experiment also tested a prediction from Memory Comparison Theory's Hypothesis II and Corollary 11(B). These hypotheses state that subjects will test their memories against records when records are available and against others when records are not available (c.f., Clark and Stephenson, 1989). The present study manipulated the expectation that subjects would be seeing
101 102 the story again. Before subjects were given the others’ responses, some were led to believe that they would later see the story while others were told that they would not be seeing the story again. According to Memory Comparison Theory, those subjects thinking that they will later see the story for a second time should in general yield less than subjects who believe that they will only see the story once. Presumably knowing that they will see the story again would alert these subjects to the possibility that any disagreements between themselves and the others could be resolved by comparing their recollections against the story and not against the memories of others. Thus, yielding and change were predicted to be less than in the condition in which subjects were told they would see the story only once. There was one other change made in this experiment. The Distractor Delay manipulation was dropped because of its two-time failure to affect source memory. Although the Distractor Delay effect should in principle degrade source memory over time, it is clear that a difference of seven and a half minutes is not enough to affect source memory. Later studies might expand the delay to a day or even longer, but expecting differences between 2.5-minutes and 10-minutes is perhaps asking too much.
Method
Subjects. 158 introductory psychology students at Ohio State University, Columbus Campus, participated during winter quarter, 1992. Subjects received course credit in partial fulfillment of course requirements. 15 subjects were deemed suspicious on the basis of the open-ended protocols and were excluded from all analyses, leaving 143 subjects for analysis. Importantly, subjects were not deleted when the source information was discredited because the experimental purpose at that point became obvious. Thus, it is possible that some subjects may 103 have been suspicious prior to being told about the true nature of the study. However, more than likely, initially suspicious subjects would have ignored the source information so as to eliminate any influence. Thus, including these suspicious subjects, if there are any, only works against the hypotheses of interest. Procedure. The procedure was identical to the third experiment with the following exceptions. First, two additional between-subjects factors were added to the design. As always, subjects were randomly assigned to the between-subjects conditions. The first new factor was designed to test Hypothesis II and Corollary 11(B). Subjects should be less likely to yield or change when their memories can be tested against a record of an event, relative to when their memories cannot be tested against such a record. Half of the subjects were informed about the Local Area Network and the multiple-choice task as before. However, the other half of the subjects saw the following,
In the next part of the experiment, your computer will be attached to a Local Area Network that will include others participating in this experiment. We will then be asking you to remember facts from the story you just read. We are interested in what people remember and how this information is used in forming impressions. Sometimes the computer will present the responses of other people on the Network. Pay close attention to these responses. The reason is that we're interested in using your insights to help us understand how memory and impressions are related. Later, you will be shown the story again so you can fully integrate your insights with the insights of others. Remember, you will get to see the story again, but pay close attention to others' responses so you better understand their impressions. Please note that the responses you will see are randomly ordered each time that they are tabulated. This means that the position of the responses you see does not imply that they are always from any one person. They are completely random.
Subjects then acknowledged this information by depressing a key to continue with the experiment. 104
The second new factor borrows from the Logic of Opposition paradigm of Jacoby and Kelley (1987). If the mediated-memory model exclusively operates, then subjects warned about the bogus nature of the social influence should respond in a manner opposite to the experimental hypothesis about Social Consensus. On the other hand, if the non- mediated model is valid, then subjects warned about the bogus nature of the social influence should nonetheless be influenced. To put it in more concrete terms, for half of the subjects, everything was as before. But for the other half, immediately following the second distractor task (but preceding the cued-recall or source memory task) they were shown a screen that said,
In this study we are investigating the social determinants of memory. Earlier, you read a story then took a multiple choice test in which the feedback from other subjects was made up. We would like to see if you can IGNORE this feedback and remember EXACTLY what was in the story. In the next phase of the experiment, you will be given a cued-recall task. Try and recall ONLY information that was ACTUALLY IN THE STORY: do your best to NOT let the feedback influence your responses 11 I
Subjects then acknowledged this information by depressing a key before continuing on with the experiment. The last change involved the open-ended question phase at the very end of the experiment. Subjects answered the three questions used in the previous studies, "We would like your insights into what types of information the other people used in the experiment," "What do you think this study is about?" and "Did you use the feedback from other subjects in formulating your responses? If yes, please elaborate. If no, why not?" After these, two additional questions were asked of each subject. These questions were, "Were you told you would get to see the story again?" and finally, "Were you shown a screen informing you about the feedback? If yes, what did it say?" These last two questions were included as manipulation checks in the event that the experimental manipulations failed. 105
Results
The yielding and change data were prepared for analysis by coding the responses as was done in the previous three experiments. The data were then entered into a series of analyses as discussed below. Yielding. The yielding data were entered into a within-subjects regression with Story Replication (A,B), Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the subject dummy codes as regressors. One purpose of this experiment was to provide another replication of the finding that Social Consensus can affect later memory. This purpose was accomplished, as the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(1,635) = 28.73, p < .0001. The means showed that yielding was higher when subjects experienced High Consensus Disagreement (M = .22) than when they experienced Low Consensus Disagreement (M = .10). Also replicating earlier analyses, there was a significant Item Memorability effect, F(2,635) = 26.55, p < .0001. The means showed that yielding was highest for unseen items (M = .27), moderate for low-memorable items (M = .16), and least for high-memorable items (M = .06). A set of orthogonal polynomial contrasts found that this linear Item Memorability effect was significant (F[l,635] = 53.09, p < .0001) but not the quadratic Item Memorability effect (F[1,635] = 0.00, p = .971). These two main effects reliably interacted, F(2,635) = 3.51, p = .031. The means are depicted in Figure 34. The interaction pattern in this particular analysis indicates that the effects of Social Consensus on yielding were greatest for unseen items and least for high- memorable items. 106
These data provide a first test of the non-mediated model using an experimental manipulation. Given that the source memory covariate was reliable in a sizeable number of previous analyses, the prediction was that discounting the others' responses would weaken but not eliminate the effects of Social Consensus. This prediction received support, as the Source Discounting main effect was significant, F(l,635) = 20.97, p < .0001. The means showed that non-discounted yielding (M = .22) was greater than discounted yielding (M = .12). The Source Discounting effect must be interpreted in light of a reliable Social Consensus X Source Discounting interaction, F(l,635) = 4.72, p = .030. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 35 and show that the effects of discounting were greater in the High Consensus Disagree condition than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition. Memory Comparison Theory makes the prediction that people will prefer to verify their memories against a record when one is available. Otherwise, people will use the memories of others. This was tested in this experiment via the Story Anticipation effect. Some subjects were led to believe that they would see the story again, and the prediction was that they would be less likely to yield. This did not happen however, as the Story Anticipation effect was nonsignificant, F(l,635) = 2.12, p = .145. If anything, the means were in the wrong direction, with subjects anticipating seeing the story again yielding more (M = .18) than subjects not anticipating another look at the story (M = .15). Explaining null results is always difficult, but one possible reason for this failure is that the manipulation was too subtle. There was a pleasant surprise in the data. The Task Order effect was significant, F(l,635) = 8.72, p = .003. The results were exactly in-line with the predictions made in the last experiment, with mean yielding higher when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task (M = .19) than when it followed the cued-recall task (M = .14). It is not entirely clear why this manipulation suddenly worked, although it 107
is heartening to see it work in the predicted direction. However, this effect was qualified by a pair of two-way interactions. First of all, there was a reliable Social Consensus X Task Order interaction, F(1,635) = 4.98, p = .026. The means of this interaction are shown in Figure 36 and indicate that yielding was equal for items in the Low Consensus Disagree condition regardless of Task Order. However, for items in the High Consensus Disagree condition mean yielding was higher when the source memory task was first. One explanation for this result is that the Task Order may affect source memory differently depending on the level of Social Consensus, leading to the result that items in the Low Consensus Disagree condition remain unaffected by Task Order. The second two-way interaction was a Task Order X Source Discounting, F(1,635) = 5.40, p = .020. The means of this interaction are shown in Figure 37. The means show that yielding is basically the same across Task Order when the source information has been discounted. However, mean yielding is highest when the source memory task preceded the cued- recall task and the source information was not discounted. One way of thinking about this finding is that the memory-mediated mechanism is affected by the Task Order while non-mediated mechanism is not. There were no other effects of interest in this analysis. Change. The size of this design, coupled with the number of subjects in this experiment, required that the data be analyzed by collapsing across story replication. Thus, the data were entered into a within-subjects regression with Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), and Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen) as regressors. As seen in previous change analyses, the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(2,1080) = 22.80, p < .0001. The means indicated that change was greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .44), 108 moderate in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .34), and least in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .25). A polynomial decomposition of this effect indicated that the linear component was significant (£[1,1080) = 45.39, p < .0001) but the quadratic component was not ((£[1,1080] = .00, p = .99). The Item Memorability effect was significant, £(2,1080) = 46.57, p < .0001, indicating that change was greatest when items were unseen (M = .46), moderate when items were low- memorable (M = .38), and least when items were high-memorable (M = .18). These two variables reliably interacted, £(4,1080) = 5.77, p < .0001. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 38. The pattern of means shows that the effects of social pressure on producing cued-recall change are especially pronounced for unseen items relative to previously seen items. The change data provided a second chance for the Story Anticipation effect to emerge. It did not happen this time either, though, as the Story Anticipation effect was non-significant, £(1,1080) = 1.99, p = .159. The means were in the right direction, with change being greater when no second story viewing was anticipated (M = .36) relative to when one was (M = .33). Apparently this manipulation was either too subtle for the effects to emerge or the theory may need modification. The data produced a significant Source Discounting X Item Memorability interaction, £(2,1080) = 3.23, p = .040, the means of which are shown in Figure 39. Interpretation of this interaction is pretty straightforward. Change increased more dramatically across item memorability when the source information was discounted than when it was not discounted. One reason this may might have occurred is that subjects aware that the source information is invalid may be able to remember their own initial responses for high memorable but not low- memorable items. In such a case, subjects can stick with their own initial response for the high-memorable items. However, for the low- memorable items, subjects may only remember the others' incorrect 109 response and may then guess blindly at cued-recall. This subanalysis provides a second test of the finding that Social Consensus can affect cued-recalls both with and without subjects' awareness. In this analysis, the test is conducted via a Social Consensus X Source Discounting interaction because subjects for whom the others' responses are valid should change less under unanimous agreement and more under unanimous disagreement than subjects for whom the source information was discounted. In line with this logic, there was a significant Social Consensus X Source Discounting interaction, F(2,1080) = 3.28, p = .038. The means of this particular interaction are depicted in Figure 40. They show that when the source information was believed, the High Consensus Agree condition induced less change and the High Consensus Disagree condition greater change than when the source information was discounted. This interaction is probably best interpreted such that the difference between these slope represents the contribution of source at cued-recall. The nonzero slope of the Social Consensus effect in the source discounted condition represents the effect of social influence on cued-recall when source memory is controlled experimentally. There was also a Social Consensus X Task Order interaction (F[2,1080] = 9.64, p < .0001), the means of which are divulged in Figure 41. The easiest way to think of this interaction is to remember that Task Order may have affected memory for source. If this is the case, then it would follow that the least change for High Consensus Agree and the greatest change for High Consensus Disagree would occur when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. In fact, this pattern of means is exactly in line with this reasoning. There was an unexpected four-way interaction with Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Story Anticipation X Source Discounting, F(4,1080) = 3.48, p = .008. The means of this interaction are listed in the appendix. This interaction is quite complex, but it appears that the 110 quadricity of Social Consensus across linear Item Memorability was greater when the source information was not discounted relative to when it was discounted. However, this increase was faster when subjects did not anticipate a second viewing of the story. Source Memory. The same problem with design and sample size required that source memory be analyzed by collapsing across story replication. This analysis is interesting because it can replicate the earlier findings that Social Consensus and Item Memorability affect source memory. Furthermore, given that yielding and change were both affected by Task Order, it may be the case that Task Order directly influenced source memory. To answer these questions, the source memory data were entered into a within-subjects regression with Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), and Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen) as regressors. The results found that, as in earlier experiments, the Social Consensus manipulation had a reliable impact on subsequent source memory, F(2,1080) = 87.40, p < .0001. The means showed that source memory was pretty good in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .59), worst in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .42), and best of all in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .83). Orthogonal polynomial contrasts revealed that both the linear and quadratic components of this effect were significant (F[1,1080] = 58.81, p < .0001 for linear; F[l,1080] = 115.99, p < .0001 for quadratic). This was the third straight time that this pattern of source memory resulted from Social Consensus. There was also a marginally significant Item Memorability effect, F(1,1080) = 2.69, p = .068. The means showed that source memory was about equal when items were either high-memorable (M = .59) or low- memorable (M = .60), but was highest when items were previously unseen Ill
(M = .65). A polynomial contrast showed that the linear Item Memorability effect was significant (F[1,1080] = 4.73, p = .030) but the quadratic Item Memorability component was not (P[l,1080] = .65, p = .420). Consistent with the findings from the earlier yielding and change analyses, there was a significant Task Order effect, F(l,1080) = 7.73, p = .006. The means showed that source memory was higher when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task (M = .65) than when it followed the cued-recall task (M = .58). This Task Order must be interpreted in light of several significant or marginally-significant interactions, however. First of all, there was a marginally significant Item Memorability X Task Order X Source Discounting interaction, P(2,1080) = 2.63, p = .072. To depict this interaction meaningfully, a "deviation from linear" index was computed by first averaging the values for high-memorable and unseen items. This value was then subtracted from thepercent correct source memory in the low-memorable condition. When the "deviation from linear" index is negative, then the source memory is nonlinear in a U-shaped pattern across item memorability. When the "deviation from linear" index is positive, then the source memory is nonlinear in an inverted-U-shaped pattern across item memorability. The "deviation from linear" index is depicted in Figure 42 and shows that the quadricity was essentially zero or slightly negative when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. But when the cued-recall task preceded the source-memory task then the quadricity became exaggerated at levels Source Discounting. Specifically, when the source information was discounted, then quadricity was U-shaped across Item Memorability. When the source information was not discounted, then the quadricity took the form of an inverted-U across item memorability. It is not entirely obvious why this pattern emerged. However, it is possible that subjects for whom the source information was discounted became more motivated to identify 112
source information. Any resultant differences in source memory would be particularly pronounced when either the items or the experimental conditions permitted. There was also a Social Consensus X Task Order X Source Discounting interaction, F(2,1080) = 4.21, p = .015. Another "deviation from linearity" index was computed, this time for Social Consensus. Negative numbers refer to a U-shaped pattern across Social Consensus.. The values of the deviation index are plotted in Figure 43 and show that a disordinal interaction across Task Order and Source Discounting. When the source information was discounted, then quadricity was accentuated when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. However, when the source information was not discounted, then quadricity was higher when the cued-recall task preceded the source memory task. As with the previous interaction, it came as somewhat of a surprise that source memory varied depending on Source Discounting. The effects of discounting the source information probably motivated the subjects to remember the source information. Exactly why this pattern emerged is unclear. There was also a marginally significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Task Order interaction in the source memory analysis, F(4,1080) = 1.84, p = .12. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 44 and 45. Perhaps the simplest interpretation of these means is that the negative effects of completing the Cued-Recall task first affected source memory more for the Low Consensus Disagree condition than either of the other two consensus conditions. Finally, there was a marginal Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Source Discounting interaction, F(4,1080) = 2.12, p = .077. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 46 and 47. The means indicate that source memory for the unseen items was especially good when the source information had been discounted. No other effects were significant in this analysis. 113
Controlling for source memory in the yielding analysis. The source memory measure can be included in the regression to covary source memory in evaluating the manipulated effects. The yielding data were entered into a within-subjects regression with Story Replication (A,B), Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, the source memory covariate, and the subject dummy codes as regressors. The results showed that the source memory covariate was significant, F(l,634) = 8.27, p = .004, indicating that yielding reliably covaried with source memory. As was the case in the first yielding analysis for this experiment, the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(l,634) = 11.01, p < .0001. The means showed that mean yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .22) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .13). There was also a significant Item Memorability effect, F(2,634) = 24.76, p < .0001, and the means showed that yielding was highest for unseen items (adjusted M = .27), moderate for low-memorable items (adjusted M =.17), and least for high-memorable items (adjusted M = .07). A trend test showed that the linear Item Memorability was significant (F[1,634] = 49.50, p < .0001) while the quadratic Item Memorability effect was not (F[1,634] = .01, p = .935). These Social Consensus and Item Memorability factors reliably interacted (F[2,634] = 3.89, p = .021), however, and the means in Figure 48 show that the effect of Social Consensus was particularly strong for the unseen items. As with the earlier analyses, the Source Discounting effect was significant, F(l,634) = 22.47, p < .0001. The means showed that yielding was higher when the source information was not discounted (adjusted M = .23) than when it was (adjusted M = .12). This Source 114
Discounting effect reliably interacted with Social Consensus, F( 1,634) = 4.91, p = .027. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 49 and show that the effects of discounting were greater for items in the High Consensus Disagree condition can items in the Low Consensus Disagree condition. The Story Anticipation effect was again nonsignificant, F(l,634) = 2.54, p = .11, indicating that the effect of story anticipation was identical whether the subjects believed they would see they story again (adjusted M = .19) or not (adjusted M = .15). The failure of the Story Anticipation effect is probably best explained as manipulation that was too subtle. But this analysis did produce a reliable Task Order effect, F(1,634) = 6.67, p = .001. The means showed that yielding was greater when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task (adjusted M = .20) than when the source memory task followed the cued-recall task (adjusted M = .14). This pattern is consistent with the source confusion hypothesis discussed earlier. There was also a Task Order X Source Discounting interaction, F(l,634) = 4.92, p = .027, the means of which are depicted in Figure 50. The simplest interpretation of the means is that the effects of discounting were greater when the source memory task was first. Task Order also significantly interacted with Social Consensus, F(l,634) = 4.71, p = .030. The adjusted means of this interaction are shown in Figure 51. The pattern of means shows that the effect of Task Order on yielding was greater for items in the High Consensus Disagree condition than items in the Low Consensus Disagree condition. Controlling for source memory in the change analysis. The source memory measure was also included in the change regression to covary source memory in evaluating the manipulated effects. As with two previous analysis, the story replication factor was dropped due to computing limitations. The change data were thus entered into a within- subjects regression with Source Discounting (Discounted, Not 115
Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, the source memory covariate, and the subject dummy codes as regressors. The results showed that the source memory covariate was significant, F(l,1079) = 8.04, p = .005, indicating that change reliably covaried with source memory. As was the case in the earlier change analysis for this experiment, the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(l,1079) = 26.19, p < .0001. The adjusted means showed that mean change was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .44), moderate in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .34), and least in the High Consensus Agree condition (M = .25). A trend test showed that the linear Social Consensus effect was significant (F[1,1079] = 52.23, p < .0001) while the quadratic Social Consensus effect was not (F[1,1079] = .79, p = .375). There was also a significant Item Memorability effect, F(2,1079) = 48.33, p < .0001, and the adjusted means showed that change was highest for unseen items (adjusted M = .46), moderate for low- memorable items (adjusted M =.38), and least for high-memorable items (adjusted M = .18). Polynomial trend tests indicated that the linear Item Memorability was significant (F[1,1079] = 91.57, p < .0001) but the quadratic Item Memorability effect was not (F[l,1079] = 5.02, p = .025). These Social Consensus and Item Memorability factors reliably interacted (F[2,1079] = 5.79, p < .0001), however, and the adjusted means listed in the appendix show that the effects of increasing social pressure induces greater change as item memorability decreases. The Source Discounting effect was not significant in this particular analysis, F(1,1079) = .39, p = .533. The adjusted means showed that change was equivalent whether the source information was not discounted (adjusted M = .34) or was (adjusted M = .35). This Source 116
Discounting effect reliably interacted with Social Consensus, F(l,1079) = 3.25, p = .039. The adjusted means of this interaction indicate that when subjects could remember the others' responses and they believed those responses were valid, they did were more likely to change when they encountered strong disagreement. On the other hand, they were less likely to change when they encountered unanimous agreement, assuming they believed the others responses were valid. The Story Anticipation effect was again nonsignificant, F(1,1079) = 2.27, p = .133, indicating that the effect of story anticipation was identical whether the subjects believed they would see they story again (adjusted M = .33) or not (adjusted M = .36). Finally, there were two interactions with the Source Discounting effect. The Item Memorability X Source Discounting effect was significant, F(l,1079), = 3.19, p = .042. The adjusted means closely parallel the earlier analysis without the covariate: The difference in change between high and low memorable items is exaggerated when the source information is discounted. The Social Consensus X Source Discounting interaction (F[1,1079] = 3.25, p = .039) indicates that the effect of social pressure in inducing change is greater when the others' responses are believed to be valid. Failure to encode. As with the previous two experiments, a set of subanalyses were conducted by restricting analyses to those items subjects answered correctly during the multiple choice phase of the experiment. These subanalyses are interesting because they control for the concern that Social Consensus only affects cued-recalls when the subjects did not originally see the information. Controlling for failure to encode in the yielding analysis. The yielding data were analyzed by restricting the analysis to the multiple choice items subjects got correct. The yielding data were entered into a within-subjects regression with Story Replication (A,B), Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory 117
first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the subject dummy codes as regressors. In this particular analysis the Social Consensus effect was significant, F(l,213) = 6.77, p = .001. The means showed that yielding was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .12) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .05). In addition to the Social Consensus effect, there was a significant Item Memorability effect, F(1,634) = 16.31, p < .0001. The means showed that yielding was higher when items were low-memorable (M = .13) than when they were high- memorable (M = .06). But these two effects did not interact, F(l,213) = 1.11, p = .294, indicating that the effects of Social Consensus on yielding did not vary across levels of memorability when subjects initially encoded the information. In one sense, analyses controlling for encoding failure provide a "last ditch" for the Story Anticipation effect to emerge. Perhaps subjects who did not encode the story would be unaffected by the story anticipation manipulation because they would not feel a need to test their nonexistent memories against records. On the other hand, when the analysis contains only multiple choice items that subjects got correct, it is much more likely that the subjects' memories were challenged. Hence, in this case they may decide to hold out and compare their memories against the story as opposed to the memories of others. But even in a "last ditch" analysis the Story Anticipation effect just did not come out, F(l,213) = 0.00, p = .957. If anything, the means were still in the wrong direction, with those anticipating seeing the story again yielding more (M = .10) than subjects anticipating not seeing the story again (M = .07). Also replicating earlier analyses, the Source Discounting effect was significant, F(1,213) = 27.61, p < .0001. The means showed that yielding was lower when the source information was discounted (M = .14) 118 than when it was not discounted (M = .04). However, this effect interacted reliably with Task Order, F(l,213) = 10.59, p = .001. The means of this particular interaction are shown in Figure 52 and reveal that when the source information was discounted, yielding was about equal regardless of Task Order. But when the source information was not discounted, yielding was appreciably higher when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. The Source Discounting effect also interacted with Social Consensus, F(1,213) = 6.47, p = .012. The means of this interaction are shown in Figure 53. The simplest way to describe this pattern is that the effects of increasing social pressure are greater for items that have not been discounted. Somewhat surprisingly, there was a significant Source Discounting X Story Anticipation X Social Consensus interaction, F(l,213) = 4.46, p = .036. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 54 and 55. Finally, the Source Discounting effect also interacted with Item Memorability, F(1,213) = 4.84, p = .029. The means of this particular interaction are depicted in Figure 56 and show that the effect of discounting more drastically reduces yielding for low-memorable items than it does for high-memorable items. This analysis produced a significant Task Order effect, F(1,213) = 7.21, p = .008. The means lined-up as in previous analyses, with yielding greater when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task (M = .10) than when source memory followed the cued-recall task (M = .06). This effect varied at levels of Social Consensus, however, F(l,213) = 8.60, p = .004. The means of this interaction are shown in Figure 57 and show that the yielding was greatest when the source memory task was first and items were in the High Consensus Disagree condition. Mean yielding was essentially equal when the source memory task followed the cued-recall task. There were two surprises in the data. First of all, although the Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction did not emerge, the 119
Social Consensus X Item Memorability effect did interact separately with two other effects. First, there was a significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Task Order interaction, F(l,213) = 4.10, p = .044. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 58 and 59. The means reveal that the effects of increasing social pressure on yielding are particularly strong for low-memorable items, but only when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. One way to interpret this interaction is that the effects of Social Consensus are particularly strong when the item memorability is low and the others' responses readily come to mind. Finally, there was a marginally significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Source Discounting interaction, F(l,213) = 3.47, p = .064. The means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 60 and 61. In some ways they mirror the findings from the previous Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Task Order interaction. Specifically, the effects of Social Consensus on yielding were much stronger when the source information was not discounted. Furthermore, yielding was greater for low-memorable items when the source information was not discounted. There were no other effects of interest in this analysis. Controlling for failure to encode and source memory in the yielding analysis. Another subanalysis was conducted restricted to the multiple choice items subjects got correct and including the source memory measure as a covariate. The yielding data were entered into a within- subjects regression with Story Replication (A,B), Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the source memory measure as a covariate as regressors. The source memory covariate was significant in this analysis, F(1,212) = 5.50, p = .020, meaning that memory for source reliably 120 covaried with yielding. The test of any remaining effects have this source memory influence controlled. Similar to many of the previous analyses controlling for source memory and encoding failure, the results showed the Social Consensus effect not significant, F(1,212) = .60, p = .44. The adjusted means were in the right direction, though, with mean yielding higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .15) than in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (adjusted M = .12). The Item Memorability effect was significant, F(l,212) = 16.25, p < .0001, with mean yielding greater for low-memorable items (adjusted M = .20) relative to high-memorable items (adjusted M = .07). Given the Story Anticipation effect was not significant in the overall yielding analysis nor the yielding analysis controlling for encoding failure, it is unsurprising that it was not significant here, either, F(1,212) = 0.00, p = .958. However, the Source Discounting effect was reliable, F(l,212) = 27.80, p < .0001, indicating that mean yielding was less when the source information was discounted (adjusted M = .05) than when it was not discounted (adjusted M = .22). The Source Discounting effect reliably interacted with Social Consensus, F(1,212) = 7.66, p = .006. The adjusted means of this interaction are shown in Figure 62. The means reveal an odd pattern. When the source information was not discounted, the effect of increasing social pressure led to greater yielding. However, when the source information was discounted, then the effect of increasing social pressure led to less yielding. Source Discounting also interacted with Item Memorability, F(1,212) = 4.76, p = .030. The means of this particular interaction are shown in Figure 63. The means reveal that yielding is especially high when item memorability is low and the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. There were a pair of three-way interactions involving the Source Discounting effect. First of all, there was a Source Discounting X Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(l,212) = 4.00, p = 121
.047. The adjusted means depicted in Figures 64 and 65 and indicate that subjects were most likely to yield when the source information was not discounted, the item memorability was low, and the social pressure was high. Second, there was a Source Discounting X Social Consensus X Story Anticipation three-way interaction, F(l,212) = 4.23, p = .041. The adjusted means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 66 and 67. It is not entirely obvious why story anticipation should have interacted with these variables the way it did. This analysis also produced a Task Order main effect, F(1,212) = 4.34, p = .038. The adjusted means showed that yielding was higher when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task (M = .17) than when it followed the cued-recall task (M = .10). However, the Task Order must be interpreted in light of several other factors in this analysis. First of all, there was a Task Order X Social Consensus interaction, F(1,212) = 9.59, p = .002. The adjusted means of this interaction are depicted in Figures 68. The easiest way to interpret this pattern is that the effects of Social Consensus affect yielding more when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall. There was also a Task Order X Social Consensus X Item Memorability interaction, F(l,212) = 5.11, p = .025. The adjusted means of this interaction are shown in Figures 69 and 70. The means reveal that the effects of Social Consensus on yielding are greatest when item memorability is low and the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task. Finally, there was a Task Order X Source Discounting interaction, F(l,212) = 11.24, p < .0001. The adjusted means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 71 and show that when the source memory task preceded the cued-recall task, yielding was low when then source was discounted but high otherwise. There were no other effects of interest in this particular subanalysis. Controlling failure to encode in the change analysis. A subanalysis was conducted on the change data restricted to those 122 multiple-choice items upon which subjects were initially correct. Specifically, the change data were entered into a within-subjects regression with Story Replication (A,B), Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), and their interactions as regressors. The results showed that change varied across levels of Item Memorability, P(1,389) = 27.43, p < .0001. The means of this effect show that change was less when item memorability was high (M = .11) than when it was low (M = .27). This finding is in accordance with the earlier change analyses from this and previous studies. Furthermore, there was a significant Social Consensus effect, F(2,389) = 3.25, p = .040. Somewhat as a surprise, the means indicated that change was least in the Low Consensus Disagree condition (M = .14), just slightly higher when the subjects faced unanimous agreement (M = .16), and highest of all in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .22). A set of orthogonal polynomial contrasts revealed that the linear component (High Consensus Agree vs. High Consensus Disagree) was statistically reliable (F(l,389] = 4.98, p = .026) while the quadratic component was not (F[1,389] = 1.68, p = .195). But the Social Consensus effect was qualified by three separate interactions. First of all, there was a significant Social Consensus X Task Order interaction, F(2,389) = 2.87, p = .058, the means of which are depicted in Figure 72. The pattern of means exhibited in this interaction is generally consistent with the notion that Task Order affected source memory, which in turn affected subjects' cued-recalls. Consider the possibility that when subjects completed the cued-recall task first their source memories were adversely affected. This in turn led to relatively flat change across Social Consensus, suggesting that under these circumstances the subjects were unable to use the others' 123 responses as a guide in generating their cued-recalls, presumably because the responses of the others were unavailable to them. When subjects completed the source memory task first, however, change was lower for High Consensus Agree and higher for High Consensus Disagree. If source memory was more available (or more accurate) to these subjects, then they could use their source memories in developing the cued-recalls. The second Social Consensus interaction provides another test of the hypothesis that social influence may affect cued-recalls without subjects' awareness. In this case, the test is somewhat more exacting than previous analyses: Do subjects abandon their accurate memories for the memories of others, even when they are told that the source information should be ignored? Ideally, the significant Social Consensus X Source Discounting interaction (F[2,389] = 3.84, p = .022) would produce a pattern of data such that there would be a significant simple main effect of Social Consensus for subjects in the Source Discounted condition. The data are depicted in Figure 73. Quite simply, when subjects' multiple-choice responses were initially accurate and the subjects were aware of the bogus nature of the source information, the Social Consensus effect was equal across conditions. However, when the subjects believed the source information, the effect of social influence was quadratic, with its greatest effect in the High Consensus Disagree condition. Finally, there was a significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Source Discounting interaction, F(2,389) = 4.92, p = .008. The means of the Social Consensus X Source Discounting interaction are displayed at levels of Item Memorability in Figures 74 and 75. The pattern of means is fairly complex, but for the purposes of simplicity the items for which the source information was not discounted followed a quadratic pattern such that change was greatest in the High Consensus Disagree condition and Lowest in the Low Consensus Disagree 124 condition. Exactly why this quadratic pattern emerged in unclear, although it may be related to the source memorability when only initially accurate multiple-choice items are retained. But the discounted items behaved strangely. For low-memorable items, change appeared to decrease as social pressure increased, but the reverse was true with high-memorable items. The reason for this result is obscure. Controlling failure to encode and source memory in the change analysis. A final subanalysis was conducted on the change data restricted to those multiple-choice items upon which subjects were initially correct and including the source memory covariate. Specifically, the change data were entered into a within-subjects regression with Story Replication (A,B), Source Discounting (Discounted, Not Discounted), Story Anticipation (Story Again, Story Not Again), Task Order (Cued-Recall first, Source Memory first), Social Consensus (High Consensus Agree, Low Consensus Disagree, High Consensus Disagree), Item Memorability (High, Low, Unseen), their interactions, and the source memory covariate as regressors. The results found that the source memory covariate was not significant in this analysis, F(l,388) = .02, p = .892, meaning that the change scores in the subanalysis did not covary with source memory. The results did find a significant Item Memorability effect, though, F(1,388) = 27.38, signifying that change was lower when item memorability was high (adjusted M = .13) than when it was low (adjusted M = .30). There was also a marginally significant Social Consensus effect, F(2,388) = 2.85, p = .059. The adjusted means showed that change was equal in the High Consensus Agree and Low Consensus Disagree conditions (adjusted M = .19), but was higher in the High Consensus Disagree condition (M = .28). Polynomial contrasts found the linear Social Consensus effect significant but not the quadratic Social Consensus effect (F[l,388] = 4.73, p = .030 for linear; F[l,388] = 1.58, p = .210 for quadratic). 125
However, the Social Consensus main effect was qualified by several interactions. The first of these was a final test if the idea that subjects may abandon their accurate memories for the memories of others when they have been warned not to do so. The Social Consensus X Source Discounting interaction was significant, F(2,388) = 3.82, p = .022. The adjusted means of this interaction are depicted in Figure 76 and show that when the source information was discounted the effect of Social Consensus was equal across conditions. However, when the source information was not discounted, subjects' cued-recalls reliably changed more as social pressure increased. Second, Social Consensus also interacted with Item Memorability and Source Discounting, F(2,388) = 4.83, p = .008. The adjusted means of this three-way interaction are displayed in Figures 77 and 78. The pattern of adjusted means is such that when the source information was not discounted, then social influence was increasingly effective as item memorability decreased. However, when the source information was discounted, then the effect of social influence was positive (i.e., greater social influence led to greater change) for high-memorable items. For low-memorable items, the effect of social influence was negative. Finally, there was a significant Social Consensus X Item Memorability X Source Discounting X Story Anticipation four-way interaction, F(2,388) = 3.10, p = .046. To present this interaction, an item memorability difference score was computed by subtracting the high- memorable adjusted mean change from the corresponding low-memorable adjusted mean change at each level of Social Consensus, Source Discounting, and Story Anticipation. These difference scores are displayed in 79 and 80. The pattern of means in this interaction shows that the difference in change between high-memorable and low-memorable items increases as social pressure increases when subjects anticipate seeing the story again and the source information is not discounted. 126
But when the source information is discounted, the difference between in change between high-memorable and low-memorable items actually decreases with increasing social pressure. The pattern of means is somewhat more complex when the subjects did not anticipate seeing the story again. When the information was discounted, the difference in change between high-memorable and low-memorable items was large when the others' responses were unanimous and fairly small in the Low Consensus Disagree condition. When the subjects did not expect to see the story again and the source information was discounted, the mean difference in change was fairly constant regardless of social pressure.
Discussion
This fourth experiment had several purposes. First of all, it was designed to replicate once more the overall effects of Social Consensus and Item Memorability on yielding and change. Second, it tested the hypothesis that memories may be evaluated like opinions under some circumstances but like abilities under other circumstances. Third, by discounting the source information for some subjects but not others, it provided an experimental test of the earlier correlational finding that social influence can affect subjects' later responses without their awareness. The data showed once again that Social Consensus and Item Memorability solidly affected yielding and change. In the overall yielding and change analyses, subjects yielded and changed more when they received unanimous disagreement than when they received nonunanimous disagreement. Similarly, when subjects received unanimous agreement they changed less than when they received some social pressure to change. Also consistent with earlier findings, differences between the multiple-choice responses and the cued-recall responses were accentuated as item memorability declined. 127
The test of the hypothesis that subjects will evaluate their memories against records when they are able to do so was operationalized by telling half the subjects that they would view the story a second time. Presumably, these subjects should be less likely to yield because they would be in a better position to ignore the responses of the others, knowing that in a few minutes they could test their memories against the actual story. A related possibility is that subjects who did not expect a second story viewing might have paid greater attention to the others' responses so as to use their answers as resourcefully as possible. Neither of these hypotheses received support in this experiment. Subjects yielded and changed equally often regardless of whether or not they were anticipating a second story viewing. Furthermore, expecting a second viewing of the story did not even produce differences in source memory. It is unclear at this point whether the manipulation simply failed or the theory needs revision. The data from this experiment also revealed that Social Consensus could significantly impact cued-recalls even when the source information was discounted. In general, this finding was qualified by subanalyses restricted to those multiple-choice items upon which subjects were initially correct. Under these circumstances, there generally was not a reliable Social Consensus effect on cued-recalls. However, the means were often in the expected direction for yielding and were nonzero. Thus, even when subjects changed from an initially correct response to the responses of others and were warned about the fraudulent nature of the feedback, they nonetheless produced yielding responses at a nonzero rate. CHAPTER VII GENERAL DISCUSSION
Memory Comparison Theory was developed to provide a theoretical framework for bridging the areas of group influence and individual memory. The results of four experiments found that, as predicted by Memory Comparison Theory, subjects reliably changed their answers when they experienced social pressure to do so. Furthermore, they were more likely to change their responses to match the group when the items were less memorable than when the items were more memorable. Several underlying processes were tested during the course of the four experiments. At the heart of the issue is whether subjects necessarily accessed memory for source in changing their answers at the point of cued-recall. This process assumes that subjects' judgments about source memory are based on their recall of the source information. A parallel to this process has been identified by Hastie and Park (1986) in their differentiation of on-line and memory-based processing. Hastie and Pari argued that judgment and recall should be correlated when judgments were not made on-line but instead were based on memory. This corresponds to the present situation in that source memory judgments must always be memory-based, providing a ready explanation for the consistently significant source memory covariate. However, the results of the experiments showed that, while subjects certainly did sometimes use the others' responses to guide them during the cued-recall task, this was by no means the only way the group had its influence. The subjects yielded to social influence at the point of cued-recall even when they were unable to accurately remember the source
128 129 information. Furthermore, this finding was not due to a failure to encode the information in the story, because subanalyses controlling for failure to encode produced identical results. Thus, the data indicate that the social distortion of memory is not necessarily mediated by memory for source. But how can social influence affect subjects without their awareness? Consider the possibility that whenever memories between the subject and others conflict, the subject is forced to immediately make a plausibility judgment about the accuracy of the alternative version. Because a high degree of consensus is generally seen as informative about the environment (Asch, 1952; Deutsch and Gerard, 1955; Allen and Wilder, 1980), subjects were forced to pit the memories of the others against their own memory. The subjects then either changed the memories to coincide with the group or they did not. Either way, subjects then also stored source information about the item in question. However, there is no inherent cognitive requirement that this source information need be available when the cued-recall item is later accessed. Thus, subjects who initial yield at the point memories conflict might later forget the source information that led to that yielding response. When asked about a cued-recall item the changed memory comes to mind, but not necessarily the source information. The independence of source memory and opinion change has parallels in the attitude change literature under the rubric of the sleeper effect, (Hovland, Lumsdaine, and Sheffield, 1948). Specifically, the sleeper effect refers to the phenomenon where, after the passage of time, attitude change occurs despite the fact that the source information was discounted. The results of this study suggest that delays as brief as 2.5 minutes may be sufficient to produce a separation of source memory and episodic memory. But the implications of the present data extend beyond just the sleeper effect and into the greater domain of attitude change. 130
When memories are conceptualized like opinions, the plausibility judgment at the point memories conflict becomes critical to the memory change process. Presumably anything that would affect the plausibility judgment at this point should later affect yielding. By implication this means that many of the factors known to affect attitude change should therefore affect memory change as well. For instance, source attractiveness (Chaiken, 1979), source similarity (Byrne, 1971), message comprehensibility (Eagly, 1974), number of arguments (Petty and Cacioppo, 1981), subject intelligence (Hovland et al., 1949), subject self-esteem (McGuire, 1968), and source credibility (Petty and Cacioppo, 1981), just to name a few, may each play a role. The studies presented also provide a first look at some of the social factors that affect source memory. Subjects'memory for source was generally excellent when the others were unanimous, and was best of all when the others unanimously disagreed with the subject. In some ways this finding is not all that surprising, given that a unanimous group is seen as particularly informative with respect to the environment (Allen and Wilder, 1980). Generally speaking, any factors (social or otherwise) that can be predicted a priori to increase attention to source should lead to better source memory later. It follows from this reasoning that the probability of a dissociation between memory change and memory for source should be curvilinear as a function of attention to source. Little or no attention to a conflicting source should result in no later memory change while extreme attention to source should result in no failure to remember source. Thus, the best bet for separating source memory from memory change is to make the conflicting source strong enough to lead to memory change but not so strong as to make it unforgettable. The studies presented accomplished this feat, because when the source memory was maximal it still was not perfect. 131
Finally, these data also speak to the issue of majority and minority influences. Moscovici has argued that the process involved with majority and minority influences are separate (Moscovici, 1980; Moscovici, 1985; see also Maass and Clark, 1984). According to Moscovici, the majority tends to operate under processes most aptly described as "normative influence." On the other hand, minorities influence majorities through what amounts to "informational influence," except that the information is contained in the stimulus, not in the words of the minority. Summing up his position, Moscovici (1985) wrote:
It would be an overstatement, but not a misrepresentation, to say that when an individual disagrees with the majority, his entire attention is concentrated on the others in the group; when the individual disagrees with a minority, his entire attention is riveted on reality, on what it is and what are its properties. Majority influence therefore hardly ever extends beyond the period of interaction, and the individual finds himself relatively unchanged before the object of controversy. Minority influence, in contrast, persists much longer, because the individual has changed meanwhile, positively or negatively, and he no longer perceives the object in the same way. (p. 394)
Thus, according to Moscovici, under high social pressure greater attention is paid to the group. On the other hand, under low social pressure greater attention is paid to the stimulus (c.f., Tesser et al., 1983). The current studies can speak to parts of these predictions but not all, since subjects were never in a majority in which a minority disagreed. However, attention to the group can be translated roughly as memory for source. Moscovici is correct that memory for source was superior when subjects faced unanimously disagreement. Furthermore, memory for source was not nearly so good when subjects face nonunanimous disagreement. But memory for source was also very good when subjects faced unanimous agreement. It is not exactly clear from Moscovici's perspective why memory for source should be so good when subjects faced uniform agreement. Perhaps unanimous groups are just naturally draw attention. 132
But it is very difficult to argue that the unanimous groups in these studies influenced others only normatively and with short-lived effects. The repeated finding of an independence of yielding/change and memory for source supports the idea that memory changes are real (and the memories themselves were the objects of controversy). And finally, in the face of erroneous (yet unanimous) social pressure, it follows that subjects may never recall a particular episodic detail in quite the same way. LIST OF REFERENCES
Albert, S.A. (1977). Temporal Comparison Theory. Psychological Review. 84, 485-503. Allem, V.L. (1975). Social support for nonconformity. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press. Asch, S.E. (1952). Social Psychology. New York: Prentice-Hall. Asch, S.E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American. 193. 31-35. Asch, S.E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs. 70. Whole No. 416. Bartlett, F.C. (1923). Psychology and primitive culture. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Bartlett, F.C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Berscheid, E., and Walster, E.H. (1969). Interpersonal attraction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press. Ceci, S.J., Ross, D.F., and Toglia, M.P. (1987). Suggestibility in children's memory: Psycholegal implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology; General. 116. 38-49. Chaiken, S. (1979). Communicator physical attractiveness and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 3,/ 1387-1397. Chandler, C.C. (1989). Specific retroactive interference in modified recognition tests: Evidence for an unknown cause of interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, and Cognition. 15, 256-265. Chandler, C.C. (1991). How memory for an event is influenced by related events: Interference in modified recognition tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, and Cognition. 17, 115-125. Chapko, M.K., and Revers, R.R. (1976). Contagion in a crowd: The effects of crowd size and initial discrepancy from unanimity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 33, 382-386. Clark, N.K., and Stephenson, G.M. (1989). Group remembering. In P. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence. (2nd ed., pp 357-391). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
133 134
Cohen, B.P. (1963). Conflict and conformity; A probability model and its application. Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press. Crutchfield, R.A. (1955). Conformity and character. American Psychologist. 10. 191-198. Deutsch, M., and Gerard, H.B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 51. 629-636. Eagly, A.H. (1974). Comprehensibility of persuasive arguments as a determinant of opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 29. 758-773. Ebbinghaus, H. (1964). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. New York: Dover. (Original work published 1885; translated 1913). Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations. 40. 427-448. Fiedler, F.E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 1., 149-190. Gerard, H.B., Wilhelmy, R.A., and Conolley, E.S. (1968). Conformity and group size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 8, 79-82. Goethals, G.M., and Darley, J.D. (1987). Social Comparison Theory: Self-evaluation and group life. In B. Mullen and G.R. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag. Halbwachs, M. (1950/1980). The Collective Memory. New York: Harper and Row. Hammond, K.R., Wilkins, M.M., and Todd, F.J. (1966). A research paradigm for the study of interpersonal learning. Psychological Bulletin. 6j[, 221-232. Hammond, K.R., and Summers, D.A. (1972). Cognitive control. Psychological Review. 79, 58-67. Hartwick, J., Sheppard, B.H., and Davis, J.H. (1982). Group remembering: Research and implications. In R.A. Guzzo (Ed.), Improving group decision making in organizations, (pp 41-72). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Hastie, R., and Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment was memory-based or on-line. Psychological Review. 93. 258-268. Hinsz, V.B. (1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 59, 705-718. Hovland, C.I., Lumsdaine, A.A., and Sheffield, F.D. (1949). Experiments on mass communication. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Iscoe, I., Williams, M., and Harvey, J. (1963). Modification of children's judgments by a simulated group technique: A normative development study. Child Development. 34. 963-978. Janis, I.L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. 135
Janis, I.L., and Hoffman, D. (1971). Facilitating effects of daily contact between partners who make a decision to cut down on smoking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 17. 25-35. Kelman, H.C., and Hovland, C.I. (1953). "Reinstatement" of the communicator in delayed measurement of opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 48. 327-335. Krech, D., Crutchfield, R.A., and Ballachey, E.I. (1962). Individual in society. New York: McGraw-Hill. Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist. 11. 343-356. Latane, B., and Wolf, S. (1981). The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychological Review. 88. 438-453. Lindsay, S.D. (1990). Misleading suggestions can impair eyewitnesses' ability to remember event details. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, and Cognition. 16. 1077-1083. Lindsay, S.D., and Johnson, M.K. (1989). The eyewitness suggestibility effect and memory for source. Memory and Cognition. 17, 349-358. Loftus, E.F., and Loftus, G.R. (1980). On the permanence of stored information in the human brain. American Psychologist. 35. 409-420. Loftus, E.F., Miller, D.G., and Burns, H.J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Learning and Memory. 4, 19-31. MacLeod, C.M. (1988). Forgotten but not gone: Savings for pictures and words in long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Learning. Memory, and Cognition. 14, 195-212. McCloskey, M., and Zaragoza, M.S. (1985). Misleading postevent information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 114. 381-387. McGrath, J.E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. McGuire, W.J. (1968). Personality and susceptibility to social influence. In E.F. Borgotta and W.W. Lambert (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally. Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In Lindzey, G., and Aronson, E. (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (3rd Edition). New York: Random House. Nelson, T.O. (1988). Predictive accuracy of the feeling of knowing across different criterion tasks and across different subject populations and individuals. In M.M. Grunberg, P. Morris, and R.N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory (Vol. 2). New York: Wiley. Nelson, T.O., McSpadden, M., Fromme, K., and Marlatt, G.A. (1986). Effects of alcohol intoxication on metamemory and on retrieval from long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 115. 247-254. Petty, R.E., and Cacioppo, J.T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: 136
Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown Company. Rappoport, L., and Summers, D.A., Eds. (1973). Human judgment and social interaction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Rosenberg, L.A. (1961). Group size, prior experience, and conformity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 63. 436-437. Stephenson, G.M., Clark, N.K., and Wade, G.S. (1986). Meetings make evidence: An experimental study of collaborative and individual recall of a simulated police interrogation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 50. 1113-1122. Tesser, A., Campbell, J., and Mickler, S. (1983). The role of social pressure, attention to the stimulus, and self-doubt in conformity. European Journal of Social Psychology. 13. 217-233. Wegner, D.M. (1986). Transactive Memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B. Mullen and G. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag. Wegner, D.M., Erber, R., amd Raymond, P. (1991). Transactive memory in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 61. 923-929. Yuker, H.E. (1955). Group atmosphere and memory. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 51. 17-23. Zaragoza, M.S. (1991). Preschool children's susceptibility to memory impairment. In J. Doris (Ed.), The suggestibility of children's recollections: Implications for eyewitness testimony. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. APPENDIX A
STIMULUS MATERIALS - STUDIES ONE THROUGH FOUR
137 138
The Story of John K., Version A This is the story of John K. It is interesting to speculate how John's typical Midwestern upbringing and the unique circumstances of his life have contributed to John's personality and experiences. John was born on March 10, 1956, in Princeton, Indiana to Alice and Hank K. John grew into a physically attractive person. John had wavy brown hair. John was a special part of the family, and sometimes John's older brother (Bill) and sisters (Jean and Patty) were overly concerned about and protective of John. Together, John's parents provided well for their family of eight. They were even able to help out and occasionally care for other people. John's uncle Rick (who was a brother of Hank and a former salesman) was crippled as a result of an auto accident and lived with the family for a time. When John was five years old, his father died unexpectedly of a stroke. John's mother Alice had always worked full time but she could not support the family by herself. John's brother Bill went to work and added the extra income that the family needed. When he was 25, John left home and moved to a nearby city where he entered a special jobs training program sponsored by the city college. By this time John had permanently ceased being financially dependent upon his mother. However, after John left home, his mother admitted to worrying a lot about him. At the training program John made a lot of new friends. John also learned to play pool while in the program, and he is still a good pool player. After six months of training, John left the program without finishing it. He decided he needed a better-paying job, and he was hired by the U.S. Postal Service to sort mail. After a training period, John was required to take a test to keep this job. John chose not to take the test. His manager at Postal Service hated to see John leave. Although John had taken a little longer than most to train, the manager had begun to see steady improvement and was beginning to take a liking to John. After the Postal Service experience, John decided to return to the jobs training program. After finishing the program, John was hired to work at a small shop, Consolidated Wood Products, Inc. He currently continues to work there. John's friends and family are happy with his job at Consolidated Wood. In addition, many people who live near John look up to him as a community leader. As a young boy, John enjoyed swimming, bike riding, and playing baseball and basketball. John's favorite sports team was the New York Slammers. One of the highlights of John's boyhood was when, on a visit to Chicago, his Uncle Bob took him to see a Chicago Cubs baseball game. In addition to his interest in sports, John had many pets. John seemed to enjoy being with animals. John's favorite was a dog named Paul. John enjoyed attending grammar school. One of John's favorite subjects was Art, and he was extremely good at painting. John especially liked to paint pictures of different jungle beasts. John liked to paint using red: It was his favorite color. Because his abilities differed from the abilities of his classmates, John was sometimes put in a special class with only a few other students. John looked forward to each day of school, and until the sixth grade, never missed a single day. Compared to other kids his age, John did very well in grade school. John generally got along with his all of his grade school classmates extremely well everyone liked John. However, often they would pick on John's brother Dave because Dave was very small for his age. John would always come to Dave's rescue when Dave was being bullied or laughed at. Dave very much appreciated this and returned John's loyalty. Alice never tried to stop the teasing, (believing that 139
"boys will be boys"), and generally ignored these things unless one of her boys got into a fight or got hurt. In many ways, John was a typical midwestern teenager who liked fast cars and couldn't wait to have his first beer. John was also a stylish dresser who liked to spend time shopping for clothes. John became very much a loner and had few friends throughout his teenage years. At nineteen, John went to work full-time for a social services organization. John's ability to clearly talk to and communicate with others was essential to the job. Although both John and his mother were satisfied with his living at home during this period, both agreed that they did not want to live together indefinitely. John didn’t make much money at this first job, but he proved to be a good manager of his own finances. After working only a few weeks, he managed to save enough to buy a new Honda motorcycle. He was a very good rider and his friends encouraged John to get involved in their motorcycle races, but John never raced. He often used his bike to run local errands for extra money and he was afraid he would lose this money if he crashed. In his spare time, John watched a lot of television. One of his favorite shows was "Good Times." He also watched a lot of T.V. sports. In addition to these pastimes, John was always ready to play cards or to help his older brother Bill to tinker with Bill's car. John is now a highly skilled electrician. Besides work and occasional participation in the games John likes, most of the rest of John's time is taken up by an intimate relationship with a woman named Susan. John has dated Susan longer than anyone else, and his family expects that they will get married someday. John and Susan have talked about the possibility of getting married, but both would like to try living together before getting married. John’s mother dreads the thought that John and Susan may have children, but she is willing to accept whatever happens. Prior to meeting Susan, John had dated two other women. His relationship to Edna was close, like a sister, but no sex was involved. The other woman, Jane, and John lived together during the time he was at the jobs training program. They both decided to end the relationship just before John left the program. John had hoped to continue the relationship with Jane, but for reasons unknown to John, she completely rejected him after the relationship ended. 140
The Story of John K., Version B
This is the story of John K. It is interesting to speculate how John's typical Midwestern upbringing and the unique circumstances of his life have contributed to John's personality and experiences. John was born on March 10, 1957, in Princeton, Illinois to Alice and Henry K. John grew into a physically attractive person. John had wavy blonde hair. John was a special part of the family, and sometimes John's older brother (Bob) and sisters (Jean and Patty) were overly concerned about and protective of John. Together, John's parents provided well for their family of nine. They were even able to help out and occasionally care for other people. John's uncle Ralph (who was a brother of Henry and a former salesman) was crippled as a result of an auto accident and lived with the family for a time. When John was four years old, his father died unexpectedly of a heart attack. John's mother Alice had always worked full time but she could not support the family by herself. John's brother Bob went to work and added the extra income that the family needed. When he was 24, John left home and moved to a nearby city where he entered a special jobs training program sponsored by the city college. By this time John had permanently ceased being financially dependent upon his mother.However, after John left home, his mother admitted to worrying a lot about him. At the training program John made a lot of new friends. John also learned to play pool while in the program, and he is still a good pool player. After six months of training, John left the program without finishing it. He decided he needed a better-paying job, and he was hired by the United Parcel Service to sort mail. After a training period, John was required to take a test to keep this job. John chose not to take the test. His manager at United Parcel Service hated to see John leave. Although John had taken a little longer than most to train, the manager had begun to see steady improvement and was beginning to take a liking to John. After the U.P.S. experience, John decided to return to the jobs training program. After finishing the program, John was hired to work at a small shop, Amalgamated Wood Products, Inc. He currently continues to work there. John's friends and family are happy with his job at Amalgamated Wood. In addition, many people who live near John look up to him as a community leader. As a young boy, John enjoyed swimming, bike riding, and playing baseball and basketball. John's favorite sports team was the Hew York Sluggers. One of the highlights of John's boyhood was when, on a visit to Chicago, his Uncle Bob took him to see a Chicago Cubs baseball game. In addition to his interest in sports, John had many pets. John seemed to enjoy being with animals. John's favorite was a dog named Pete. John enjoyed attending grammar school. One of John's favorite subjects was Art, and he was extremely good at drawing. John especially liked to draw pictures of different jungle beasts. John liked to draw using green: It was his favorite color. Because his abilities differed from the abilities of his classmates, John was sometimes put in a special class with only a few other students. John looked forward to each day of school, and until the sixth grade, never missed a single day. Compared to other kids his age, John did well in grade school. John generally got along with his all of his grade school classmates extremely well everyone liked John. However, often they would pick on John's brother Doug because Doug was very small for his age. John would always come to Doug's rescue when Doug was being bullied or laughed at. Doug very much appreciated this and returned 141
John's loyalty. Alice never tried to stop the teasing, (believing that "boys will be boys"), and generally ignored these things unless one of her boys got into a fight or got hurt. In many ways, John was a typical midwestern teenager who liked fast cars and couldn't wait to have his first beer. John was also a stylish dresser who liked to spend time shopping for clothes. John became very much a loner and had few friends throughout his teenage years. At eighteen, John went to work full-time for a social services organization. John's ability to clearly talk to and communicate with others was essential to the job. Although both John and his mother were satisfied with his living at home during this period, both agreed that they did not want to live together indefinitely. John didn't make much money at this first job, but he proved to be a good manager of his own finances. After working only a few weeks, he managed to save enough to buy a new Yamaha motorcycle. He was a very good rider and his friends encouraged John to get involved in their motorcycle races, but John never raced. He often used his bike to run local errands for extra money and he was afraid he would lose this money if he crashed. In his spare time, John watched a lot of television. One of his favorite shows was "Mean Streets." He also watched a lot of T.V. sports. In addition to these pastimes, John was always ready to play cards or to help his older brother Bob to tinker with Bob's car. John is now a highly skilled plumber. Besides work and occasional participation in the games John likes, most of the rest of John's time is taken up by an intimate relationship with a woman named Sally. John has dated Sally longer than anyone else, and his family expects that they will get married someday. John and Sally have talked about the possibility of getting married, but both would like to try living together before getting married. John's mother dreads the thought that John and Sally may have children, but she is willing to accept whatever happens. Prior to meeting Sally, John had dated two other women. His relationship to Edy was close, like a sister, but no sex was involved. The other woman, Jane, and John lived together during the time he was at the jobs training program. They both decided to end the relationship just before John left the program. John had hoped to continue the relationship with Jane, but for reasons unknown to John, she completely rejected him after the relationship ended. 142
The Multiple Choice Question Pool, Studies One Through Four 1. What year was John born? (a) 1955 (b) 1958 (c) 1956 (d) 1957 2. In what state was John born? (a) Indiana (b) Iowa (c) Illinois (d) Minnesota 3. What was the name of John's father? (a) Henry (b) Harry (c) Herb (d) Hank 4. What color was John's hair? (a) black (b) red (c) blonde (d) brown 5. What was the name of John's older brother? (a) Brian (b) Bill (c) Bob (d) Brad 6. How large was John's family when he grew up? (a) seven (b) eight (c) six (d) nine 7. What was the name of John's uncle? (a) Ron (b) Ralph (c) Rick (d) Rich 8. How old was John when his father died? (a) six (b) three (c) five (d) four 9. From what did John's father die? (a) heart attack (b) embolism (c) ruptured spleen (d) stroke 10. How old was John when he started at the city college? (a) 23 (b) 24 (c) 26 (d) 25 143
11. Where did John work for a time? (a) police dispatcher (b) fire dispatcher (c) United Parcel Service (d) U.S. Postal Service 12. For what company is John currently working? (a) Diversified Wood Products (b) Amalgamated Wood Products (c) Consolidated Wood Products (d) Midwestern Wood Products 13. What is John's favorite New York team? (a) Slammers (b) Sluggers (c) Hitters (d) Flyers 14. What was the name of John's dog? (a) Pete (b) Paul (c) Tyler (d) Leo 15. John especially liked to work in which type of art medium? (a) sculpting (b) painting (c) drawing (d) weaving 16. How did John do in school as a child? (a) well (b) very well (c) average (d) poor 17. What was the name of John's little brother? (a) Doug (b) Dave (c) Donald (d) Dane 18. How old was John when he began working for social services? (a) 19 (b) 20 (c) 17 (d) 18 19. What type of motorcycle did John buy? (a) Yamaha (b) Kawasaki (c) Suzuki (d) Honda 20. What was John's favorite T.V. show? (a) Mean Streets (b) Amazing Animals (c) Good Times (d) Wonder Week 21. Currently John is employed as a skilled...? 144
(a) electrician (b) mason (c) carpenter (d) plumber 22. What is the name of John's current girlfriend? (a) Susan (b) Sally (c) Sheryl (d) Sharon 23. With whom did John used to date? (a) Edna (b) Ellen (c) Emily (d) Edy 24. What is John's favorite color? (a) blue (b) green (c) red (d) brown 25. What was the name of John's aunt? (a) Joan (b) Julia (c) Jane (d) Jenny 26. What color were John's eyes? (a) green (b) brown (c) blue (d) hazel 27. What was John's favorite jungle beast? (a) cheetah (b) lion (c) tiger (d) leopard 28. What was John's favorite T.V. sport? (a) football (b) baseball (c) baketball (d) hockey 29. How old is John's current girlfriend? (a) one year older than John (b) two years younger than John (c) one year younger than John (d) two years older than John 30. How many pets did John have as a child? (a) 7 (b) 4 (c) 6 (d) 5 145
Notes. 1) In Study 1, items 2, 3, and 6 were a apriori designated high- memorability, while items 18, 19, and 22 were a apriori designated low- memorability. Items 25 through 30 were unseen. In Study 1 items 26, 27, and 30 were selected as the critical unseen. 2) In Study 1, the Low Consensus Inaccurate response profiles from the other subjects are listed below. The italicized letters denote the incorrect response used in the High Consensus Inaccurate profiles, while the bold letters denote the accurate responses used in the High Consensus Accurate Profiles. That more than one letter is highlighted within the sets below does not mean that only two responses were shown. Item______Story A______Story B 2 b,c,a,a,c b,c,a,a,c 3 a,d,c,d,a a,d,ib,b,a 6 b,a,c,b,c d,Jb,a,d,b 18 d,c,a,b,a d,c,a,b,a 19 d,c,b,a,d d,c,b,a,d 22 c,a,d,a,b c,b,tf,a,b 26 c,a,b,b,c c,a,Jb,Jb,c 27 d,Jb,c,c,d d,Jb,c,c,d 30 b,b,c,d,c b,b,c,d,c 3. Item memorabilities were recoded in subsequent analyses in Study 1. Recoding was accomplished within the six (seen) critical items by selecting as high-memorable those items on which subjects were most accurate during the multiple-choice phase as high-memorable. This led to the selection of items 2, 19, and 22 as high-memorable while 3, 6, and 18 were low-memorable. 4. Based on the multiple-choice results of the first experimemt new items were selected for the following studies. The high-memorable items were 13, 17, and 19. The low-memorable selected items were 7, 10, and 16. Finally, the unseen items selected were 25, 27 and 30. APPPENDIX B
FIGURES STUDIES ONE THROUGH FOUR
146 147
A ccuracy 1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 High C e n s u s A cc. Low C e n s u s In a cc. High C e n su s In acc.x x Feedback
High Memorable ~Low M e m o rab le
Figure 1. Accuracy at levels of Feedback and Item Memorability, Study 1.
A ccuracy 1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 High Census Acc. Low Census Inacc. High Census Inacc.x x Feedback
High Memorable ~Low M e m o rab le
Figure 2. Accuracy at levels of Feedback and recoded Item Memorability, Study 1. Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability ~U n seen
Figure 3. Yielding as a function of recoded Item Memorability and Social Consensus, Study 1.
C hange
0.6
0 .4
0.2
High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus DIsagr.High C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 4. Change as a function of recoded Item Memorability and Social Consensus, Study 1. Accuracy
0 .7 5
0 .5
0 .2 5
High Census Agr. Law Census DIsagrHIgh Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Initially Accurate —1— Initially Inaccurate
Figure 5, Accuracy at levels of Social Consensus, recoded Item Memorability, and Initial Accuracy, Study 1.
Y ielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability ~ 4 ~ Low Memorability ~U nseen
Figure 6. Yielding at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus, Study 2. Yielding 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 7. Yielding at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus for Distractor Delay of 2.5 min, Study 2.
Y ielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 8. Yielding at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus for Distractor Delay of 10 min, Study 2. Change
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Law C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 9. Change as a function of Item Memorability and Social Consensus, Study 2.
Source Memory 1
0.8
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 10. Source Memory as a function of Item Memorability and Social Consensus, Study 2. 152
Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability ~ i ~ Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 11. Yielding at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 2.
Change
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 12. Change as a function of Item Memorability and Social Consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 2. 153
Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
— High Memorability Low Memorability
Figure 13. Yielding at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus controlling failure to encode, Study 2.
Y ielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability
Figure 14. Yielding at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus, adj. for covariate & failure to encode. 154
C hange 0.0
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsgr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
— High Memorability ~ L o w Memorability
Figure 15. Change at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus controlling failure to encode, Study 2.
C hange 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsgr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability ~ ^ Low Memorability
Figure 16. Change at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus adj. for covariate, failure to encode. Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
x Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
— High Mem —+— Low Mem Unseen
Figure 17. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Item Memorability, Study 3.
C hange 0.8
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 x High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Mem —l— Low Mem ~U nseen
Figure 18. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Item Memorability, Study 3. 156
Change 0.6
0 .5
0 .4
0 .3
0.2
0.1
0 x High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Memory First ~ 1 Cued-Recall First
Figure 19. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order, Study 3.
C hange 0.6
0 .5
0 .4
0 .3
0.2
0.1
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsagr. xx Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Memory First —1— Cued-Recall First
Figure 20. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order for Delay of 2.5 minutes, Study 3. Change o.e
0 .5
0 .4
0 .3
0.2
0.1
0 High C ensus Agr. Law C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Memory First Cued-Recall First
Figure 21. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order for Delay of 10 minutes, Study 3.
C hange o.e
0 .4
0.2
_i High Memorable Low Memorable Unseen X Item Memorability
Delay 2.5 minutes Delay 10 minutes
Figure 22. Change at levels of Item Memorability and Distractor Delay, Study 3. 158
Source Memory 1
0.8
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 23. Source Memory as a function of Item Memorability and Social Consensus, Study 3.
Source Memory 1
0.8
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
2.5-mlnute delay 10-mlnute delay
Figure 24. Source Memory as a function of Distractor Delay and Social Consensus, Study 3. Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability —“—Unseen
Figure 25. Yielding at levels of Item Memorability and Social Consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 3.
C hange 0.8
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability — Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 26. Change as a function of Item Memorability and Social Consensus adjusted for covariate, Study 3. Change 0.6
0 .5
0 .4
0 .3
0.2
0.1
x High Memorable Low Memorable U n seen x Item Memorability
~ Delay 2.5 minutes —'— Delay 10 minutes
Figure 27. Change at levels of Item Memorability and Distractor Delay, adj. for covariate, Study 3.
Y ield in g 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem
Figure 28. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Item Memorability controlling failure to encode, Study 3. 161
adjusted Yielding 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 High Memorability Low Memorability x Item Memorability
2.5-mlnute delay ~10-mlnute delay
Figure 29, Yielding at levels of Item Mem and Distractor Delay, controlling encoding failure & source mem, Study 3.
C hange 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. xx Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem
Figure 30. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Item Memorability controlling encoding failure, Study 3. Change 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 High Memorable Low Memorable x Item Memorability
— Delay 2.5 minutes ~ D e la y 10 minutes
Figure 31. Change at levels of Item Mem and Distractor Delay controlling encoding failure, Study 3.
adjusted Change 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr.x x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem
Figure 32. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Item Mem controlling encoding failure and source mem, Study 3 163
adjusted Change 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High Memorable Low Memorable x Item Memorability
Delay 2.5 minutes ~ D e la y 10 minutes
Figure 33. Change at levels of Item Mem and Distractor Delay controlling encoding failure and source mem, Study 3
Y ieldin g 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 x Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem Unseen
Figure 34. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Item Memorability, Study 4. Yielding 0.0
0 .4
0.2
Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. - 11— Source Not Disc.
Figure 35.. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Source Discounting, Study 4.
Y ieldin g 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Memory First Cued-Recall First
Figure 36. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order, Study 4. Yielding 0.0
0.4
0.2
0 Cued-Recall First Source Mem First x Task Order
Source Disc. ~S o u rce N o t D isc.
Figure 37. Yielding at levels of Source Discounting and Task Order, Study 4,
C hange
0.0
0.4
0.2
0 x High C ensus Agr. Low C ensus Disagr.HIgh C ensus Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
- High Mem _4_ Low Mem Unseen
Figure 38. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Item Mem, Study 4. Change 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High-Memorable Low-Memorable U n seen x Item Memorability
~S o u rc e Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 39. Change at levels of Item Mem and Source Discounting, Study 4.
C hange 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Hi Census Agr. Low Census Disagr. HI Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 40. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Source Discounting, Study 4. Change 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Memory First —f—Cued-Recall First
Figure 41. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order, Study 4.
Source memory’s deviation from linearity 0.2
0.1
- 0.1
- 0.2 Source Mem First Cued-Recall First x Task Order
Source Disc. _4— Source Not Disc.
Figure 42. Source memory deviation from linear Item Mem at levels of Task Order and Source Discounting, Study 4. Source memory’s deviation from linearity - 0 .0 5
- 0 .1 5
- 0 .2 5
- 0 .3 5
- 0 .4 5 Source Mem First Cued-Recall First x Task Order
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 43. Source memory deviation from linear Census at levels of Task Order and Source Discounting, Study 4.
Source Memory 1
0.8
0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsgr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 44, Source Memory at levels of Item Memorability & Social Consensus w/Cued-Recall task 1st, Study 4, Source Memory 1
0.8
0.0
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsgr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 45. Source Memory at levels of Item Memorability & Social Consensus w/Source Memory task 1st, Study 4,
Source Memory 1
0.8
0.0
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsgr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 46. Source Memory at levels of Item Mem & Social Census when Source Information is Discounted, Study 4. 170 Source Memory 1
0.8
0.0
0.4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disagr.HIgh Census Dlsgr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Memorability Low Memorability Unseen
Figure 47, Source Memory at levels of Item Mem & Social Census when Source Information is Not Discounted, Study 4.
adjusted Yielding 0.0
0.4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Mem l— Low Mem Unseen
Figure 48. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Item Memorability, adj. for covariate, Study 4. 171 adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4 -
0.2
Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 49, Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Source Discounting, adj. for covariate, Study 4.
adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
Cued-Recall First Source Mem First x Task Order
Source Disc. —f~ Source Not Disc.
Figure 50, Yielding at levels of Source Discounting and Task Order, adjusted for covariate, Study 4. Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
“ Source Memory First ~ 4— Cued-Recall First
Figure 51. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order, adjusted for covariate, Study 4,
Y ieldin g 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Cued-Recall First Source Mem First x Task Order
Source Disc. - +— Source Not Disc.
Figure 52. Yielding at levels of Source Discounting and Task Order, controlling encoding failure, Study 4. Yielding 0.0
0 .4
0.2
Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. - 4— Source Not Disc.
Figure 53. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Source Discounting controlling encoding failure, Study 4.
Y ieldin g 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. ~Source N o t D isc.
Figure 54. Yielding at levels of Social Census & Source Disc, w / Story Anticiptn controlling encoding failure, Study 4. Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2 -
Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. ~+— Source Not Disc.
Figure 55. Yielding at levels of Social Census & Source Disc, w/o Story Anticipt controlling encoding failure, Study 4.
Y ielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High-Memorable Low-Memorable x Item Memorability
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 56. Yielding at levels of Item Mem and Source Discounting, controlling encoding failure, Study 4. Yielding 0.0
0.4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
— Source Memory First — Cued-Recall F irs t
Figure 57. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order, controlling encoding failure, Study 4.
Y ielding 0.0
0.4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem
Figure 58. Yielding at levels of Social Census & Item Mem, w /Source Mem task 1st controlling encoding failure, Study 4. Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Mem —■— Low Mem
Figure 59. Yielding at levels of Social Census & Item Mem, w/Cued-Recall 1st. controlling encoding failure, Study 4.
Y ieldin g 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem
Figure 60. Yielding at levels of Social Census & Item Mem, w/Source Discounted controlling encoding failure, Study 4. Yielding 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
H igh M em — Low Mem
Figure 61. Yielding at levels of Social Census & Item Mem, w/Source not Disc, controlling encoding failure, Study 4.
adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 62. Yielding at levels of Social Census and Source Discounting adj. for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4. adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
High-Memorable Low-Memorable x Item Memorability
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 63. Yielding at levels of Item Mem and Source Discounting, adj. for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4.
adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem
Figure 64. Yielding at Social Census & Item Mem, w /Source Discounted adj. for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4. adjusted Yielding 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Mem Low Mem
Figure 65. Yielding at Social Census & Item Mem, w /o Source Discounted adj. for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4.
adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
■ Source Disc. 11— Source Not Disc.
Figure 66. Yielding at Social Census & Source Disc, w / Story Anticipt, adj, for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4. adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. —+—Source Not Disc.
Figure 67, Yielding at Social Census & Source Disc, w/o Story Anticipt, adj for covariate& encoding failure, Study 4.
adjusted Yielding 0.0
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Memory First —1— Cued-Recall First
Figure 68. Yielding at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order, adjusted for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4. adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High Mem Low Mem
Figure 69. Yielding at Social Census & Item Mem, w/Source Mem task 1st adj. for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4.
adjusted Yielding 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 Low Census Dlsagr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
High M em — Low Mem
Figure 70. Yielding at Social Census & Item Mem, w/Cued-Recall task 1st adj for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4. Yielding 0.0
0.4
0.2
0 Cued-Recall First Source Mem First x Task Order
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 71. Yielding at levels of Source Discounting and Task Order, adj. for covariate & encoding failure, Study 4.
C hange 0.0
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Dlsgr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Mem First Cued-Recall First
Figure 72. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Task Order controlling encoding failure, Study 4. Change 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Disgr.High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 73. Change at levels of Social Consensus and Source Discounting controlling encoding failure, Study 4.
Change 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Dlsgr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 74. Change at levels of Social Census and Source Disc. w/Low Item Mem controlling encoding failure, Study 4. Change 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Dlsgr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 75. Change at levels of Social Census and Source Disc. w/High Item Mem controlling encoding failure, Study 4.
C hange 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Dlsgr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. —4— Source Not Disc.
Figure 76. Change at levels of Social Census and Source Disc, adj for encoding failure & source memory, Study 4. 185
C hange 0 .0 r
0 .4 -
0 1 1 1 1 1 High Census Agr. Low Census Dlsgr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. ~ l— Source Not Disc.
Figure 77. Change at levels of Social Census and Source Disc. w/High Item Mem adj for source mem & encoding failure.
C hange 0.6
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census Dlsgr. High Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 78, Change at levels of Social Census and Source Disc. w/Low Item Mem adj for source mem & encoding failure. 186 Low change - HI change 0.0
0 .4
0.2
- 0.2
High Census Agr. Low Census DIsgr.HIgh Census Dlsagr. Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. —t— Source Not Disc.
Figure 79. Low-Hi at levels of Social Census, Source Disc. w/Story Antic, adj for source mem & encoding failure.
Low change - HI change 0.0
0 .4
0.2
0 High Census Agr. Low Census DIsgr.HIgh Census Dlsagr. x Social Consensus (Pressure)
Source Disc. Source Not Disc.
Figure 80. Low-Hi at levels of Social Census, Source Disc. w/No Story Antic, adj for source mem & encoding failure.
MEMORY COMPARISON THEORY: SOME PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE FOR THE SOCIAL DISTORTION OF MEMORY
VOLUME II
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
by
Andrew L. Betz, III, B.A., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University 1992
Dissertation Committee: Dr. Thomas M. Ostrom Dr. John J. Skowronski Dr. William von Hippel Dr. Neal F. Johnson Adviser Department of Psychology TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPENDICIES C. ANALYSIS SUMMARY TABLES - STUDIES ONE THROUGH FOUR APPPENDIX C
ANALYSIS SUMMARY TABLES - STUDIES ONE THROUGH FOUR
189 Analysis 1. The accuracy analysis from Study 1.
General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: ACCURACY Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 107 25.61657880 0.23940728 1.46 0.0045 Error 480 78.92763889 0.16443258 Corrected Total 587 104.54421769
R-Square C.V. Root MSE ACCURACY Mean 0.245031 52.75126 0.4055029 0.7687075
Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY) 96 20.87652778 0.21746383 1.32 0.0317 STORY 1 0.00102324 0.00102324 0.01 0.9372 FEEDBACK 2 3.22000567 1.61000283 9.79 0.0001 MEMORY 1 0.05796202 0.05796202 0.35 0.5530 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.50571995 0.25285998 1.54 0.2159 STORY*MEMORY 1 0.10558107 0.10558107 0.64 0.4234 FEEDBACK*MEMORY 2 0.32500567 0.16250283 0.99 0.3730 STORY*FEEDBAC*MEMORY 2 0.52228458 0.26114229 1.59 0.2054
Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 3.10809949 3.10809949 18.90 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 0.11190618 0.11190618 0.68 0.4098 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORYN Mean SD
A 300 0.77000000 0.42153565 B 288 0.76736111 0.42324939
Level of ACCURACY...... FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 196 0.86734694 0.34006802 2 196 0.75000000 0.43412157 3 196 0.68877551 0.46418004 Level of ACCURACY...... MEMORY N Mean SD high 294 0.75850340 0.42872038 low 294 0.77891156 0.41568748 Level of Level of AwLUKAwT STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD
A 1 100 0.86000000 0.34873509 A 2 100 0.79000000 0.40936018 A 3 100 0.66000000 0.47609523 B 1 96 0.87500000 0.33245498 B 2 96 0.70833333 0.45691567 B 3 96 0.71875000 0.45196937 Level of Level of STORY MEMORY N Mean SD
A high 150 0.74666667 0.43637719 A low 150 0.79333333 0.40627076 B high 144 0.77083333 0.42176370 B low 144 0.76388889 0.42617359 Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... FEEDBACK MEMORYN Mean SD 1 high 98 0.88775510 0.31729050 1 low 98 0.84693878 0.36189766 2 high 98 0.71428571 0.45407661 2 low 98 0.78571429 0.41243556 3 high 98 0.67346939 0.47135493 3 low 98 0.70408163 0.45880130 Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY FEEDBACKMEMORY N Mean SD A 1 high 50 0.86000000 0.35050983 A 1 low 50 0.86000000 0.35050983 A 2 high 50 0.78000000 0.41845196 A 2 low 50 0.80000000 0.40406102
Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY FEEDBACKMEMORY N Mean SD A 3 high 50 0.60000000 0.49487166 A 3 low 50 0.72000000 0.45355737 B 1 high 48 0.91666667 0.27931019 B 1 low 48 0.83333333 0.37662179 B 2 high 48 0.64583333 0.48332111 B 2 low 48 0.77083333 0.42474440 B 3 high 48 0.75000000 0.43759497 B 3 low 48 0.68750000 0.46841744 192
Analysis 2. The accuracy analysis from Study 1, recoding item memorability. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: ACCURACY Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F
Model 107 27.71286363 0.25899873 1.62 0.0004 Error 480 76.83135406 0.16006532 Corrected Total 587 104.54421769
R-Square C.V. Root MSE ACCURACY Mean
0.265083 52.04602 0.4000816 0.7687075
Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY) 96 21.07812553 0.21956381 1.37 0.0178 STORY 1 0.00132115 0.00132115 0.01 0.9276 FEEDBACK 2 3.21425429 1.60712714 10.04 0.0001 MEM 1 2.09025076 2.09025076 13.06 0.0003 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.32973246 0.16486623 1.03 0.3578 STORY*MEM 1 0.05517016 0.05517016 0.34 0.5574 FEEDBACK*MEM 2 0.79353167 0.39676584 2.48 0.0849 STORY*FEEDBACK*MEM 2 0.15325920 0.07662960 0.48 0.6199
Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 3.11804549 3.11804549 19.48 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 0.09610966 0.09610966 0.60 0.4388 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORYN Mean SD A 300 0.77000000 0.42153565 B 288 0.76736111 0.42324939 Level of ...... ACCURACY...... FEEDBACK N Mean SD
1 196 0.86734694 0.34006802 2 196 0.75000000 0.43412157 3 196 0.68877551 0.46418004
Level of ...... ACCURACY...... MEM N Mean SD
high 294 0.82993197 0.37633312 low 294 0.70748299 0.45569411
Level of Level of --ACCURACY...... STORYFEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 100 0.86000000 0.34873509 A 2 100 0.79000000 0.40936018 A 3 100 0.66000000 0.47609523 B 1 96 0.87500000 0.33245498 B 2 96 0.70833333 0.45691567 B 3 96 0.71875000 0.45196937
Level of Level of --ACCURACY...... STORY MEM N Mean SD
A high 150 0.84000000 0.36783422 A low 150 0.70000000 0.45979278 B high 144 0.81944444 0.38599210 B low 144 0.71527778 0.45285720 Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... FEEDBACK MEM N Mean SD 1 high 98 0.90816327 0.29028016 1 low 98 0.82653061 0.38059937 2 high 97 0.85567010 0.35324952 2 low 99 0.64646465 0.48049998 3 high 99 0.72727273 0.44762826 3 low 97 0.64948454 0.47961002 Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY FEEDBACKMEM N Mean SD
A 1 high 48 0.93750000 0.24462303 A 1 low 52 0.78846154 0.41238372 A 2 high 54 0.87037037 0.33904952 A 2 low 46 0.69565217 0.46521513 Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORYFEEDBACK MEM N Mean SD A 3 high 48 0.70833333 0.45933964 A 3 low 52 0.61538462 0.49125075 B 1 high 50 0.88000000 0.32826072 B 1 low 46 0.86956522 0.34050261 B 2 high 43 0.83720930 0.37354368 B 2 low 53 0.60377358 0.49379311 B 3 high 51 0.74509804 0.44014258 B 3 low 45 0.68888889 0.46817937 194
Analysis 3. The yielding analysis from Study 1, recoding item memorability and recoding feedback to social consensus.
General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F
Model 107 41.23844715 0.38540605 2.34 0.0001 Error 544 89.51462034 0.16454893 Corrected Total 651 130.75306748
R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean
0.315392 146.1223 0.4056463 0.2776074
Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY) 96 29.22462487 0.30442318 1.85 0.0001 STORY 1 0.17670896 0.17670896 1.07 0.3005 CENSUS 1 4.13197277 4.13197277 25.11 0.0001 MEM 2 5.99797856 2.99898928 18.23 0.0001 STORY*CENSUS 1 0.10520640 0.10520640 0.64 0.4243 ST0RY*MEM 2 0.00988535 0.00494267 0.03 0.9704 CENSUS*MEM 2 0.43717242 0.21858621 1.33 0.2658 STORY*CENSUS*MEM 2 0.13472922 0.06736461 0.41 0.6643 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 5.14591022 5.14591022 31.27 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.72132283 0.72132283 4.38 0.0367 General Linear Models Procedure
Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY N Mean SD A 345 0.29565217 0.45699816 B 307 0.25732899 0.43787593
Level of ...... YIELD...... CENSUS N Mean SD 2 294 0.17687075 0.38220985 3 358 0.36033520 0.48076957
Level iof ...... YIELD...... MEM N Mean SD
high 209 0.18181818 0.38662065 low 217 0.23502304 0.42499360 unse 226 0.40707965 0.49238049
Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORYCENSUS N Mean SD
A 2 150 0.18000000 0.38547452 A 3 195 0.38461538 0.48775652 B 2 144 0.17361111 0.38009681 B 3 163 0.33128834 0.47212698 Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY MEM N Mean SD A high 109 0.19266055 0.39621039 A low 118 0.27118644 0.44646794 A unse 118 0.41525424 0.49486718 B high 100 0.17000000 0.37752517 low 99 0.19191919 0.39581401 unse 108 0.39814815 0.49179843 of Level of s MEM N Mean SD 2 high 97 0.12371134 0.33096236 2 low 99 0.13131313 0.33946130 2 unse 98 0.27551020 0.44906804 3 high 112 0.23214286 0.42409719 3 low 118 0.32203390 0.46924846 3 unse 128 0.50781250 0.50190337 Level of Level, of Level of ---- 1I ICLl/------STORY CENSUS MEM N Mean SD
A 2 high 54 0.12962963 0.33904952 A 2 low 46 0.13043478 0.34050261 A 2 unse 50 0.28000000 0.45355737 A 3 high 55 0.25454545 0.43962028 A 3 low 72 0.36111111 0.48369341 A 3 unse 68 0.51470588 0.50349961 B 2 high 43 0.11627907 0.32435301 B 2 low 53 0.13207547 0.34181281 B 2 unse 48 0.27083333 0.44909286 B 3 high 57 0.21052632 0.41130637 B 3 low 46 0.26086957 0.44396109 B 3 unse 60 0.50000000 0.50421948 196
Analysis 4. The change analysis from Study 1, recoding item memorability and recoding feedback to social consensus.
General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square FValue Pr > F Model 113 65.87016707 0.58292183 3.78 0.0001 Error 768 118.30216854 0.15403928 Corrected Total 881 184.17233560
R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean
0.357655 132.1244 0.3924784 0.2970522
Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY) 96 36.52201346 0.38043764 2.47 0.0001 STORY 1 0.01064769 0.01064769 0.07 0.7927 CENSUS 2 15.73890277 7.86945138 51.09 0.0001 MEM 2 3.72958113 1.86479056 12.11 0.0001 STORY*CENSUS 2 0.28377230 0.14188615 0.92 0.3985 STORY*MEM 2 0.01887242 0.00943621 0.06 0.9406 CENSUS*MEM 4 3.41112593 0.85278148 5.54 0.0002 STORY*CENSUS*MEM 4 0.45463289 0.11365822 0.74 0.5663
Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F census linear 1 15.26234602 15.26234602 99.08 0.0001 census quadratic 1 0.02671967 0.02671967 0.17 0.6772 mem linear 1 3.72867675 3.72867675 24.21 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.00390965 0.00390965 0.03 0.8735 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... CHANGE- STORY N Mean SD
A 450 0.30222222 0.45973212 B 432 0.29166667 0.45505666
Level of CENSUS N Mean SD
1 230 0.08260870 0.27589026 2 294 0.26190476 0.44042073 3 358 0.46368715 0.49937758 Level of MEM N Mean SD high 294 0.20068027 0.40119218 low 294 0.28231293 0.45089228 unse 294 0.40816327 0.49233167 Level. of Level, of ------urmrauc------STORY CENSUS N Mean SD
A 1 105 0.05714286 0.23322865 A 2 150 0.23333333 0.42436952 A 3 195 0.48717949 0.50112219 B 1 125 0.10400000 0.30648896 B 2 144 0.29166667 0.45611617 B 3 163 0.43558282 0.49736106 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE..... STORY MEM N Mean SD 197
A high 150 0.20000000 0.40134004 A low 150 0.29333333 0.45681516 A unse 150 0.41333333 0.49408130 B high 144 0.20138889 0.40243770 B low 144 0.27083333 0.44594129 B unse 144 0.40277778 0.49216866 Level of Level of CENSUS MEMN Mean SD 1 high 85 0.05882353 0.23669053 1 low 77 0.10389610 0.30712656 1 unse 68 0.08823529 0.28574564 2 high 97 0.15463918 0.36343862 2 low 99 0.29292929 0.45742235 2 unse 98 0.33673469 0.47502312 3 high 112 0.34821429 0.47854550 3 low 118 0.38983051 0.48979148 3 unse 128 0.63281250 0.48393228 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY CENSUS MEMN Mean SD A 1 high 41 0.02439024 0.15617376 A 1 low 32 0.09375000 0.29614458 A 1 unse 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 A 2 high 54 0.16666667 0.37617740 A 2 low 46 0.23913043 0.43126597 A 2 unse 50 0.30000000 0.46291005 A 3 high 55 0.36363636 0.48547939 A 3 low 72 0.41666667 0.49646639 A 3 unse 68 0.66176471 0.47662665 B 1 high 44 0.09090909 0.29080336 B 1 low 45 0.11111111 0.31782086 B 1 unse 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 B 2 high 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 B 2 low 53 0.33962264 0.47811313 B 2 unse 48 0.37500000 0.48924605 B 3 high 57 0.33333333 0.47559487 B 3 low 46 0.34782609 0.48154341 B 3 unse 60 0.60000000 0.49403218 198
Analysis 5. The accuracy analysis from Study 1, recoding item memorability and recoding feedback to social consensus.
General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: ACCURACY Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 119 42.73891790 0.35915057 2.72 0.0001
Error 468 61.80529978 0.13206261 Corrected Total 587 104.54421769 R-Square C.V. Root MSE ACCURACY Mean
0.408812 47.27470 0.3634042 0.7687075
Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F STORY 1 0.05080828 0.05080828 0.38 0.5354 SN(STORY) 96 13.12290692 0.13669695 1.04 0.4001 INICORR 1 11.85556019 11.85556019 89.77 0.0001 ST0RY*INIC0RR 1 0.10889113 0.10889113 0.82 0.3643 MEM 1 0.02390747 0.02390747 0.18 0.6707 STORY*MEM 1 0.00061616 0.00061616 0.00 0.9456 CENSUS 2 1.17961213 0.58980606 4.47 0.0120 STORY*CENSUS 2 0.13357442 0.06678721 0.51 0.6034 INICORR*MEM 1 0.06895878 0.06895878 0.52 0.4703 STORY*INIC0RR*MEM 1 0.00101886 0.00101886 0.01 0.9300 INICORR*CENSUS 2 4.34566061 2.17283031 16.45 0.0001 STORY*INICORR*CENSUS 2 0.11476969 0.05738484 0.43 0.6478 MEM*CENSUS 2 0.34976430 0.17488215 1.32 0.2670 STORY*MEM*CENSUS 2 0.07192528 0.03596264 0.27 0.7617 INICORR*MEM*CENSUS 2 0.19115003 0.09557501 0.72 0.4855 STOR*INICO*MEM*CENSU 2 0.57073891 0.28536945 2.16 0.1164 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORYN Mean SD
A 300 0.77000000 0.42153565 B 288 0.76736111 0.42324939 Level of ...... ACCURACY...... INICORR N Mean SD 0 132 0.40909091 0.49353910 1 456 0.87280702 0.33355497
Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY INICORR N Mean SD A 0 73 0.42465753 0.49771166 A 1 227 0.88105727 0.32443652 B 0 59 0.38983051 0.49189812 B 1 229 0.86462882 0.34286904 Level of ■... ACCURACY.... MEM N Mean SD high 294 0.82993197 0.37633312 low 294 0.70748299 0.45569411
Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY MEMN Mean SD
A high 150 0.84000000 0.36783422 A low 150 0.70000000 0.45979278 B high 144 0.81944444 0.38599210 199
B low 144 0.71527778 0.45285720 Level of ...... ACCURACY...... CENSUS N Mean SD 1 162 0.85802469 0.35010706 2 196 0..75000000 0.43412157 3 230 0.72173913 0.44911998 Level. of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY CENSUSN Mean SD A 1 73 0.87671233 0.33104236 A 2 100 0.79000000 0.40936018 A 3 127 0.69291339 0.46311250 B 1 89 0.84269663 0.36614939 B 2 96 0.70833333 0.45691567 B 3 103 0.75728155 0.43082273
Level. of Level. of ...... ACCURACY...... INICORR MEMN Mean SD 0 high 47 0.46808511 0.50437494 0 low 85 0.37647059 0.48737564 1 high 247 0.89878543 0.30222505 1 low 209 0.84210526 0.36551777
Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY INICORR MEM N Mean SD
A 0 high 24 0.45833333 0.50897738 A 0 low 49 0.40816327 0.49658699 A 1 high 126 0.91269841 0.28340335 A 1 low 101 0.84158416 0.36695158 B 0 high 23 0.47826087 0.51075392 B 0 low 36 0.33333333 0.47809144 B 1 high 121 0.88429752 0.32119783 B 1 low 108 0.84259259 0.36588229 Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... INICORR CENSUS N Mean SD 0 1 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 0 2 44 0.27272727 0.45051063 0 3 72 0.55555556 0.50039108 1 1 146 0.93835616 0.24133544 1 2 152 0.88815789 0.31621399 1 3 158 0.79746835 0.40316414 Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORY INICORR CENSUS N Mean SD A 0 1 7 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 0 2 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 A 0 3 47 0.55319149 0.50253750 A 1 1 66 0.96969697 0.17273341 A 1 2 81 0.91358025 0.28273357 A 1 3 80 0.77500000 0.42021694 B 0 1 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 B 0 2 25 0.28000000 0.45825757 B 0 3 25 0.56000000 0.50662281 B 1 1 80 0.91250000 0.28434913 B 1 2 71 0.85915493 0.35033758 B 1 3 78 0.82051282 0.38624364 Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... MEM CENSUS N Mean SD
high 1 85 0.90588235 0.29372523 high 2 97 0.85567010 0.35324952 high 3 112 0.75000000 0.43495884 low 1 77 0.80519481 0.39864775 low 2 99 0.64646465 0.48049998 low 3 118 0 69491525 0.4624068 Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... STORYMEMCENSUSN Mean SD A high 1 41 0.95121951 0.21808479 A high 2 54 0.87037037 0.33904952 A high 3 55 0.72727273 0.44946657 A low 1 32 0.78125000 0.42001344 A low 2 46 0.69565217 0.46521513 A low 3 72 0.66666667 0.47471266 B high 1 44 0.86363636 0.34714176 B high 2 43 0.83720930 0.37354368 B high 3 57 0.77192982 0.42331784 B low 1 45 0.82222222 0.38664577 B low 2 53 0.60377358 0.49379311 B low 3 46 0.73913043 0.44396109 Level of Level of Level of ...... ACCURACY...... INICORR MEM CENSUS N Mean SD 0 high 1 3 0.00000000 0.00000000 0 high 2 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 0 high 3 28 0.57142857 0.50395263 0 low 1 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 0 low 2 28 0.21428571 0.41785545 0 low 3 44 0.54545455 0.50368620 high 1 82 0.93902439 0.24075811 high 2 81 0.95061728 0.21801574 high 3 84 0.80952381 0.39503517 low 1 64 0.93750000 0.24397502 low 2 71 0.81690141 0.38950001 low 3 74 0.78378378 0.41447343 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... --ACCURACY STORY INICORR MEM CENSUS N Mean SD A 0 h i gh 1 1 0.00000000 A 0 high 2 7 0.42857143 0^53452248 A 0 high 3 16 0.50000000 0.51639778 A 0 low 1 6 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 0 low 2 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 A 0 low 3 31 0.58064516 0.50161031 A 1 high 1 40 0.97500000 0.15811388 A 1 high 2 47 0.93617021 0.24709225 A 1 high 3 39 0.82051282 0.38877641 A 1 low 1 26 0.96153846 0.19611614 A 1 low 2 34 0.88235294 0.32703497 A 1 low 3 41 0.73170732 0.44857498 B 0 high 1 2 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 0 high 2 9 0.33333333 0.50000000 B 0 high 3 12 0.66666667 0.49236596 B 0 low 1 7 0.28571429 0.48795004 B 0 low 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 B 0 low 3 13 0.46153846 0.51887452 B 1 high 1 42 0.90476190 0.29710176 B 1 high 2 34 0.97058824 0.17149859 B 1 high 3 45 0.80000000 0.40451992 B 1 low 1 38 0.92105263 0.27327631 B 1 low 2 37 0.75675676 0.43495884 B 1 low 3 33 0.84848485 0.36410954 201
Analysis 6. The yielding analysis from Study 2. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 119 37.60061966 0.31597159 2.50 0.0001
Error 480 60.77271368 0.12660982 Corrected Total 599 98.37333333 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.382224 172.1723 0.3558227 0.2066667
Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0RY*DELAY) 96 19.51869658 0.20331976 1.61 0.0007 STORY 1 0.16347151 0.16347151 1.29 0.2564 DELAY 1 0.01839686 0.01839686 0.15 0.7032 MEM 2 9.33203797 4.66601899 36.85 0.0001 FEEDBACK 1 4.19166802 4.19166802 33.11 0.0001 STORY*DELAY 1 0.00291804 0.00291804 0.02 0.8794 ST0RY*MEM 2 0.37927576 0.18963788 1.50 0.2247 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.24664533 0.24664533 1.95 0.1634 DELAY*MEM 2 0.42662030 0.21331015 1.68 0.1866 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.01262345 0.01262345 0.10 0.7523 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 1.71009488 0.85504744 6.75 0.0013 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.18909695 0.09454848 0.75 0.4744 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.21064854 0.21064854 1.66 0.1977 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.67905138 0.33952569 2.68 0.0695 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.16592621 0.08296311 0.66 0.5198 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.36893662 0.18446831 1.46 0.2340 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 8.33745522 8.33745522 65.85 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.99458275 0.99458275 7.86 0.0053 General Linear Models Procedure
Level of -YIELD- STORY Mean SD A 300 0.22333333 0.41717583 B 300 0.19000000 0.39295638 Level of -YIELD- DELAY Mean SD L 306 0.21241830 0.40968925 N 294 0.20068027 0.40119218 Level of -YIELD- MEM N Mean SD hig 200 0.09000000 0.28689991 low 200 0.15000000 0.35796746 uns 200 0.38000000 0.48660448
Level of -YIELD- FEEDBACK Mean SD
300 0.12333333 0.32936884 300 0.29000000 0.45452022 Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY DELAY Mean SD A L 156 0.23076923 0.42268197 AN 144 0.21527778 0.41244952 B L 150 0.19333333 0.39623508 B N 150 0.18666667 0.39094905 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY MEMN Mean SD
A hig 100 0.10000000 0.30151134 A low 100 0.14000000 0.34873509 A uns 100 0.43000000 0.49756985 B hig 100 0.08000000 0.27265992 B low 100 0.16000000 0.36845295 B uns 100 0.33000000 0.47258156
Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD
A 2 150 0.12000000 0.32605019 A 3 150 0.32666667 0.47056537 B 2 150 0.12666667 0.33371343 B 3 150 0.25333333 0.43637719 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAY MEM N Mean SD
L hig 102 0.05882353 0.23645607 L lou 102 0.17647059 0.38310262 L uns 102 0.40196078 0.49271533 N hig 98 0.12244898 0.32948902 N low 98 0.12244898 0.32948902 N uns 98 0.35714286 0.48162097 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAY FEEDBACKN Mean SD L 2 153 0.12418301 0.33087328 L 3 153 0.30065359 0.46004816 N 2 147 0.12244898 0.32892434 N 3 147 0.27891156 0.44999715
Level of Level of ...... YIELD- MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 2 100 0.01000000 0.10000000 hig 3 100 0.17000000 0.37752517 lou 2 100 0.13000000 0.33799767 low 3 100 0.17000000 0.37752517 uns 2 100 0.23000000 0.42295258 uns 3 100 0.53000000 0.50161356
Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAY MEM N Mean SD L hig 52 0.05769231 0.23543548 L lou 52 0.19230769 0.39795859 L uns 52 0.44230769 0.50150603 N hig 48 0.14583333 0.35667396 N lou 48 0.08333333 0.27931019 N uns 48 0.41666667 0.49822380 L hig 50 0.06000000 0.23989794 L lou 50 0.16000000 0.37032804 L uns 50 0.36000000 0.48487322 N hig 50 0.10000000 0.30304576 N lou 50 0.16000000 0.37032804 N uns 50 0.30000000 0.46291005 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL 2 78 0.14102564 0.35030076 A L 3 78 0.32051282 0.46969428 AN 2 72 0.09722222 0.29833917 A N 3 72 0.33333333 0.47471266 BL 2 75 0.10666667 0.31076772 BL 3 75 0.28000000 0.45202248 B N 2 75 0.14666667 0.35615565 B N 3 75 0.22666667 0.42149455
Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAYMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD
L hig 2 51 0.01960784 0.14002801 L hig 3 51 0.09803922 0.30032662 L low 2 51 0.13725490 0.34754038 L low 3 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 L uns 2 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 L uns 3 51 0.58823529 0.49705012 N hig 2 49 0.00000000 0.00000000 N hig 3 49 0.24489796 0.43448304 N low 2 49 0.12244898 0.33120066 N low 3 49 0.12244898 0.33120066 N uns 2 49 0.24489796 0.43448304 N uns 3 49 0.46938776 0.50423378
Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A hig 2 50 0.00000000 0.00000000 A hig 3 50 0.20000000 0.40406102 A low 2 50 0.12000000 0.32826072 A low 3 50 0.16000000 0.37032804 A uns 2 50 0.24000000 0.43141911 A uns 3 50 0.62000000 0.49031435 B hig 2 50 0.02000000 0.14142136 B hig 3 50 0.14000000 0.35050983 B low 2 50 0.14000000 0.35050983 B low 3 50 0.18000000 0.38808793 B uns 2 50 0.22000000 0.41845196 B uns 3 50 0.44000000 0.50142654 205
Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD A L hig 2 26 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L hig 3 26 0.11538462 0.32581259 A L low 2 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 A L low 3 26 0.23076923 0.42966892 A L uns 2 26 0.26923077 0.45234432 A L uns 3 26 0.61538462 0.49613894 A N hig 2 24 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N hig 3 24 0.29166667 0.46430562 A N low 2 24 0.08333333 0.28232985 A N low 3 24 0.08333333 0.28232985 A N uns 2 24 0.20833333 0.41485112 A N uns 3 24 0.62500000 0.49453536 B L hig 2 25 0.04000000 0.20000000 B L hig 3 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 B L low 2 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 B L low 3 25 0.20000000 0.40824829 B L uns 2 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 B L uns 3 25 0.56000000 0.50662281 B N hig 2 25 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 25 0.20000000 0.40824829 B N low 2 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 B N low 3 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 B N uns 2 25 0.28000000 0.45825757 B N uns 3 25 0.32000000 0.47609523 Analysis 7. The change analysis from Study 2.
General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 131 57.86925926 0.44175007 2.47 0.0001 Error 768 137.24629630 0.17870611 Corrected Total 899 195.11555556
R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0. 296590 133.0290 0.4227365 0.3177778
Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F
SN(STORY*DELAY) 96 31.12524217 0.32422127 1.81 0.0001 STORY 1 0.00718725 0.00718725 0.04 0.8411 DELAY 1 0.15411005 0.15411005 0.86 0.3534 MEM 2 16.11936430 8.05968215 45.10 0.0001 FEEDBACK 2 4.29285256 2.14642628 12.01 0.0001 STORY*DELAY 1 0.27652636 0.27652636 1.55 0.2139 STORY*MEM 2 0.78905561 0.39452780 2.21 0.1107 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.02205815 0.01102907 0.06 0.9402 DELAY*MEM 2 0.41711005 0.20855503 1.17 0.3118 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.35531675 0.17765838 0.99 0.3705 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 2.12770159 0.53192540 2.98 0.0187 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.00220035 0.00110017 0.01 0.9939 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.37809053 0.18904526 1.06 0.3477 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.62502389 0.15625597 0.87 0.4788 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.34885629 0.08721407 0.49 0.7446 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 4 0.66096376 0.16524094 0.92 0.4489 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 15.57915271 15.57915271 87.18 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.54021159 0.54021159 3.02 0.0825 feedback linear 1 4.29079279 4.29079279 24.01 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 0.00205977 0.00205977 0.01 0.9145 207
General Linear Hodels Procedure
Level of -CHANGE- STORY Mean SD
450 0.32000000 0.46699532 450 0.31555556 0.46525399 Level of ...... CHANGE- DELAY N Mean SD
L 459 0.30501089 0.46091440 N 441 0.33106576 0.47113113 Level of MEMN Mean SD
hig 300 0.17333333 0.37916766 low 300 0.28333333 0.45136977 uns 300 0.49666667 0.50082429
Level of LnANuc FEEDBACK N Mean SD
1 300 0.23333333 0.42365927 2 300 0.31666667 0.46595343 3 300 0.40333333 0.49138623
Level of Level of ...... It Level of Level of ------^• nn nuc------STORY MEM N Mean SD A hig 150 0.14666667 0.35495848 A low 150 0.32666667 0.47056537 A uns 150 0.48666667 0.50149664 B hig 150 0.20000000 0.40134004 B low 150 0.24000000 0.42851390 B uns 150 0.50666667 0.50163045 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORYFEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 150 0.24000000 0.42851390 A 2 150 0.31333333 0.46540257 A 3 150 0.40666667 0.49285726 B 1 150 0.22666667 0.42007776 B 2 150 0.32000000 0.46803889 B 3 150 0.40000000 0.49153915 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAYMEM N Mean SD L hig 153 0.13071895 0.33819977 L lou 153 0.28104575 0.45098600 L uns 153 0.50326797 0.50163133 N hig 147 0.21768707 0.41408435 N lou 147 0.28571429 0.45329841 N uns 147 0.48979592 0.50160492 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- DELAYFEEDBACK N Mean SD L 1 153 0.19607843 0.39833244 L 2 153 0.32679739 0.47058286 L 3 153 0.39215686 0.48983475 N 1 147 0.27210884 0.44656717 N 2 147 0.30612245 0.46245688 N 3 147 0.41496599 0.49440067 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 100 0.12000000 0.32659863 hig 2 100 0.11000000 0.31446604 hig 3 100 0.29000000 0.45604802 lou 1 100 0.23000000 0.42295258 lou 2 100 0.33000000 0.47258156 lou 3 100 0.29000000 0.45604802 uns 1 100 0.35000000 0.47937249 uns 2 100 0.51000000 0.50241839 uns 3 100 0.63000000 0.48523659 209 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY DELAY HEM N Mean SD AL hig 78 0.08974359 0.28766401 A L low 78 0.30769231 0.46452580 A L uns 78 0.47435897 0.50257413 AN hig 72 0.20833333 0.40896641 AN low 72 0.34722222 0.47942813 AN uns 72 0.50000000 0.50350881 BL hig 75 0.17333333 0.38108428 BL low 75 0.25333333 0.43784896 BL uns 75 0.53333333 0.50224720 BN hig 75 0.22666667 0.42149455 BN low 75 0.22666667 0.42149455 B N uns 75 0.48000000 0.50296419 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL 1 78 0.16666667 0.37509018 A L 2 78 0.33333333 0.47445571 AL 3 78 0.37179487 0.48641211 AN 1 72 0.31944444 0.46953345 A N 2 72 0.29166667 0.45771939 A N 3 72 0.44444444 0.50039108 BL 1 75 0.22666667 0.42149455 BL 2 75 0.32000000 0.46961744 BL 3 75 0.41333333 0.49574768 B N 1 75 0.22666667 0.42149455 B N 2 75 0.32000000 0.46961744 BN 3 75 0.38666667 0.49026560 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAYMEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 51 0.07843137 0.27152438 hig 2 51 0.09803922 0.30032662 hig 3 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 low 1 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 low 2 51 0.35294118 0.48263980 low 3 51 0.27450980 0.45070750 uns 1 51 0.29411765 0.46017899 uns 2 51 0.52941176 0.50410083 uns 3 51 0.68627451 0.46862335 N hig 1 49 0.16326531 0.37343779 N hig 2 49 0.12244898 0.33120066 N hig 3 49 0.36734694 0.48707792 N low 1 49 0.24489796 0.43448304 N low 2 49 0.30612245 0.46565731 N low 3 49 0.30612245 0.46565731 N uns 1 49 0.40816327 0.49658699 N uns 2 49 0.48979592 0.50507627 N uns 3 49 0.57142857 0.50000000 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD A hig 1 50 0.10000000 0.30304576 A hig 2 50 0.10000000 0.30304576 A hig 3 50 0.24000000 0.43141911 A low 1 50 0.26000000 0.44308750 A low 2 50 0.38000000 0.49031435 A low 3 50 0.34000000 0.47851812 A uns 1 50 0.36000000 0.48487322 A uns 2 50 0.46000000 0.50345743 A uns 3 50 0.64000000 0.48487322 B hig 1 50 0.14000000 0.35050983 B hig 2 50 0.12000000 0.32826072 B hig 3 50 0.34000000 0.47851812 B low 1 50 0.20000000 0.40406102 B low 2 50 0.28000000 0.45355737 B low 3 50 0.24000000 0.43141911 B uns 1 50 0.34000000 0.47851812 B uns 2 50 0.56000000 0.50142654 B uns 3 50 0.62000000 0.49031435 Level of Level of Level Level of CHANGE STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL hig 1 26 0.03846154 0.19611614 A L hig 2 26 0.07692308 0.27174649 A L hig 3 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 A L lou 1 26 0.23076923 0.42966892 AL lou 2 26 0.38461538 0.49613894 A L lou 3 26 0.30769231 0.47067872 A L uns 1 26 0.23076923 0.42966892 A L uns 2 26 0.53846154 0.50839113 A L uns 3 26 0.65384615 0.48516452 A N hig 1 24 0.16666667 0.38069349 A N hig 2 24 0.12500000 0.33783196 A N hig 3 24 0.33333333 0.48154341 A N lou 1 24 0.29166667 0.46430562 A N lou 2 24 0.37500000 0.49453536 A N lou 3 24 0.37500000 0.49453536 A N uns 1 24 0.50000000 0.51075392 A N uns 2 24 0.37500000 0.49453536 A N uns 3 24 0.62500000 0.49453536 B L hig 1 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 BL hig 2 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 B L hig 3 25 0.28000000 0.45825757 B L lou 1 25 0.20000000 0.40824829 B L lou 2 25 0.32000000 0.47609523 B L lou 3 25 0.24000000 0.43588989 B L uns 1 25 0.36000000 0.48989795 B L uns 2 25 0.52000000 0.50990195 B L uns 3 25 0.72000000 0.45825757 BN hig 1 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 B N hig 2 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 B N hig 3 25 0.40000000 0.50000000 B N lou 1 25 0.20000000 0.40824829 BN lou 2 25 0.24000000 0.43588989 B N lou 3 25 0.24000000 0.43588989 B N uns 1 25 0.32000000 0.47609523 B N uns 2 25 0.60000000 0.50000000 B N uns 3 25 0.52000000 0.50990195 Analysis 8. The source memory analysis from Study 2. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: FEEDID Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 131 66.48840456 0.50754507 2.65 0.0001 Error 768 146.95159544 0.19134322 Corrected Total 899 213.44000000 R-Square C.V. Root MSE FEEDID Mean 0.311509 71.31978 0.4374280 0.6133333 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY*DELAY) 96 26.79994302 0.27916607 1.46 0.0043 STORY 1 0.26685854 0.26685854 1.39 0.2380 DELAY 1 0.00785464 0.00785464 0.04 0.8395 MEM 2 3.26311082 1.63155541 8.53 0.0002 FEEDBACK 2 27.59744906 13.79872453 72.12 0.0001 STORY*DELAY 1 0.57008456 0.57008456 2.98 0.0847 STORY*MEM 2 1.03982108 0.51991054 2.72 0.0667 ST0RY*FEEDBACK 2 0.10380970 0.05190485 0.27 0.7625 DELAY*MEM 2 0.24807657 0.12403828 0.65 0.5232 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.31980472 0.15990236 0.84 0.4340 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.93001353 0.23250338 1.22 0.3029 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.83450126 0.41725063 2.18 0.1137 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.00524196 0.00262098 0.01 0.9864 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.73027329 0.18256832 0.95 0.4320 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 2.15303639 0.53825910 2.81 0.0246 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 4 1.73125185 0.43281296 2.26 0.0609 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 1.79667673 1.79667673 9.39 0.0023 mem quadratic 1 1.46643409 1.46643409 7.66 0.0058 feedback linear 1 2.28893352 2.28893352 11.96 0.0006 feedback quadratic 1 25.30851554 25.30851554 132.27 0.0001 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORY N Mean SD A 450 0.63111111 0.48304077 B 450 0.59555556 0.49133043 Level of ...... FEEDID..... DELAY N Mean SD L 459 0.61655773 0.48675505 N 441 0.60997732 0.48830900 Level of MEM N Mean SD hig 300 0.58666667 0.49325439 low 300 0,.55666667 0.49760855 uns 300 0.69666667 0.46046605 Level of FEEDBACKN Mean SD 1 300 0.67000000 0.47099837 2 300 0.37666667 0.48535980 3 300 0.79333333 0.40559081 Level of Level of ______1■rrr\1ttU1U ffl- ~ ~------_...... STORY DELAY N Mean SD AL 234 0.65811966 0.47535653 AN 216 0.60185185 0.49065338 BL 225 0.57333333 0.49569576 B N 225 0.61777778 0.48701390 Level of Level of STORY MEM N Mean SD A hig 150 0.56000000 0.49804989 A low 150 0.58000000 0.49521197 A uns 150 0.75333333 0.43251515 B hig 150 0.61333333 0.48861765 B low 150 0.53333333 0.50055897 B uns 150 0.64000000 0.48160804 Level of Level of ______1zccnin...... fcfcU 1 L> ------STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 150 0.67333333 0.47056537 A 2 150 0.40666667 0.49285726 A 3 150 0.81333333 0.39094905 B 1 150 0.66666667 0.47298377 B 2 150 0.34666667 0.47750283 B 3 150 0.77333333 0.42007776 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID DELAY MEM N Mean SD L hig 153 0.60784314 0.48983475 L lou 153 0.56209150 0.49775900 L uns 153 0.67973856 0.46810923 N hig 147 0.56462585 0.49750098 N lou 147 0.55102041 0.49909059 N uns 147 0.71428571 0.45329841 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID DELAY FEEDBACKN Mean SD L 1 153 0.66666667 0.47295265 L 2 153 0.40522876 0.49254853 L 3 153 0.77777778 0.41710503 N 1 147 0.67346939 0.47054712 N 2 147 0.34693878 0.47762341 N 3 147 0.80952381 0.39401921 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID' MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 100 0.68000000 0.46882617 hig 2 100 0.37000000 0.48523659 hig 3 100 0.71000000 0.45604802 lou 1 100 0.62000000 0.48783173 lou 2 100 0.30000000 0.46056619 lou 3 100 0.75000000 0.43519414 uns 1 100 0.71000000 0.45604802 uns 2 100 0.46000000 0.50090827 uns 3 100 0.92000000 0.27265992 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORY DELAY MEM N Mean SD A L hig 78 0.56410256 0.49908341 A L lou 78 0.62820513 0.48641211 A L uns 78 0.78205128 0.41552458 A N hig 72 0.55555556 0.50039108 A N lou 72 0.52777778 0.50273119 A N uns 72 0.72222222 0.45104643 B L hig 75 0.65333333 0.47911330 B L lou 75 0.49333333 0.50332230 B L uns 75 0.57333333 0.49792362 B N hig 75 0.57333333 0.49792362 B N lou 75 0.57333333 0.49792362 B N uns 75 0.70666667 0.45835586 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L 1 78 0.69230769 0.46452580 AL 2 78 0.46153846 0.50174521 A L 3 78 0.82051282 0.38624364 A N 1 72 0.65277778 0.47942813 AN 2 72 0.34722222 0.47942813 A N 3 72 0.80555556 0.39854980 B L 1 75 0.64000000 0.48323236 BL 2 75 0.34666667 0.47911330 BL 3 75 0.73333333 0.44519456 BN 1 75 0.69333333 0.46421492 BN 2 75 0.34666667 0.47911330 BN 3 75 0.81333333 0.39226760 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID DELAYMEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 51 0.72549020 0.45070750 hig 2 51 0.43137255 0.50019604 hig 3 51 0.66666667 0.47609523 low 1 51 0.62745098 0.48829435 low 2 51 0.31372549 0.46862335 low 3 51 0.74509804 0.44014258 uns 1 51 0.64705882 0.48263980 uns 2 51 0.47058824 0.50410083 uns 3 51 0.92156863 0.27152438 N hig 1 49 0.63265306 0.48707792 N hig 2 49 0.30612245 0.46565731 N hig 3 49 0.75510204 0.43448304 N low 1 49 0.61224490 0.49228746 N low 2 49 0.28571429 0.45643546 N low 3 49 0.75510204 0.43448304 N uns 1 49 0.77551020 0.42156979 N uns 2 49 0.44897959 0.50254455 N uns 3 49 0.91836735 0.27664167 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORY HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A hig 1 50 0.62000000 0.49031435 A hig 2 50 0.34000000 0.47851812 A hig 3 50 0.72000000 0.45355737 A low 1 50 0.56000000 0.50142654 A low 2 50 0.38000000 0.49031435 A low 3 50 0.80000000 0.40406102 A uns 1 50 0.84000000 0.37032804 A uns 2 50 0.50000000 0.50507627 A uns 3 50 0.92000000 0.27404752 B hig 1 50 0.74000000 0.44308750 B hig 2 50 0.40000000 0.49487166 B hig 3 50 0.70000000 0.46291005 B low 1 50 0.68000000 0.47121207 B low 2 50 0.22000000 0.41845196 B low 3 50 0.70000000 0.46291005 B uns 1 50 0.58000000 0.49856938 B uns 2 50 0.42000000 0.49856938 B uns 3 50 0.92000000 0.27404752 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORYDELAY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L hig 1 26 0.61538462 0.49613894 A L hig 2 26 0.34615385 0.48516452 A L hig 3 26 0.73076923 0.45234432 A L low 1 26 0.65384615 0.48516452 A L low 2 26 0.42307692 0.50383147 A L low 3 26 0.80769231 0.40191848 A L uns 1 26 0.80769231 0.40191848 A L uns 2 26 0.61538462 0.49613894 A L uns 3 26 0.92307692 0.27174649 A N hig 1 24 0.62500000 0.49453536 A N hig 2 24 0.33333333 0.48154341 A N hig 3 24 0.70833333 0.46430562 A N low 1 24 0.45833333 0.50897738 A N low 2 24 0.33333333 0.48154341 AN low 3 24 0.79166667 0.41485112 A N uns 1 24 0.87500000 0.33783196 A N uns 2 24 0.37500000 0.49453536 A N uns 3 24 0.91666667 0.28232985 BL hig 1 25 0.84000000 0.37416574 B L hig 2 25 0.52000000 0.50990195 B L hig 3 25 0.60000000 0.50000000 B L low 1 25 0.60000000 0.50000000 B L low 2 25 0.20000000 0.40824829 BL low 3 25 0.68000000 0.47609523 B L uns 1 25 0.48000000 0.50990195 B L uns 2 25 0.32000000 0.47609523 B L uns 3 25 0.92000000 0.27688746 B N hig 1 25 0.64000000 0.48989795 B N hig 2 25 0.28000000 0.45825757 B N hig 3 25 0.80000000 0.40824829 B N low 1 25 0.76000000 0.43588989 B N low 2 25 0.24000000 0.43588989 B N low 3 25 0.72000000 0.45825757 B N uns 1 25 0.68000000 0.47609523 B N uns 2 25 0.52000000 0.50990195 BN uns 3 25 0.92000000 0.27688746 218 Analysis 9. The yielding analysis including source memory as a covariate, Study 2. The means are adjusted for the covariate. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sun of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 120 38.88183353 0.32401528 2.61 0.0001 Error 479 59.49149980 0.12419937 Corrected Total 599 98.37333333 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.395248 170.5255 0.3524193 0.2066667 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY*DELAY) 96 18.02456718 0.18775591 1.51 0.0029 FEEDID 1 1.28121388 1.28121388 10.32 0.0014 STORY 1 0.10858993 0.10858993 0.87 0.3502 DELAY 1 0.01366391 0.01366391 0.11 0.7403 MEM 2 7.77757797 3.88878898 31.31 0.0001 FEEDBACK 1 1.51735171 1.51735171 12.22 0.0005 STORY*DELAY 1 0.00064809 0.00064809 0.01 0.9424 STORY*MEM 2 0.44152713 0.22076356 1.78 0.1702 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.26039493 0.26039493 2.10 0.1483 DELAY*MEM 2 0.43612785 0.21806393 1.76 0.1739 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.03247105 0.03247105 0.26 0.6094 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 1.69036450 0.84518225 6.81 0.0012 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.19467444 0.09733722 0.78 0.4573 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.20394008 0.20394008 1.64 0.2007 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.57066644 0.28533322 2.30 0.1016 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.17185847 0.08592923 0.69 0.5011 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.25359103 0.12679551 1.02 0.3611 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 7.11414057 7.11414057 57.28 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.74472494 0.74472494 6.00 0.0147 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY YIELD LSMEAN A 0.22007951 B 0.19310453 219 DELAY YIELD LSMEAN L 0.21136669 N 0.20181734 MEM YIELD LSMEAN hig 0.09649146 low 0.15642681 uns 0.36685779 FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 2 0.14890836 3 0.26427568 STORY DELAY YIELD LSMEAN A L 0.22381189 A N 0.21634712 B L 0.19892149 B N 0.18728757 STORY MEM YIELD LSMEAN A hig 0.10863657 A low 0.13733095 A uns 0.41427099 B hig 0.08434634 B low 0.17552266 B uns 0.31944459 STORY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 2 0.14155351 A 3 0.29860550 B 2 0.15626321 B 3 0.22994586 YIELD LSMEAN LSMEAN YIELD LSMEAN LSMEAN 0.06347151 0.18853449 0.41942968 0.08612741 0.40911231 0.06310453 0.17800629 0.28323553 0.06328802 0.18327039 0.38754167 0.12969490 0.12958322 0.34617392 low low 0.17303903 MEM hig uns higuns 0.15380163 unshig 0.35565366 0.10558816 low MEM hig uns L L low L N N N LLL hig low N N N uns L LL low uns DELAY N hig N N low low 2 0.16479798 low low 3 0.14805563 hig 2 hig 3 0.03671490 0.15626802 MEM FEEDBACK YIELD uns 2 uns 3 0.24521220 0.48850338 L L L 2 3 0.14631023 0.27642316 DELAY FEEDBACK N YIELD N 2 3 0.15150649 0.25212820 STORYDELAY <<<<< STORY DELAY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A L 2 0.15635725 A L 3 0.29126654 A N 2 0.12674977 A N 3 0.30594446 B L 2 0.13626321 B L 3 0.26157978 BN 2 0.17626321 B N 3 0.19831194 DELAY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN L hig 2 0.03886600 L hig 3 0.08771004 L low 2 0.17088188 L low 3 0.19565890 DELAY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN L uns 2 0.22918280 L uns 3 0.54590053 N hig 2 0.03456379 N hig 3 0.22482600 N low 2 0.15871408 N low 3 0.10045236 N uns 2 0.26124159 N uns 3 0.43110624 STORY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A hig 2 0.03045626 A hig 3 0.18681689 A low 2 0.14426980 A low 3 0.13039211 A uns 2 0.24993449 A uns 3 0.57860750 B hig 2 0.04297354 B hig 3 0.12571915 B low 2 0.18532617 B low 3 0.16571915 B uns 2 0.24048991 B uns 3 0.39839927 STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A L hig 2 0.02966022 A L hig 3 0.09728280 AL low 2 0.17395397 A L low 3 0.20311501 AL uns 2 0.26545757 AL uns 3 0.57340179 A N hig 2 0.03125229 AN hig 3 0.27635097 A N low 2 0.11458562 A N low 3 0.05766920 AN uns 2 0.23441140 A N uns 3 0.58381321 B L hig 2 0.04807178 B L hig 3 0.07813728 BL low 2 0.16780979 BL low 3 0.18820278 BL uns 2 0.19290804 STORY DELAYMEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN BL uns 3 0.51839927 B N hig 2 0.03787529 B N hig 3 0.17330102 BN low 2 0.20284254 B N low 3 0.14323553 B N uns 2 0.28807178 B N uns 3 0.27839927 223 Analysis 10. The change analysis including source memory as a covariate. Study 2. The means are adjusted for the covariate. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 132 57.90776607 0.43869520 2.45 0.0001 Error 767 137.20778948 0.17888890 Corrected Total 899 195.11555556 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0. 296787 133.0970 0.4229526 0.3177778 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY*DELAY) 96 30.55494157 0.31828064 1.78 0.0001 FEEDID 1 0.03850682 0.03850682 0.22 0.6428 STORY 1 0.00865931 0.00865931 0.05 0.8259 DELAY 1 0.15297753 0.15297753 0.86 0.3554 MEM 2 16.06164679 8.03082339 44.89 0.0001 FEEDBACK 2 4.32581859 2.16290930 12.09 0.0001 STORY*DELAY 1 0.26280190 0.26280190 1.47 0.2259 ST0RY*MEM 2 0.79806323 0.39903161 2.23 0.1082 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.02061739 0.01030869 0.06 0.9440 DELAY*MEM 2 0.40710482 0.20355241 1.14 0.3210 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.36216645 0.18108322 1.01 0.3639 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 2.13040301 0.53260075 2.98 0.0186 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.00160340 0.00080170 0.00 0.9955 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.37949664 0.18974832 1.06 0.3467 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.64215799 0.16053950 0.90 0.4649 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.35651957 0.08912989 0.50 0.7371 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 4 0.67983492 0.16995873 0.95 0.4343 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 15.56065865 15.56065865 86.99 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.56378524 0.56378524 3.15 0.0762 feedback linear 1 4.32547896 4.32547896 24.18 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 0.01372044 0.01372044 0.08 0.7819 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY CHANGE LSMEAN A 0.32149463 B 0.31526778 CHANGE LSMEAN LSMEAN CHANGE LSMEAN CHANGE LSMEAN CHANGE 0.24401401 0.30911756 0.41135233 0.22753000 0.31568331 0.40259001 LSMEAN CHANGE 0.29132327 0.35166599 0.31935250 0.31118306 LSMEAN CHANGE 0.20000000 0.23870499 0.50709834 0.14817236 0.32688517 0.48942638 0.23577201 0.31240044 0.40697117 .49826236 0.33142453 0.30533788 0.28279508 0.17408618 1 1 2 3 2 3 I OH I MEM hig uns L N DELAY 1 FEEDBACK 2 3 B B low uns B hig A A A hig low uns B B L STORY N MEM STORY DELAY A A L N STORY FEEDBACK < < < CO 00 00 03G3U3U3OT03>2»2»J>J»I» STORY 3 N 2 1 N N CHANGE FEEDBACK DELAY 3 2 1 L L L n 3 0.63467469 0.50584438 3 uns 2 uns i 3 0.29335604 3 CHANGE hig FEEDBACK MEM n 1 0.35426800 1 uns i 2 0.10653972 0.12236278 2 hig 1 hig o 3 0.29288278 0.32481721 0.23068524 3 low 2 low 1 low N N N CHANGE MEM DELAY low L L L N N N o 0.25139082 low uns L low L N N N EA E CHANGE MEM DELAY hig L uns L L L i 0.21670861 uns hig uns i 0.13146375 hig low n 0.48151084 0.22601916 uns hig n 0.53268583 uns i 0.20739805 hig i 0.08894666 hig o 0.22601916 low o 0.30793305 low 0.49163674 0.28592822 0.50488797 0.27966194 0.41873012 0.30152114 0.27402231 0.39521222 0.32327973 0.19752170 0.17398084 0.50176265 0.34583729 0.47709011 LSMEAN LSMEAN LSMEAN LSMEAN STORYDELAY FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A L 1 0.16794507 A L 2 0.33087614 A L 3 0.37514860 A N 1 0.32008295 A N 2 0.28735897 A N 3 0.44755606 B L 1 0.22709834 B L 2 0.31568331 B L 3 0.41527584 B N 1 0.22796167 B N 2 0.31568331 B N 3 0.38990418 DELAY MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.08108196 hig 2 0.09554363 hig 3 0.21776566 low 1 0.21560460 low 2 0.34742237 low 3 0.27595884 uns 1 0.29587854 uns 2 0.52687319 uns 3 0.69191217 N hig 1 0.16364360 N hig 2 0.11753581 N hig 3 0.36894642 N low 1 0.24576589 N low 2 0.30221206 N low 3 0.30980673 N uns 1 0.41265746 N uns 2 0.48481556 N uns 3 0.57743721 227 STORY MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 1 0.10267513 A hig 2 0.09653279 A hig 3 0.24530915 A low 1 0.26029131 A low 2 0.37600154 A low 3 0.34436265 A uns 1 0.36907559 A uns 2 0.45481835 A uns 3 0.64438519 B hig 1 0.14205043 B hig 2 0.11654665 B hig 3 0.34140292 B low 1 0.20107917 B low 2 0.27363289 B low 3 0.24140292 B uns 1 0.33946041 B uns 2 0.55687040 B uns 3 0.62496419 STORY DELAY HEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A L hig 1 0.03849474 AL hig 2 0.07259809 A L hig 3 0.15574716 A L low 1 0.23142503 A L low 2 0.38153560 A L low 3 0.31083851 A L uns 1 0.23391543 AL uns 2 0.53849474 A L uns 3 0.65886015 A N hig 1 0.16685552 A N hig 2 0.12046748 A N hig 3 0.33487115 A N low 1 0.28915759 AN tow 2 0.37046748 AN low 3 0.37788678 A N uns 1 0.50423575 A N uns 2 0.37114196 AN uns 3 0.62991023 B L hig 1 0.12366918 B L hig 2 0.11848916 B L hig 3 0.27978417 B L low 1 0.19978417 B L low 2 0.31330914 B L low 3 0.24107917 B L uns 1 0.35784166 B L uns 2 0.. 51525165 BL uns 3 0.72496419 B N hig 1 0.16043167 B N hig 2 0.11460414 B N hig 3 0.40302168 B N low 1 0.20237418 B N low 2 0.23395664 B N low 3 0.24172667 B N uns 1 0.32107917 BN uns 2 0.59848916 B N uns 3 0.52496419 229 Analysis 11. The yield analysis controlling for failure to encode. Study 2. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 109 10.33748779 0.09483934 1.16 0.1930 Error 172 14.07740583 0.08184538 Corrected Total 281 24.41489362 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.423409 298.8013 0.2860863 0.0957447 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY*DELAY) 94 8.51815851 0.09061871 1.11 0.2807 STORY 1 0.06267148 0.06267148 0.77 0.3828 DELAY 1 0.00308752 0.00308752 0.04 0.8462 MEM 1 0.17831257 0.17831257 2.18 0.1418 FEEDBACK 1 0.26856428 0.26856428 3.28 0.0718 STORY*DELAY 1 0.02077502 0.02077502 0.25 0.6150 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.00739709 0.00739709 0.09 0.7641 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.00850982 0.00850982 0.10 0.7475 DELAY*MEM 1 0.08092188 0.08092188 0.99 0.3215 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.03568387 0.03568387 0.44 0.5099 MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.37974745 0.37974745 4.64 0.0326 STORY*DELAY*MEM 1 0.00965085 0.00965085 0.12 0.7317 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.00775354 0.00775354 0.09 0.7586 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.24484595 0.24484595 2.99 0.0855 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.09313214 0.09313214 1.14 0.2876 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 1 0.05781626 0.05781626 0.71 0.4018 General Linear Models Procedure Level of YIELD...... STORY N Mean SD A 142 0.11267606 0.31731568 B 140 0.07857143 0.27003483 Level of YIELD...... DELAY N Mean SD L 154 0.09090909 0.28841773 N 128 0.10156250 0.30325904 Level of -YIELD- HEM Mean SD hig 163 0.06748466 0.25163255 low 119 0.13445378 0.34258167 Level of -YIELD- FEEDBACK Mean SD 152 0.05921053 0.23679853 130 0.13846154 0.34671987 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORYDELAY N Mean SD AL 85 0.11764706 0.32410186 AN 57 0.10526316 0.30962019 BL 69 0.05797101 0.23540066 B N 71 0.09859155 0.30023465 Level of Level of STORYMEM N Mean SD A hig 83 0.08433735 0.27958241 A low 59 0.15254237 0.36263211 B hig 80 0.05000000 0.21932001 B low 60 0.11666667 0.32373177 Level of Level of STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 2 75 0.06666667 0.25112360 A 3 67 0.16417910 0.37323382 B 2 77 0.05194805 0.22337742 B 3 63 0.11111111 0.31679398 Level of Level of DELAY MEM N Mean SD L hig 86 0.04651163 0.21182550 L low 68 0.14705882 0.35679778 N hig 77 0.09090909 0.28936492 N low 51 0.11764706 0.32539569 Level of Level of DELAYFEEDBACK N Mean SD L 2 83 0.06024096 0.23937916 L 3 71 0.12676056 0.33507259 N 2 69 0.05797101 0.23540066 N 3 59 0.15254237 0.36263211 Level of Level of ...... YIELD..... MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 2 8 7 0. 00000000 0.00000000 hig 3 76 0. 14473684 0.35417312 low 2 65 0. 13846154 0.34807161 low 3 54 0. 12962963 0.33904952 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAY MEM N Mean SD A L hig 47 0.06382979 0.24709225 A L low 38 0.18421053 0.39285945 A hig 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 A low 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 B L hig 39 0.02564103 0.16012815 B L low 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 B hig 41 0.07317073 0.26365165 B low 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAY FEEDBACKN Mean SD AL 2 43 0.06976744 0.25776963 A L 3 42 0.16666667 0.37719547 A 2 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 A 3 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 B L 2 40 0.05000000 0.22072143 B L 3 29 0.06896552 0.25788071 B N 2 37 0.05405405 0.22924344 B N 3 34 0.14705882 0.35949063 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAY MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD L hig 2 45 0.00000000 0.00000000 L hig 3 41 0.09756098 0.30040623 L low 2 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 L low 3 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 N hig 2 42 0.00000000 0.00000000 N hig 3 35 0.20000000 0.40583972 N low 2 27 0.14814815 0.36201399 N low 3 24 0.08333333 0.28232985 232 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A hig 2 44 0.00000000 0.00000000 A hig 3 39 0.17948718 0.38877641 A low 2 31 0.16129032 0.37387825 A low 3 28 0.14285714 0.35634832 B hig 2 43 0.00000000 0.00000000 B hig 3 37 0.10810811 0.31480009 B low 2 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 B low 3 26 0.11538462 0.32581259 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L hig 2 24 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L hig 3 23 0.13043478 0.34435022 A L low 2 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 AL low 3 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 A N hig 2 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N hig 3 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 A N low 2 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 A N low 3 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 B L hig 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 B L hig 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 BL low 2 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 BL low 3 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 B N hig 2 22 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B N low 2 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 B N low 3 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 233 Analysis 12. The yield analysis controlling for failure to encode and memory for source. Study 2. The means are adjusted for the covariate. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 110 10.77553817 0.09795944 1.23 0.1137 Error 171 13.63935544 0.07976231 Corrected Total 281 24.41489362 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.441351 294.9743 0.2824222 0.0957447 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY*DELAY) 94 8.19156460 0.08714430 1.09 0.3064 FEEDID 1 0.43805038 0.43805038 5.49 0.0203 STORY 1 0.02871130 0.02871130 0.36 0.5493 DELAY 1 0.00033498 0.00033498 0.00 0.9484 MEM 1 0.26487275 0.26487275 3.32 0.0702 FEEDBACK 1 0.01834807 0.01834807 0.23 0.6321 STORY*DELAY 1 0.02227636 0.02227636 0.28 0.5979 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.03298892 0.03298892 0.41 0.5210 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.00001432 0.00001432 0.00 0.9893 DELAY*MEM 1 0.10366644 0.10366644 1.30 0.2559 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.07858703 0.07858703 0.99 0.3223 MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.45770247 0.45770247 5.74 0.0177 STORY*DELAY*MEM 1 0.01288269 0.01288269 0.16 0.6883 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.00148213 0.00148213 0.02 0.8917 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.24582538 0.24582538 3.08 0.0810 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.11893115 0.11893115 1.49 0.2237 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 1 0.09379045 0.09379045 1.18 0.2797 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY YIELD LSMEAN A 0.10754790 B 0.08438725 DELAY YIELD LSMEAN L 0.09722249 N 0.09471266 HEM YIELD LSMEAN hig 0.06136415 low 0.13057101 FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 2 .08557949 3 .10635566 STORY DELAY YIELD LSMEAN A L 0.11893833 A N 0.09615747 B L 0.07550664 B N 0.09326786 STORY MEM YIELD LSMEAN A hig 0.08515531 A low 0.12994049 B hig 0.03757298 B low 0.13120152 STORY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 2 0.09690324 A 3 0.11819256 B 2 0.07425574 B 3 0.09451876 DELAY MEM YIELD LSMEAN L hig 0.04116910 L low 0.15327587 N hig 0.08155919 N low 0.10786614 235 DELAY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN L 2 0.06780248 L 3 0.12664249 N 2 0.10335650 N 3 0.08606882 MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 0.00542234 hig 3 0.11730595 low 2 0.16573665 tow 3 0.09540536 STORY DELAY MEM YIELD LSMEAN A L hig 0.06754468 A L low 0.17033199 A N hig 0.10276593 A N low 0.08954900 BL hig 0.01479352 BL low 0.13621976 B N hig 0.06035244 B N low 0.12618328 STORY DELAY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A L 2 0.08666699 A L 3 0.15120968 A N 2 0.10713950 A N 3 0.08517543 B L 2 0.04893798 B L 3 0.10207530 B N 2 0.09957351 B N 3 0.08696222 DELAY HEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN L hig 2 -0.00057214 L hig 3 0.08291035 L low 2 0.13617711 L low 3 0.17037464 N hig 2 0.01141681 N hig 3 0.15170156 N low 2 0.19529619 N low 3 0.02043608 STORYHEMFEEDBACKYIELD LSMEAN A hig 2 0.00579890 A hig 3 0.16451172 A low 2 0.18800759 A low 3 0.07187340 B hig 2 0.00504577 B hig 3 0.07010019 B low 2 0.14346571 B low 3 0.11893733 STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A L hig 2 0.02042732 AL hig 3 0.11466204 A L low 2 0.15290666 AL low 3 0.18775732 A N hig 2 -0.00882952 A N hig 3 0.21436139 A N low 2 0.22310852 AN low 3 -0.04401053 BL hig 2 -0.02157160 B L hig 3 0.05115865 BL low 2 0.11944756 B L low 3 0.15299196 BN hig 2 0.03166315 B N hig 3 0.08904174 B N low 2 0.16748387 BN low 3 0.08488270 Analysis 13. The change analysis controlling for failure to encode. Study 2. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 119 17.16056442 0.14420642 1.27 0.0529 Error 310 35.18594721 0.11350306 Corrected Total 429 52.34651163 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.327826 237.4884 0.3369021 0.1418605 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY*DELAY) 96 12.40851173 0.12925533 1.14 0.2051 STORY 1 0.00002013 0.00002013 0.00 0.9894 DELAY 1 0.09551187 0.09551187 0.84 0.3597 MEM 1 1.31908113 1.31908113 11.62 0.0007 FEEDBACK 2 0.24995522 0.12497761 1.10 0.3338 ST0RY*DELAY 1 0.00125663 0.00125663 0.01 0.9163 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.00268480 0.00268480 0.02 0.8779 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.14423709 0.07211855 0.64 0.5304 DELAY*MEM 1 0.16007300 0.16007300 1.41 0.2359 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.04972736 0.02486368 0.22 0.8034 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 1.37037005 0.68518503 6.04 0.0027 STORY*DELAY*MEM 1 0.03132127 0.03132127 0.28 0.5997 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.04981533 0.02490767 0.22 0.8031 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.20992620 0.10496310 0.92 0.3977 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.09338455 0.04669228 0.41 0.6631 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.08932800 0.04466400 0.39 0.6750 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 0.12289788 0.12289788 1.08 0.2989 feedback quadratic 1 0.11211451 0.11211451 0.99 0.3211 General Linear Models Procedure Level of -CHANGE...... STORY N Mean SD A 218 0.14678899 0.35470993 B 212 0.13679245 0.34444143 Level of CHANGE...... DELAY N Mean SD L 232 0.12931034 0.33626861 N 198 0.15656566 0.36431191 Level of CHANGE...... MEM N Mean SD hig 250 0.08800000 0.28386319 low 180 0.21666667 0.41312273 Level of CHANGE...... FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 148 0. 10810811 0.31157129 2 152 0. 16447368 0.37193033 3 130 0. 15384615 0.36219697 Level of Level of ...... IvnnNut'UAurc-. STORYDELAY N Mean SD A L 124 0.12903226 0.33659563 A N 94 0.17021277 0.37783474 B L 108 0.12962963 0.33746146 B N 104 0.14423077 0.35302491 Level of Level of ...... I-NANufc'UAUCC. ______------_ STORY MEM N Mean SD A hig 126 0.07936508 0.27138680 A low 92 0.23913043 0.42888983 B hig 124 0.09677419 0.29684944 B low 83 0.19318182 0.39705683 Level of Level of STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 76 0.11842105 0.32525294 A 2 75 0.18666667 0.39226760 A 3 67 0.13432836 0.34357842 B 1 72 0.09722222 0.29833917 B 2 77 0.14285714 0.35222173 B 3 63 0.17460317 0.38267659 Level of Level of ...... 1'UAurc...... «HANuc ------DELAYMEMN Mean SD L hig 132 0.05303030 0.22494763 L low 100 0.23000000 0.42295258 N hig 118 0.12711864 0.33452633 N low 80 0.20000000 0.40252368 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- DELAY FEEDBACKN Mean SD L 1 78 0.07692308 0.26819409 L 2 83 0.18072289 0.38712758 L 3 71 0.12676056 0.33507259 N 1 70 0.14285714 0.35245369 N 2 69 0.14492754 0.35460675 N 3 59 0.18644068 0.39280496 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 87 0.06896552 0.25486446 hig 2 87 0.04597701 0.21064938 hig 3 76 0.15789474 0.36706517 low 1 61 0.16393443 0.37328844 low 2 65 0.32307692 0.47129119 low 3 54 0.14814815 0.35858250 Level of Level of Level. of ...... CHANGE...... STORY DELAY MEM N Mean SD AL hig 70 0.04285714 0.20399732 A L low 54 0.24074074 0.43154768 AN hig 56 0.12500000 0.33371191 A N low 38 0.23684211 0.43085148 B L hig 62 0.06451613 0.24767560 BL low 46 0.21739130 0.41702883 BN hig 62 0.12903226 0.33797230 B N low 42 0.16666667 0.37719547 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY DELAYFEEDBACK N Mean SD AL 1 39 0.05128205 0.22345587 AL 2 43 0.20930233 0.41162509 AL 3 42 0.11904762 0.32777007 AN 1 37 0.18918919 0.39706128 AN 2 32 0.15625000 0.36890203 A N 3 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 BL 1 39 0.10256410 0.30735474 BL 2 40 0.15000000 0.36162029 BL 3 29 0.13793103 0.35093120 BN 1 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 BN 2 37 0.13513514 0.34658350 B N 3 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 Level of Level of Level of DELAY MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD L hig 1 46 0.04347826 0.20618457 L hig 2 45 0.02222222 0.14907120 L hig 3 41 0.09756098 0.30040623 L low 1 32 0.12500000 0.33601075 L low 2 38 0.36842105 0.48885153 L low 3 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 N hig 1 41 0.09756098 0.30040623 N hig 2 42 0.07142857 0.26066118 N hig 3 35 0.22857143 0.42604296 N low 1 29 0.20689655 0.41225082 N low 2 27 0.25925926 0.44657608 N low 3 24 0.12500000 0.33783196 Level of Level of Level of LnANut STORY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A hig 1 43 0.06976744 0.25776963 A hig 2 44 0.04545455 0.21070705 A hig 3 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 A low 1 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 A low 2 31 0.38709677 0.49513765 A low 3 28 0.14285714 0.35634832 B hig 1 44 0.06818182 0.25497171 B hig 2 43 0.04651163 0.21308263 B hig 3 37 0.18918919 0.39706128 B low 1 28 0.14285714 0.35634832 B low 2 34 0.26470588 0.44781108 B low 3 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORYDELAY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L hig 1 23 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L hig 2 24 0.04166667 0.20412415 A L hig 3 23 0.08695652 0.28810407 A L low 1 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 A L low 2 19 0.42105263 0.50725727 A L low 3 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 A N hig 1 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 A N hig 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 A N hig 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 A N low 1 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 AN low 2 12 0.33333333 0.49236596 AN low 3 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 B L hig 1 23 0.08695652 0.28810407 B L hig 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 BL hig 3 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 BL low 1 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 BL low 2 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 BL low 3 11 0.18181818 0.40451992 B N hig 1 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 BN hig 2 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 BN hig 3 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 BN low 1 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 B N low 2 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 B N low 3 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 242 Analysis 14. The change analysis controlling for failure to encode and memory for source. Study 2. The means are adjusted for the covariate. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 120 17.65438541 0.14711988 1.31 0.0336 Error 309 34.69212622 0.11227225 Corrected Total 429 52.34651163 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.337260 236.1973 0.3350705 0.1418605 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STORY*DELAY) 96 12.58258945 0.13106864 1.17 0.1643 FEEDID 1 0.49382099 0.49382099 4.40 0.0368 STORY 1 0.00082033 0.00082033 0.01 0.9319 DELAY 1 0.10759781 0.10759781 0.96 0.3284 MEM 1 1.15553211 1.15553211 10.29 0.0015 FEEDBACK 2 0.14724688 0.07362344 0.66 0.5198 STORY*DELAY 1 0.00167840 0.00167840 0.01 0.9028 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.01452619 0.01452619 0.13 0.7193 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.13320003 0.06660001 0.59 0.5532 DELAY*MEM 1 0.13901405 0.13901405 1.24 0.2667 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.05150010 0.02575005 0.23 0.7952 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 1.23232699 0.61616350 5.49 0.0045 STORY*DELAY*MEM 1 0.04285726 0.04285726 0.38 0.5371 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.04760533 0.02380267 0.21 0.8091 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.19967316 0.09983658 0.89 0.4120 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.10515615 0.05257808 0.47 0.6265 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.11541591 0.05770796 0.51 0.5986 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 0.14602075 0.14602075 1.30 0.2550 feedback quadratic 1 0.00004744 0.00004744 0.00 0.9836 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY CHANGE LSMEAN A 0.16595279 B 0.16289494 DELAY CHANGE LSMEAN L 0.14690668 N 0.18194106 MEM CHANGE LSMEAN hig 0.10792005 low 0.22092768 FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 0.13904948 2 0.16496879 3 0.18925334 STORY DELAY CHANGE LSMEAN A L 0.15062268 A N 0.18128290 B L 0.14319067 B N 0.18259921 STORY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 0.10311302 A low 0.22879256 B hig 0.11272709 B low 0.21306280 STORY FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 0.12499539 A 2 0.19228634 A 3 0.18057663 B 1 0.15310357 B 2 0.13765123 B 3 0.19793004 244 DELAY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN L hig 0.07088267 L lou 0.22293069 N hig 0.14495744 N low 0.21892467 DELAY FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 0.11290601 0.16366100 0.16415302 0.16519294 0.16627657 0.21435365 MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.09779099 hig 2 0.03149392 hig 3 0.19447525 low 1 0.18030796 low 2 0.29844366 low 3 0.18403142 STORY DELAY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A L hig 0.05742222 A L low 0.24382314 A N hig 0.14880381 A N low 0.21376198 B L hig 0.08434311 B L low 0.20203824 B N hig 0.14111106 B N low 0.22408736 STORYDELAYFEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A L 1 0.08563815 A L 2 0.20330660 AL 3 0.16292329 A N 1 0.16435262 A N 2 0.18126609 A N 3 0.19822998 B L 1 0.14017386 B L 2 0.12401541 B L 3 0.16538275 B N 1 0.16603327 B N 2 0.15128705 B N 3 0.23047732 DELAY MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.08441326 hig 2 -0.00219287 hig 3 0.13042761 low 1 0.14139876 low 2 0.32951487 low 3 0.19787842 N hig 1 0.11116872 N hig 2 0.06518070 N hig 3 0.25852289 N low 1 0.21921716 N low 2 0.26737244 N low 3 0.17018441 STORY MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 1 0.09794191 A hig 2 0.03363700 A hig 3 0.17776014 A low 1 0.15204886 A low 2 0.35093568 A low 3 0.18339313 B hig 1 0.09764007 B hig 2 0.02935083 B hig 3 0.21119036 B low 1 0.20856706 B low 2 0.24595163 B low 3 0.18466971 246 STORYDELAY MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A L hig 1 0.03623541 A L hig 2 0.01541982 A L hig 3 0.12061143 A L low 1 0.13504090 A L low 2 0.39119337 A L low 3 0.20523514 A N hig 1 0.15964841 A N hig 2 0.05185419 A N hig 3 0.23490885 A N low 1 0.16905683 A N low 2 0.31067799 A N low 3 0.16155112 B L hig 1 0.13259111 B L hig 2 -0.01980556 B L hig 3 0.14024379 B L low 1 0.14775662 B L low 2 0.26783638 B L low 3 0.19052171 B N hig 1 0.06268904 B N hig 2 0.07850722 B N hig 3 0.28213693 B N low 1 0.26937750 B N low 2 0.22406689 B N low 3 0.17881771 Analysis 15. The overall yielding analysis, Study 3. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 194 68.86701207 0.35498460 2.59 0.0001 Error 735 100.66094492 0.13695367 Corrected Total 929 169.52795699 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.406228 154.3352 0.3700725 0.2397849 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STOR*DELAY*RECAL) 147 37.39508419 0.25438833 1.86 0.0001 STORY 1 0.29235654 0.29235654 2.13 0.1444 DELAY 1 0.00977969 0.00977969 0.07 0.7894 RECALPOS 1 0.01391800 0.01391800 0.10 0.7500 STORY*DELAY 1 0.05706745 0.05706745 0.42 0.5188 ST0RY*RECALP0S 1 0.00459189 0.00459189 0.03 0.8548 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.22011774 0.22011774 1.61 0.2053 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.03351625 0.03351625 0.24 0.6210 MEM 2 17.12591061 8.56295530 62.52 0.0001 STORY*MEM 2 0.48235618 0.24117809 1.76 0.1726 DELAY*MEM 2 0.29081439 0.14540719 1.06 0.3464 MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.33784552 0.16892276 1.23 0.2919 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.09620771 0.04810386 0.35 0.7039 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.23842934 0.11921467 0.87 0.4192 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.18702247 0.09351123 0.68 0.5055 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 2 0.02882528 0.01441264 0.11 0.9001 FEEDBACK 1 8.77503343 8.77503343 64.07 0.0001 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.00002534 0.00002534 0.00 0.9892 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.01836426 0.01836426 0.13 0.7143 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 1 0.00031723 0.00031723 0.00 0.9616 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.02289118 0.02289118 0.17 0.6828 ST0RY*FEEDBA*RECALP0 1 0.00836626 0.00836626 0.06 0.8049 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 1 0.10901765 0.10901765 0.80 0.3726 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 1 0.06931959 0.06931959 0.51 0.4770 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 1.51606145 0.75803073 5.53 0.0041 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.12078338 0.06039169 0.44 0.6436 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.30064846 0.15032423 1.10 0.3342 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 2 0.26769547 0.13384774 0.98 0.3768 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.17783512 0.08891756 0.65 0.5227 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.04409215 0.02204608 0.16 0.8513 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.03066768 0.01533384 0.11 0.8941 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 2 0.18418567 0.09209283 0.67 0.5108 248 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 16.60648326 16.60648326 121.26 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.51942735 0.51942735 3.79 0.0519 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... YIELD.... STORY N Mean SD A 450 0.25777778 0.43789784 B 480 0.22291667 0.41663709 Level of -YIELD- DELAY Mean SD L 468 0.24358974 0.42970726 N 462 0.23593074 0.42503936 Level of -YIELD- RECALPOS Mean SD F 468 0.23504274 0.42447927 S 462 0.24458874 0.43030905 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAY N Mean SD AL 234 0.25213675 0.43517019 AN 216 0.26388889 0.44176356 BL 234 0.23504274 0.42493448 BN 246 0.21138211 0.40912116 Level of Level of STORY RECALPOS N Mean SD A F 210 0.25714286 0.43810316 A S 240 0.25833333 0.43863297 BF 258 0.21705426 0.41304111 BS 222 0.22972973 0.42160963 Level of Level of DELAY RECALPOS N Mean SD L F 228 0.25438596 0.43647373 L S 240 0.23333333 0.42383650 N F 240 0.21666667 0.41283454 N S 222 0.25675676 0.43783127 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAY RECALPOS N Mean SD A L F 102 0.27450980 0.44847073 A L S 132 0.23484848 0.42551896 A NF 108 0.24074074 0.42952637 A NS 108 0.28703704 0.45448802 B L F 126 0.23809524 0.42761799 B LS 108 0.23148148 0.42374568 B N F 132 0.19696970 0.39922432 B NS 114 0.22807018 0.42144059 Level of ...... YIELD..... HEM N Mean SD hig 310 0.09354839 0.29167021 low 310 0.20322581 0.40304976 uns 310 0.42258065 0.49476854 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY MEM N Mean SD A hig 150 0.08000000 0.27220206 A low 150 0.24000000 0.42851390 A uns 150 0.45333333 0.49948519 B hig 160 0.10625000 0.30912486 B low 160 0.16875000 0.37570688 B uns 160 0.39375000 0.49011454 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-' DELAY MEM N Mean SD L hig 156 0.09615385 0.29575156 L low 156 0.18589744 0.39027678 L uns 156 0.44871795 0.49896502 N hig 154 0.09090909 0.28841773 N low 154 0.22077922 0.41612519 N uns 154 0.39610390 0.49068221 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-- HEM RECALPOS N Mean SD hig F 156 0.07051282 0.25683381 hig S 154 0.11688312 0.32232919 low F 156 0.19230769 0.39538278 low S 154 0.21428571 0.41166465 uns F 156 0.44230769 0.49826000 uns S 154 0.40259740 0.49202105 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORYDELAYHEMN Mean SD AL hig 78 0.08974359 0.28766401 AL low 78 0.20512821 0.40640886 A L uns 78 0.46153846 0.50174521 AN hig 72 0.06944444 0.25599235 AN low 72 0.27777778 0.45104643 A N uns 72 0.44444444 0.50039108 BL hig 78 0.10256410 0.30535241 B L low 78 0.16666667 0.37509018 B L uns 78 0.43589744 0.49908341 BN hig 82 0.10975610 0.31450912 BN low 82 0.17073171 0.37858991 B N uns 82 0.35365854 0.48104699 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY HEM RECALPOSN Mean SD A hig F 70 0.05714286 0.23379133 A hig S 80 0.10000000 0.30189276 A low F 70 0.25714286 0.44021452 A low S 80 0.22500000 0.42021694 A uns F 70 0.45714286 0.50175675 A uns S 80 0.45000000 0.50063251 B hig F 86 0.08139535 0.27504508 B hig S 74 0.13513514 0.34420145 B low F 86 0.13953488 0.34853612 B low S 74 0.20270270 0.40475698 B uns F 86 0.43023256 0.49801247 B uns S 74 0.35135135 0.48065117 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAYHEMRECALPOSN Mean SD hig F 76 0.07894737 0.27144836 hig S 80 0.11250000 0.31797420 low F 76 0.21052632 0.41039134 low S 80 0.16250000 0.37123639 uns F 76 0.47368421 0.50262469 uns S 80 0.42500000 0.49746191 N hig F 80 0.06250000 0.24358868 N hig S 74 0.12162162 0.32907936 N low F 80 0.17500000 0.38236440 N low S 74 0.27027027 0.44713080 N uns F 80 0.41250000 0.49539014 N uns S 74 0.37837838 0.48829316 251 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORYDELAY MEMRECALPOS N Mean SD A L hig F 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 AL hig S 44 0.09090909 0.29080336 A L low F 34 0.26470588 0.44781108 A L low S 44 0.15909091 0.36998943 A L uns F 34 0.47058824 0.50664040 AL uns S 44 0.45454545 0.50368620 AN hig F 36 0.02777778 0.16666667 AN hig S 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 A N low F 36 0.25000000 0.43915503 AN low S 36 0.30555556 0.46717659 A N uns F 36 0.44444444 0.50395263 A N uns S 36 0.44444444 0.50395263 BL hig F 42 0.07142857 0.26066118 B L hig S 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B L low F 42 0.16666667 0.37719547 B L low S 36 0.16666667 0.37796447 B L uns F 42 0.47619048 0.50548674 BL uns S 36 0.38888889 0.49441323 B N hig F 44 0.09090909 0.29080336 B N hig S 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 B N low F 44 0.11363636 0.32103822 B N low S 38 0.23684211 0.43085148 BN uns F 44 0.38636364 0.49254484 BN uns S 38 0.31578947 0.47106912 Level of — YIELD- FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 465 0 14193548 0.34935981 3 465 0.33763441 0.47341250 Level of Level of YIELD...... STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 2 225 0 .16000000 0.36742346 A 3 225 0.35555556 0.47974861 B 2 240 0 .12500000 0.33141007 B 3 240 0.32083333 0.46777240 Level of Level of YIELD...... DELAYFEEDBACKN Mean SD L 2 234 0 .14957265 0.35741656 L 3 234 0.33760684 0.47390742 N 2 231 0 .13419913 0.34160635 N 3 231 0.33766234 0.47393972 Level of Level of ...... YIELD.... FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD 2 F 234 0 13675214 0.34432201 2 S 231 0 14718615 0.35506075 3 F 234 0.33333333 0.47241504 3 S 231 0.34199134 0.47540685 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL 2 117 0.15384615 0.36235305 AL 3 117 0.35042735 0.47915585 A 2 108 0.16666667 0.37441543 A 3 108 0.36111111 0.48256196 BL 2 117 0.14529915 0.35391791 B L 3 117 0.32478632 0.47030914 B 2 123 0.10569106 0.30869923 B 3 123 0.31707317 0.46723942 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD STORY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A 2 F 105 0.16190476 0.37013016 A 2 S 120 0.15833333 0.36658390 A 3 F 105 0.35238095 0.48000305 A 3 S 120 0.35833333 0.48152128 B 2 F 129 0.11627907 0.32180902 B 2 S 111 0.13513514 0.34341828 B 3 F 129 0.31782946 0.46744813 B 3 S 111 0.32432432 0.47024485 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD DELAYFEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD L 2 F 114 0.14912281 0.35778216 L 2 S 120 0.15000000 0.35856858 L 3 F 114 0.35964912 0.48201628 L 3 S 120 0.31666667 0.46712662 N 2 F 120 0.12500000 0.33210558 N 2 S 111 0.14414414 0.35282875 N 3 F 120 0.30833333 0.46374133 N 3 S 111 0.36936937 0.48482289 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAY FEEDBACKRECALPOS N Mean SD A L 2 F 51 0.17647059 0.38501337 A L 2 S 66 0.13636364 0.34580402 A L 3 F 51 0.37254902 0.48829435 A L 3 S 66 0.33333333 0.47501687 A N 2 F 54 0.14814815 0.35858250 A N 2 S 54 0.18518519 0.39209520 A N 3 F 54 0.33333333 0.47583095 A N 3 S 54 0.38888889 0.49207557 B L 2 F 63 0.12698413 0.33562957 B L 2 S 54 0.16666667 0.37617740 B L 3 F 63 0.34920635 0.48054842 B L 3 S 54 0.29629630 0.46091090 B N 2 F 66 0.10606061 0.31027471 B N 2 S 57 0.10526316 0.30962019 B N 3 F 66 0.28787879 0.45624391 B N 3 S 57 0.35087719 0.48148684 Level of Level of ■...... YIELD..... MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 2 155 0.03870968 0.19352744 hig 3 155 0.,14838710 0.35663558 low 2 155 0.,11612903 0.32141810 low 3 155 0.,29032258 0.45538256 uns 2 155 0. 27096774 0.44590019 uns 3 155 0. 57419355 0.49606748 Level, of Level of Level. of ...... YIELD- STORY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A hig 2 75 0.04000000 0.19727878 A hig 3 75 0.12000000 0.32714985 A low 2 75 0.14666667 0.35615565 A low 3 75 0.33333333 0.47457900 A uns 2 75 0.29333333 0.45835586 A uns 3 75 0.61333333 0.49026560 B hig 2 80 0.03750000 0.19118220 B hig 3 80 0.17500000 0.38236440 B low 2 80 0.08750000 0.28434913 B low 3 80 0.25000000 0.43574467 B uns 2 80 0.25000000 0.43574467 B uns 3 80 0.53750000 0.50173749 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAYMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD L hig 2 78 0.03846154 0.19355242 L hig 3 78 0.15384615 0.36313652 L low 2 78 0.12820513 0.33648197 L low 3 78 0.24358974 0.43202626 L uns 2 78 0.28205128 0.45291081 L uns 3 78 0.61538462 0.48965318 N hig 2 77 0.03896104 0.19477102 N hig 3 77 0.14285714 0.35222173 N low 2 77 0.10389610 0.30712656 N low 3 77 0.33766234 0.47601387 N uns 2 77 0.25974026 0.44136741 N uns 3 77 0.53246753 0.50221655 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD hig 2 F 78 0.03846154 0.19355242 hig 2 S 77 0.03896104 0.19477102 hig 3 F 78 0.10256410 0.30535241 hig 3 S 77 0.19480519 0.39864775 low 2 F 78 0.08974359 0.28766401 low 2 S 77 0.14285714 0.35222173 low 3 F 78 0.29487179 0.45893650 low 3 S 77 0.28571429 0.45471630 uns 2 F 78 0.28205128 0.45291081 uns 2 S 77 0.25974026 0.44136741 uns 3 F 78 0.60256410 0.49253502 uns 3 S 77 0.54545455 0.50119474 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAYMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL hig 2 39 0.02564103 0.16012815 A L hig 3 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 AL low 2 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 A L low 3 39 0.25641026 0.44235903 AL uns 2 39 0.28205128 0.45588075 A L uns 3 39 0.64102564 0.48597051 A N hig 2 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 A N hig 3 36 0.08333333 0.28030596 A N low 2 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 A N low 3 36 0.41666667 0.50000000 A N uns 2 36 0.30555556 0.46717659 A N uns 3 36 0.58333333 0.50000000 B L hig 2 39 0.05128205 0.22345587 B L hig 3 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 B L low 2 39 0.10256410 0.30735474 B L low 3 39 0.23076923 0.42683279 B L uns 2 39 0.28205128 0.45588075 B L uns 3 39 0.58974359 0.49831024 B N hig 2 41 0.02439024 0.15617376 B N hig 3 41 0.19512195 0.40121766 BN low 2 41 0.07317073 0.26365165 B N low 3 41 0.26829268 0.44857498 BN uns 2 41 0.21951220 0.41905818 B N uns 3 41 0.48780488 0.50606083 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORYMEM FEEDBACKRECALPOS N Mean SD A hig 2 F 35 0.05714286 0.23550411 A hig 2 S 40 0.02500000 0.15811388 A hig 3 F 35 0.05714286 0.23550411 A hig 3 S 40 0.17500000 0.38480764 A low 2 F 35 0.14285714 0.35503580 A low 2 S 40 0.15000000 0.36162029 A low 3 F 35 0.37142857 0.49024089 A low 3 S 40 0.30000000 0.46409548 A uns 2 F 35 0.28571429 0.45834925 A uns 2 S 40 0.30000000 0.46409548 A uns 3 F 35 0.62857143 0.49024089 A uns 3 S 40 0.60000000 0.49613894 B hig 2 F 43 0.02325581 0.15249857 B hig 2 S 37 0.05405405 0.22924344 B hig 3 F 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 B hig 3 S 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 B low 2 F 43 0.04651163 0.21308263 B low 2 S 37 0.13513514 0.34658350 B low 3 F 43 0.23255814 0.42746257 B low 3 S 37 0.27027027 0.45022517 B uns 2 F 43 0.27906977 0.45385027 B uns 2 S 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 B uns 3 F 43 0.58139535 0.49916874 B uns 3 S 37 0.48648649 0.50671171 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD hig 2 F 38 0.02631579 0.16222142 hig 2 S 40 0.05000000 0.22072143 hig 3 F 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 hig 3 S 40 0.17500000 0.38480764 low 2 F 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 low 2 S 40 0.12500000 0.33493206 low 3 F 38 0.28947368 0.45960587 low 3 S 40 0.20000000 0.40509575 uns 2 F 38 0.28947368 0.45960587 uns 2 S 40 0.27500000 0.45220259 uns 3 F 38 0.65789474 0.48078291 uns 3 S 40 0.57500000 0.50064062 N hig 2 F 40 0.05000000 0.22072143 N hig 2 S 37 0.02702703 0.16439899 N hig 3 F 40 0.07500000 0.26674678 N hig 3 S 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 N low 2 F 40 0.05000000 0.22072143 N low 2 S 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 N low 3 F 40 0.30000000 0.46409548 N low 3 S 37 0.37837838 0.49167239 N uns 2 F 40 0.27500000 0.45220259 N uns 2 S 37 0.24324324 0.43495884 N uns 3 F 40 0.55000000 0.50383147 N uns 3 S 37 0.51351351 0.50671171 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAYMEMFEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A L hig 2 F 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A L hig 2 S 22 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L hig 3 F 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A L hig 3 S 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 A L low 2 F 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 A L low 2 S 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 A L low 3 F 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 A L low 3 S 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 A L uns 2 F 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 A L uns 2 S 22 0.27272727 0.45584231 A L uns 3 F 17 0.64705882 0.49259218 A L uns 3 S 22 0.63636364 0.49236596 A N hig 2 F 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A N hig 2 S 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 AN hig 3 F 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N hig 3 S 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A N low 2 F 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A N low 2 S 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A N low 3 F 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 A N low 3 S 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 A N uns 2 F 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 A N uns 2 S 18 0.33333333 0.48507125 A N uns 3 F 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 A N uns 3 S 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD B L hig 2 F 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 B L hig 2 S 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B L hig 3 F 21 0.14285714 0.35856858 B L hig 3 S 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 B L low 2 F 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 B L low 2 S 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 BL low 3 F 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 B L low 3 S 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 B L uns 2 F 21 0.28571429 0.46291005 B L uns 2 S 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 BL uns 3 F 21 0.66666667 0.48304589 B L uns 3 S 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 B N hig 2 F 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 BN hig 2 S 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 F 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 B N hig 3 S 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 B N low 2 F 22 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N low 2 S 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B N low 3 F 22 0.22727273 0.42893203 B N low 3 S 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 B N uns 2 F 22 0.27272727 0.45584231 B N uns 2 S 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B N uns 3 F 22 0.50000000 0.51176632 B N uns 3 S 19 0.47368421 0.51298918 260 Analysis 16. The overall change analysis, Study 3. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 218 117.38728360 0.53847378 3.04 0.0001 Error 1176 208.52239382 0.17731496 Corrected Total 1394 325.90967742 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.360183 113.1826 0.4210878 0.3720430 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STOR*DELAY*RECAL) 147 51.63828863 0.35128088 1.98 0.0001 STORY 1 0.08520968 0.08520968 0.48 0.4883 DELAY 1 0.00003014 0.00003014 0.00 0.9896 RECALPOS 1 0.01228427 0.01228427 0.07 0.7924 STORY*DELAY 1 0.31919746 0.31919746 1.80 0.1800 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.00289266 0.00289266 0.02 0.8984 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.11653172 0.11653172 0.66 0.4177 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.39278354 0.39278354 2.22 0.1369 MEM 2 28.04613964 14.02306982 79.09 0.0001 STORY*MEM 2 0.66127425 0.33063712 1.86 0.1554 DELAY*MEM 2 1.06408233 0.53204117 3.00 0.0501 MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.05316724 0.02658362 0.15 0.8608 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.67185023 0.33592511 1.89 0.1509 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.19263522 0.09631761 0.54 0.5810 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.13053094 0.06526547 0.37 0.6921 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 2 0.15609535 0.07804768 0.44 0.6440 FEEDBACK 2 20.91668964 10.45834482 58.98 0.0001 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.16219258 0.08109629 0.46 0.6331 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.06448152 0.03224076 0.18 0.8338 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 2 0.62945487 0.31472744 1.77 0.1699 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.68170773 0.34085387 1.92 0.1467 STORY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.11861438 0.05930719 0.33 0.7158 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.93597398 0.46798699 2.64 0.0718 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 2 0.07177807 0.03588903 0.20 0.8168 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 6.36135564 1.59033891 8.97 0.0001 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 1.02343032 0.25585758 1.44 0.2176 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.26833344 0.06708336 0.38 0.8242 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 4 0.18317543 0.04579386 0.26 0.9047 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 4 0.04719936 0.01179984 0.07 0.9919 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 4 0.51930025 0.12982506 0.73 0.5700 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 4 0.32786925 0.08196731 0.46 0.7635 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 4 0.84369815 0.21092454 1.19 0.3136 261 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 25.66795236 25.66795236 144.76 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 2.37818729 2.37818729 13.41 0.0003 feedback linear 1 19.76756768 19.76756768 111.48 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 1.14912196 1.14912196 6.48 0.0110 Level of -CHANGE...... STORY N Mean SD 675 0.38074074 0.48592906 720 0.36388889 0.48145166 Level of -CHANGE- DELAY Mean SD 702 0.37321937 0.48400452 693 0.37085137 0.48338163 Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS Mean SD 702 0.36752137 0.48247384 693 0.37662338 0.48488915 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE' STORYDELAYN Mean SD A L 351 0.39601140 0.48976500 A N 324 0.36419753 0.48194874 B L 351 0.35042735 0.47778488 B N 369 0.37669377 0.48521501 Level of Level of STORYRECALPOSN Mean SD A F 315 0.37777778 0.48560306 A S 360 0.38333333 0.48687509 B F 387 0.35917313 0.48037910 B S 333 0.36936937 0.48336037 Level of Level of DELAYRECALPOSN Mean SD L F 342 0.37719298 0.48539401 L S 360 0.36944444 0.48332613 N F 360 0.35833333 0.48017812 N S 333 0.38438438 0.48718146 262 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY DELAY RECALPOS N Mean SD AL F 153 0.38562092 0.48834014 AL S 198 0.40404040 0.49194923 AN F 162 0.37037037 0.48440126 AN S 162 0.35802469 0.48090603 BL F 189 0.37037037 0.48418650 BL S 162 0.32716049 0.47063123 B N F 198 0.34848485 0.47769830 BN S 171 0.40935673 0.49315926 Level of ...... CHANGE.... MEM N Mean SD hig 465 0..17634409 0.38152311 low 465 0.42795699 0.49531547 uns 465 0.51182796 0.50039843 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY MEM N Mean SD A hig 225 0.15555556 0.36324158 A low 225 0.46222222 0.49968244 A uns 225 0.52444444 0.50051561 B hig 240 0.19583333 0.39767017 B low 240 0.39583333 0.49005095 B uns 240 0.50000000 0.50104493 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE' DELAY MEMN Mean SD L hig 234 0.18376068 0.38811911 L low 234 0.39316239 0.48949944 L uns 234 0.54273504 0.49923826 N hig 231 0.16883117 0.37541620 N low 231 0.46320346 0.49972701 N uns 231 0.48051948 0.50070532 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- MEM RECALPOSN Mean SD hig F 234 0.18376068 0.38811911 hig S 231 0.16883117 0.37541620 low F 234 0.41880342 0.49442065 low S 231 0.43722944 0.49712140 uns F 234 0.50000000 0.50107181 uns S 231 0.52380952 0.50051733 Level of Level of Level of --CHANGE STORY DELAY MEM N Mean SD AL hig 117 0.15384615 0.36235305 AL low 117 0.43589744 0.49800664 A L uns 117 0.59829060 0.49235236 A N hig 108 0.15740741 0.36588229 A N low 108 0.49074074 0.50224487 AN uns 108 0.44444444 0.49922058 BL hig 117 0.21367521 0.41166315 B L low 117 0.35042735 0.47915585 B L uns 117 0.48717949 0.50198545 B N hig 123 0.17886179 0.38480398 B N low 123 0.43902439 0.49829778 B N uns 123 0.51219512 0.50189565 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY MEMRECALPOS N Mean SD A hig F 105 0.15238095 0.36111346 A hig S 120 0.15833333 0.36658390 A low F 105 0.47619048 0.50182816 A low S 120 0.45000000 0.49957966 A uns F 105 0.50476190 0.50237531 A uns S 120 0.54166667 0.50035002 B hig F 129 0.20930233 0.40839661 B hig S 111 0.18018018 0.38608050 B low F 129 0.37209302 0.48524748 B low S 111 0.42342342 0.49634207 B uns F 129 0.49612403 0.50193424 B uns S 111 0.50450450 0.50224720 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAYMEM RECALPOS N Mean SD hig F 114 0.20175439 0.40308159 hig S 120 0.16666667 0.37424059 low F 114 0.40350877 0.49276712 low S 120 0.38333333 0.48823698 uns F 114 0.52631579 0.50151146 uns S 120 0.55833333 0.49866769 N hig F 120 0.16666667 0.37424059 N hig S 111 0.17117117 0.37836668 N low F 120 0.43333333 0.49761335 N low S 111 0.49549550 0.50224720 N uns F 120 0.47500000 0.50146843 N uns S 111 0.48648649 0.50208411 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY DELAY HEM RECALPOS N Mean SD AL hig F 51 0.15686275 0 .36729002 AL hig S 66 0.15151515 0'.36129784 AL low F 51 0.45098039 0i.50254256 AL low S 66 0.42424242 0 .49801471 A L uns F 51 0.54901961 0 .50254256 A L uns S 66 0.63636364 0 .48473192 AN hig F 54 0.14814815 0 .35858250 AN hig S 54 0.16666667 0 .37617740 AN low F 54 0.50000000 0 .50469494 AN low S 54 0.48148148 0 .50434866 AN uns F 54 0.46296296 0 .50330841 A N uns S 54 0.42592593 0 .49912572 B L hig F 63 0.23809524 0 .42933879 BL hig S 54 0.18518519 0 .39209520 B L low F 63 0.36507937 0 .48531956 BL low S 54 0.33333333 0 .47583095 B L uns F 63 0.50793651 0 .50395263 B L uns S 54 0.46296296 0 .50330841 BN hig F 66 0.18181818 0 .38865017 BN hig S 57 0.17543860 0.38372270 B N low F 66 0.37878788 0 .48880235 BN low S 57 0.50877193 0 .50436690 B N uns F 66 0.48484848 0 .50360009 B N uns S 57 0.54385965 0 .50250002 Level of --CHANGE...... FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 465 0.20430108 0.40362420 2 465 0.41290323 0.49288599 3 465 0.49892473 0.50053735 Level of Level of CHANGE STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 225 0.22666667 0.41960866 A 2 225 0.41777778 0.49429282 A 3 225 0.49/7/7/8 0.50110988 B 1 240 0.18333333 0.38774821 B 2 240 0.40833333 0.49255263 B 3 240 0.50000000 0.50104493 Level of Level of DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD L 1 234 0.21367521 0.41077880 L 2 234 0.41025641 0.49293456 L 3 234 0.49572650 0.50105351 N 1 231 0.19480519 0.39691071 N 2 231 0.41558442 0.49389268 N 3 231 0.50216450 0.50108108 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE' FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 F 234 0 .22649573 0.41946075 1 S 231 0 .18181818 0.38653217 2 F 234 0.38888889 0.48854303 2 S 231 0.43722944 0.49712140 3 F 234 0.48717949 0.50090707 3 S 231 0.51082251 0.50096838 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L 1 117 0.26495726 0.44320857 A L 2 117 0.40170940 0.49235236 A L 3 117 0.52136752 0.50169180 AN 1 108 0.18518519 0.39025868 A N 2 108 0.43518519 0.49809259 A N 3 108 0.47222222 0.50155521 B L 1 117 0.16239316 0.37039739 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORYDELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD B L 2 117 0.41880342 0.49548507 B L 3 117 0.47008547 0.50125101 B N 1 123 0.20325203 0.40406438 B N 2 123 0.39837398 0.49156554 B N 3 123 0.52845528 0.50123132 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A 1 F 105 0.26666667 0.44433759 A 1 S 120 0.19166667 0.39526256 A 2 F 105 0.39047619 0.49019694 A 2 S 120 0.44166667 0.49866769 A 3 F 105 0.47619048 0.50182816 A 3 S 120 0.51666667 0.50181743 B 1 F 129 0.19379845 0.39681386 B 1 S 111 0.17117117 0.37836668 B 2 F 129 0.38759690 0.48910118 B 2 S 111 0.43243243 0.49766037 B 3 F 129 0.49612403 0.50193424 B 3 S 111 0.50450450 0.50224720 266 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 F 114 0.25438596 0.43743831 1 S 120 0.17500000 0.38156026 2 F 114 0.35964912 0.48201628 2 S 120 0.45833333 0.50035002 3 F 114 0.51754386 0.50189828 3 S 120 0.47500000 0.50146843 N 1 F 120 0.20000000 0.40167716 N 1 S 111 0.18918919 0.39343507 N 2 F 120 0.41666667 0.49507377 N 2 S 111 0.41441441 0.49485477 N 3 F 120 0.45833333 0.50035002 N 3 S 111 0.54954955 0.49979521 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A L 1 F 51 0.31372549 0.46862335 A L 1 S 66 0.22727273 0.42228152 A L 2 F 51 0.33333333 0.47609523 A L 2 S 66 0.45454545 0.50174521 A L 3 F 51 0.50980392 0.50487816 A L 3 S 66 0.53030303 0.50290531 AN 1 F 54 0.22222222 0.41964345 AN 1 S 54 0.14814815 0.35858250 A N 2 F 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 A N 2 S 54 0.42592593 0.49912572 A N 3 F 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A N 3 S 54 0.50000000 0.50469494 B L 1 F 63 0.20634921 0.40793462 B L 1 S 54 0.11111111 0.31722063 B L 2 F 63 0.38095238 0.48952154 B L 2 S 54 0.46296296 0.50330841 B L 3 F 63 0.52380952 0.50344436 B L 3 S 54 0.40740741 0.49596555 B N 1 F 66 0.18181818 0.38865017 B N 1 S 57 0.22807018 0.42331784 B N 2 F 66 0.39393939 0.49236596 B N 2 S 57 0.40350877 0.49496209 B N 3 F 66 0.46969697 0.50290531 B N 3 S 57 0.59649123 0.49496209 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 155 0.13548387 0.34334904 hig 2 155 0.16129032 0.36899074 hig 3 155 0.23225806 0.42364152 low 1 155 0.21935484 0.41515085 low 2 155 0.51612903 0.50135969 low 3 155 0.54838710 0.49926632 uns 1 155 0.25806452 0.43898806 uns 2 155 0.56129032 0.49783781 uns 3 155 0.71612903 0.45233648 of Level of Level of --CHANGE..... STORYMEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD A hig 1 75 0.12000000 0.32714985 A hig 2 75 0.18666667 0.39226760 A hig 3 75 0.16000000 0.36907481 A low 1 75 0.26666667 0.44519456 A low 2 75 0.53333333 0.50224720 A low 3 75 0.58666667 0.49574768 A uns 1 75 0.29333333 0.45835586 A uns 2 75 0.53333333 0.50224720 A uns 3 75 0.74666667 0.43784896 B hig 1 80 0.15000000 0.35932426 B hig 2 80 0.13750000 0.34654716 B hig 3 80 0.30000000 0.46114881 B low 1 80 0.17500000 0.38236440 B low 2 80 0.50000000 0.50315461 B low 3 80 0.51250000 0.50299735 B uns 1 80 0.22500000 0.42021694 B uns 2 80 0.58750000 0.49539014 B uns 3 80 0.68750000 0.46643680 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAY MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD L hig 1 78 0.16666667 0.37509018 L hig 2 78 0.16666667 0.37509018 L hig 3 78 0.21794872 0.41552458 L low 1 78 0.19230769 0.39666441 L low 2 78 0.46153846 0.50174521 L low 3 78 0.52564103 0.50257413 L uns 1 78 0.28205128 0.45291081 L uns 2 78 0.60256410 0.49253502 L uns 3 78 0.74358974 0.43947718 N hig 1 77 0.10389610 0.30712656 N hig 2 77 0.15584416 0.36508597 N hig 3 77 0.24675325 0.43394895 N low 1 77 0.24675325 0.43394895 N low 2 77 0.57142857 0.49811675 N low 3 77 0.57142857 0.49811675 N uns 1 77 0.23376623 0.42600049 N uns 2 77 0.51948052 0.50289660 N uns 3 77 0.68831169 0.46622053 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD hig 1 F 78 0.17948718 0.38624364 hig 1 S 77 0.09090909 0.28936492 hig 2 F 78 0.15384615 0.36313652 hig 2 S 77 0.16883117 0.37705917 hig 3 F 78 0.21794872 0.41552458 hig 3 S 77 0.24675325 0.43394895 low 1 F 78 0.24358974 0.43202626 low 1 S 77 0.19480519 0.39864775 low 2 F 78 0.47435897 0.50257413 low 2 S 77 0.55844156 0.49982909 low 3 F 78 0.53846154 0.50174521 low 3 S 77 0.55844156 0.49982909 uns 1 F 78 0.25641026 0.43947718 uns 1 S 77 0.25974026 0.44136741 uns 2 F 78 0.53846154 0.50174521 uns 2 S 77 0.58441558 0.49605415 uns 3 F 78 0.70512821 0.45893650 uns 3 S 77 0.72727273 0.44828221 Level of Level of Level of Level of CHANGE STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L hig 1 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 A L hig 2 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 A L hig 3 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 A L low 1 39 0.25641026 0.44235903 A L low 2 39 0.46153846 0.50503537 A L low 3 39 0.58974359 0.49831024 A L uns 1 39 0.38461538 0.49286406 A L uns 2 39 0.58974359 0.49831024 A L uns 3 39 0.82051282 0.38877641 A N hig 1 36 0.08333333 0.28030596 A N hig 2 36 0.22222222 0.42163702 A N hig 3 36 0.16666667 0.37796447 A N low 1 36 0.27777778 0.45425676 A N low 2 36 0.61111111 0.49441323 A N low 3 36 0.58333333 0.50000000 AN uns 1 36 0.19444444 0.40138649 A N uns 2 36 0.47222222 0.50630940 A N uns 3 36 0.66666667 0.47809144 B L hig 1 39 0.17948718 0.38877641 B L hig 2 39 0.17948718 0.38877641 B L hig 3 39 0.28205128 0.45588075 B L low 1 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 B L low 2 39 0.46153846 0.50503537 B L low 3 39 0.46153846 0.50503537 B L uns 1 39 0.17948718 0.38877641 B L uns 2 39 0.61538462 0.49286406 B L uns 3 39 0.66666667 0.47756693 B N hig 1 41 0.12195122 0.33129458 B N hig 2 41 0.09756098 0.30040623 B N hig 3 41 0.31707317 0.47111699 B N low 1 41 0.21951220 0.41905818 B N low 2 41 0.53658537 0.50485448 B N low 3 41 0.56097561 0.50243310 B N uns 1 41 0.26829268 0.44857498 B N uns 2 41 0.56097561 0.50243310 B N uns 3 41 0.70731707 0.46064642 270 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A hig 1 F 35 0.17142857 0.38238526 A hig 1 S 40 0.07500000 0.26674678 A hig 2 F 35 0.17142857 0.38238526 A hig 2 S 40 0.20000000 0.40509575 A hig 3 F 35 0.11428571 0.32280285 A hig 3 S 40 0.20000000 0.40509575 A low 1 F 35 0.31428571 0.47100822 A low 1 S 40 0.22500000 0.42290206 A low 2 F 35 0.48571429 0.50709255 A low 2 S 40 0.57500000 0.50064062 A low 3 F 35 0.62857143 0.49024089 A low 3 S 40 0.55000000 0.50383147 A uns 1 F 35 0.31428571 0.47100822 A uns 1 S 40 0.27500000 0.45220259 A uns 2 F 35 0.51428571 0.50709255 A uns 2 S 40 0.55000000 0.50383147 A uns 3 F 35 0.68571429 0.47100822 A uns 3 S 40 0.80000000 0.40509575 B hig 1 F 43 0.18604651 0.39374962 B hig 1 S 37 0.10810811 0.31480009 B hig 2 F 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 B hig 2 S 37 0.13513514 0.34658350 B hig 3 F 43 0.30232558 0.46470081 B hig 3 S 37 0.29729730 0.46337319 B low 1 F 43 0.18604651 0.39374962 B low 1 S 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 B low 2 F 43 0.46511628 0.50468459 B low 2 S 37 0.54054054 0.50522792 B low 3 F 43 0.46511628 0.50468459 B low 3 S 37 0.56756757 0.50224720 B uns 1 F 43 0.20930233 0.41162509 B uns 1 S 37 0.24324324 0.43495884 B uns 2 F 43 0.55813953 0.50248552 B uns 2 S 37 0.62162162 0.49167239 B uns 3 F 43 0.72093023 0.45385027 B uns 3 S 37 0.64864865 0.48397751 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAY HEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD hig 1 F 38 0.23684211 0.43085148 hig 1 S 40 0.10000000 0.30382181 hig 2 F 38 0.15789474 0.36953702 hig 2 S 40 0.17500000 0.38480764 hig 3 F 38 0.21052632 0.41315495 hig 3 S 40 0.22500000 0.42290206 low 1 F 38 0.23684211 0.43085148 low 1 S 40 0.15000000 0.36162029 low 2 F 38 0.39473684 0.49535538 low 2 S 40 0.52500000 0.50573633 low 3 F 38 0.57894737 0.50035549 low 3 S 40 0.47500000 0.50573633 uns 1 F 38 0.28947368 0.45960587 uns 1 S 40 0.27500000 0.45220259 uns 2 F 38 0.52631579 0.50600941 uns 2 S 40 0.67500000 0.47434165 uns 3 F 38 0.76315789 0.43085148 uns 3 S 40 0.72500000 0.45220259 N hig 1 F 40 0.12500000 0.33493206 N hig 1 S 37 0.08108108 0.27672473 N hig 2 F 40 0.15000000 0.36162029 N hig 2 S 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 N hig 3 F 40 0.22500000 0.42290206 N hig 3 S 37 0.27027027 0.45022517 N low 1 F 40 0.25000000 0.43852901 N low 1 S 37 0.24324324 0.43495884 N low 2 F 40 0.55000000 0.50383147 N low 2 S 37 0.59459459 0.49774265 N low 3 F 40 0.50000000 0.50636968 N low 3 S 37 0.64864865 0.48397751 N uns 1 F 40 0.22500000 0.42290206 N uns 1 S 37 0.24324324 0.43495884 N uns 2 F 40 0.55000000 0.50383147 N uns 2 S 37 0.48648649 0.50671171 N uns 3 F 40 0.65000000 0.48304589 N uns 3 S 37 0.72972973 0.45022517 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORYDELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A L hig 1 F 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 A L hig 1 S 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 A L hig 2 F 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A L hig 2 S 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 A L hig 3 F 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A L hig 3 S 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 AL low 1 F 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 AL low 1 S 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 AL low 2 F 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 AL low 2 S 22 0.54545455 0.50964719 AL low 3 F 17 0.64705882 0.49259218 AL low 3 S 22 0.54545455 0.50964719 AL uns 1 F 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 AL uns 1 S 22 0.40909091 0.50323628 AL uns 2 F 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 AL uns 2 S 22 0.63636364 0.49236596 A L uns 3 F 17 0.76470588 0.43723732 AL uns 3 S 22 0.86363636 0.35125009 A N hig 1 F 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A N hig 1 S 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A N hig 2 F 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 A N hig 2 S 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 A N hig 3 F 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A N hig 3 S 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 AN low 1 F 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 AN low 1 S 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 AN low 2 F 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 A N low 2 S 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 AN low 3 F 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 AN low 3 S 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 AN uns 1 F 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 A N uns 1 S 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A N uns 2 F 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 AN uns 2 S 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 AN uns 3 F 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 AN uns 3 S 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 (continued next page) 273 (continued) Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY DELAY HEM FEEDBACK RECALPOSN Mean SD B L hig 1 F 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 B L hig 1 S 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B L hig 2 F 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 B L hig 2 S 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 B L hig 3 F 21 0.28571429 0.46291005 B L hig 3 S 18 Q.zttrrm 0.46088860 B L low 1 F 21 0.14285714 0.35856858 B L low 1 S 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B L low 2 F 21 0.42857143 0.50709255 B L low 2 S 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 B L low 3 F 21 0.52380952 0.51176632 B L low 3 S 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 B L uns 1 F 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 B L uns 1 S 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B L uns 2 F 21 0.52380952 0.51176632 B L uns 2 S 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 BL uns 3 F 21 0.76190476 0.43643578 B L uns 3 S 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 B N hig 1 F 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 B N hig 1 S 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B N hig 2 F 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 B N hig 2 S 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B N hig 3 F 22 0.31818182 0.47673129 B N hig 3 S 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 B N low 1 F 22 0.22727273 0.42893203 BN low 1 S 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 BN low 2 F 22 0.50000000 0.51176632 B N low 2 S 19 0.57894737 0.50725727 B N low 3 F 22 0.40909091 0.50323628 B N low 3 S 19 0.73684211 0.45241393 B N uns 1 F 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 B N uns 1 S 19 0.36842105 0.49559463 B N uns 2 F 22 0.59090909 0.50323628 B N uns 2 S 19 0.52631579 0.51298918 B N uns 3 F 22 0.68181818 0.47673129 B N uns 3 S 19 0.73684211 0.45241393 Analysis 17. The overall source memory analysis, Study 3. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: FEED ID Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 218 99.30399434 0.45552291 2.34 0.0001 Error 1176 229.33399849 0.19501190 Corrected Total 1394 328.63799283 R-Square C.V. Root MSE FEEDID Mean 0.302168 71.21782 0.4416015 0.6200717 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*DELAY*RECAL) 147 38.79206756 0.26389162 1.35 0.0050 STORY 1 0.24408030 0.24408030 1.25 0.2635 DELAY 1 0.00647318 0.00647318 0.03 0.8555 RECALPOS 1 0.00277159 0.00277159 0.01 0.9051 STORY*DELAY 1 0.12039844 0.12039844 0.62 0.4322 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.52178342 0.52178342 2.68 0.1022 DELAY*RECALP0S 1 0.36819910 0.36819910 1.89 0.1697 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.56288857 0.56288857 2.89 0.0896 MEM 2 1.28854183 0.64427091 3.30 0.0371 STORY*MEM 2 0.03401784 0.01700892 0.09 0.9165 DELAY*MEM 2 0.13263554 0.06631777 0.34 0.7118 MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.65521905 0.32760952 1.68 0.1868 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.16291613 0.08145807 0.42 0.6587 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.37032870 0.18516435 0.95 0.3872 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.85427932 0.42713966 2.19 0.1123 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 2 1.06655265 0.53327632 2.73 0.0653 FEEDBACK 2 40.26007428 20.13003714 103.22 0.0001 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.57604901 0.28802450 1.48 0.2288 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 1.31327994 0.65663997 3.37 0.0348 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 2 0.57266708 0.28633354 1.47 0.2307 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.16933399 0.08466700 0.43 0.6479 STORY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.01568564 0.00784282 0.04 0.9606 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.49116554 0.24558277 1.26 0.2842 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 2 0.86937797 0.43468899 2.23 0.1081 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 1.11826652 0.27956663 1.43 0.2206 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 1.09880153 0.27470038 1.41 0.2289 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.48809876 0.12202469 0.63 0.6442 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 4 0.23670679 0.05917670 0.30 0.8758 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 4 2.09117274 0.52279319 2.68 0.0304 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 4 3.13060167 0.78265042 4.01 0.0031 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 4 0.27554084 0.06888521 0.35 0.8419 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 4 0.40683948 0.10170987 0.52 0.7199 275 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 0.78223569 0.78223569 4.01 0.0454 mem quadratic 1 0.50630614 0.50630614 2.60 0.1074 feedback linear 1 8.97008100 8.97008100 46.00 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 31.28999328 31.28999328 160.45 0.0001 Level of -FEEDID...... STORY N Mean SD A 675 0.63259259 0.48245626 B 720 0.60833333 0.48846215 Level of -FEEDID- DELAY Mean SD L 702 0.61680912 0.48651084 N 693 0.62337662 0.48488915 Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOS Mean SD F 702 0.61823362 0.48616613 S 693 0.62193362 0.48525455 Level of Level of -FEEDID- STORY DELAY N Mean SD A L 351 0.61823362 0.48651326 A N 324 0.64814815 0.47828670 B L 351 0.61538462 0.48719877 B N 369 0.60162602 0.49022794 Level of Level of -FEEDID- STORY RECALPOS N Mean SD A F 315 0.65396825 0.47646034 A S 360 0.61388889 0.48753417 B F 387 0.58914729 0.49262546 B S 333 0.63063063 0.48336037 Level of Level of -FEEDID- DELAY RECALPOS N Hean SD L F 342 0.63157895 0.48308317 L S 360 0.60277778 0.49000376 N F 360 0.60555556 0.48941125 N S 333 0.64264264 0.47994250 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORYDELAYRECALPOS N Mean SD A LF 153 0.67973856 0.46810923 A L S 198 0.57070707 0.49622995 A NF 162 0.62962963 0.48440126 A NS 162 0.66666667 0.47286624 B LF 189 0.59259259 0.49265687 B LS 162 0.64197531 0.48090603 B NF 198 0.58585859 0.49382175 B NS 171 0.61988304 0.48684094 Level of ...... FEEDID..... MEMN Mean SD hig 465 0.60645161 0.48906280 low 465 0.59139785 0.49210489 uns 465 0.66236559 0.47341250 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORY MEM N Mean SD A hig 225 0.61333333 0.48807201 A low 225 0.61333333 0.48807201 A uns 225 0.67111111 0.47085704 B hig 240 0.60000000 0.49092177 B low 240 0.57083333 0.49599160 B uns 240 0.65416667 0.47663321 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID- DELAYMEM N Mean SD L hig 234 0.58974359 0.49293456 L low 234 0.60256410 0.49041658 L uns 234 0.65811966 0.47535653 N hig 231 0.62337662 0.48559138 N low 231 0.58008658 0.49461622 N uns 231 0.66666667 0.47242820 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID- MEMRECALPOS N Mean SD hig F 234 0.60683761 0.48949944 hig S 231 0.60606061 0.48968275 low F 234 0.55982906 0.49747169 low S 231 0.62337662 0.48559138 uns F 234 0.68803419 0.46428909 uns S 231 0.63636364 0.48209031 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORY DELAY MEM N Mean SD A L hig 117 0.59829060 0.49235236 A L low 117 0.61538462 0.48859676 A L uns 117 0.64102564 0.48176290 A N hig 108 0.62962963 0.48515519 A N low 108 0.61111111 0.48977075 A N uns 108 0.70370370 0.45875205 B L hig 117 0.58119658 0.49548507 B L low 117 0.58974359 0.49399578 B L uns 117 0.67521368 0.47030914 B N hig 123 0.61788618 0.48789150 B N low 123 0.55284553 0.49923305 B N uns 123 0.63414634 0.48363875 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORYMEM RECALPOS N Mean SD A hig F 105 0.61904762 0.48795004 A hig S 120 0.60833333 0.49016947 A low F 105 0.62857143 0.48550416 A low S 120 0.60000000 0.49195204 A uns F 105 0.71428571 0.45392065 A uns S 120 0.63333333 0.48391494 B hig F 129 0.59689922 0.49243305 B hig S 111 0.60360360 0.49136691 B low F 129 0.50387597 0.50193424 B low S 111 0.64864865 0.47955754 B uns F 129 0.66666667 0.47324236 B uns S 111 0.63963964 0.48228232 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID DELAYMEMRECALPOS N Mean SD hig F 114 0.57894737 0.49590780 hig S 120 0.60000000 0.49195204 low F 114 0.62280702 0.48682375 low S 120 0.58333333 0.49507377 uns F 114 0.69298246 0.46329319 uns S 120 0.62500000 0.48615279 N hig F 120 0.63333333 0.48391494 N hig S 111 0.61261261 0.48936269 N low F 120 0.50000000 0.50209645 N low S 111 0.66666667 0.47354242 N uns F 120 0.68333333 0.46712662 N uns S 111 0.64864865 0.47955754 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID- STORY DELAY MEM RECALPOS N Mean SD A L hig F 51 0.62745098 0.48829435 A L hig S 66 0.57575758 0.49801471 AL low F 51 0.66666667 0.47609523 AL low S 66 0.57575758 0.49801471 A L uns F 51 0.74509804 0.44014258 AL uns S 66 0.56060606 0.50011654 AN hig F 54 0.61111111 0.49207557 A N hig S 54 0.64814815 0.48203215 A N low F 54 0.59259259 0.49596555 A N low S 54 0.62962963 0.48743829 AN uns F 54 0.68518519 0.46880314 A N uns S 54 0.72222222 0.45210896 B hig F 63 0.53968254 0.50242627 BL hig S 54 0.62962963 0.48743829 BL low F 63 0.58730159 0.49627388 BL low S 54 0.59259259 0.49596555 B L uns F 63 0.65079365 0.48054842 BL uns S 54 0.70370370 0.46091090 BN hig F 66 0.65151515 0.48014178 BN hig S 57 0.57894737 0.49811675 BN low F 66 0.42424242 0.49801471 BN low S 57 0.70175439 0.46155453 B N uns F 66 0.68181818 0.46933966 B N uns S 57 0.57894737 0.49811675 Level of ...... FEEDID FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 465 0.62795699 0.48387035 2 465 0 40645161 0.49169974 3 465 0 82580645 0.37968431 Level of Level of FEEDID...... STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 225 0.64000000 0.48107024 A 2 225 0.44444444 0.49801192 A 3 225 0.81333333 0.39051248 B 1 240 0.61666667 0.48721449 B 2 240 0.37083333 0.48403738 B 3 240 0.83750000 0.36967983 Level of Level of FEEDID...... DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD L 1 234 0.58547009 0.49369674 L 2 234 0.41452991 0.49369674 L 3 234 0.85042735 0.35741656 N 1 231 0.67099567 0.47087186 N 2 231 0.39826840 0.49060436 N 3 231 0.80086580 0.40021639 279 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 F 234 0,.59829060 0.49129467 1 S 231 0.65800866 0.47540685 2 F 234 0.41880342 0.49442065 2 S 231 0.39393939 0.48968275 3 F 234 0.83760684 0.36960169 3 S 231 0.81385281 0.39007062 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL 1 117 0.58974359 0.49399578 AL 2 117 0.45299145 0.49992631 AL 3 117 0.81196581 0.39242008 AN 1 108 0.69444444 0.46278986 AN 2 108 0.43518519 0.49809259 AN 3 108 0.81481481 0.39025868 BL 1 117 0.58119658 0.49548507 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD BL 2 117 0.37606838 0.48648095 BL 3 117 0.88888889 0.31562138 BN 1 123 0.65040650 0.47879185 B H 2 123 0.36585366 0.48363875 BN 3 123 0.78861789 0.40995866 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORYFEEDBACKRECALPOS N Mean SD A 1 F 105 0.62857143 0.48550416 A 1 S 120 0.65000000 0.47896948 A 2 F 105 0.48571429 0.50219299 A 2 S 120 0.40833333 0.49358632 A 3 F 105 0.84761905 0.36111346 A 3 S 120 0.78333333 0.41370093 B 1 F 129 0.57364341 0.49647498 B 1 S 111 0.66666667 0.47354242 B 2 F 129 0.36434109 0.48312111 B 2 S 111 0.37837838 0.48718214 B 3 F 129 0.82945736 0.37757514 B 3 S 111 0.84684685 0.36176834 280 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS Mean SD 1 F 114 0.59649123 0.49276712 1 S 120 0.57500000 0.49641572 2 F 114 0.42105263 0.49590780 2 S 120 0.40833333 0.49358632 3 F 114 0.87719298 0.32966464 3 S 120 0.82500000 0.38156026 N 1 F 120 0.60000000 0.49195204 N 1 S 111 0.74774775 0.43627490 N 2 F 120 0.41666667 0.49507377 N 2 S 111 0.37837838 0.48718214 N 3 F 120 0.80000000 0.40167716 N 3 S 111 0.80180180 0.40045020 of Leve of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORY DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD L 1 F 51 0.60784314 0.49308950 L 1 S 66 0.57575758 0.49801471 L 2 F 51 0.54901961 0.50254256 L 2 S 66 0.37878788 0.48880235 L 3 F 51 0.88235294 0.32539569 L 3 S 66 0.75757576 0.43183352 N 1 F 54 0.64814815 0.48203215 N 1 S 54 0.74074074 0.44234304 N 2 F 54 0.42592593 0.49912572 N 2 S 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 N 3 F 54 0.81481481 0.39209520 N 3 S 54 0.81481481 0.39209520 L 1 F 63 0.58730159 0.49627388 L 1 S 54 0.57407407 0.49912572 L 2 F 63 0.31746032 0.46922712 L 2 S 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 L 3 F 63 0.87301587 0.33562957 L 3 S 54 0.90740741 0.29258242 N 1 F 66 0.56060606 0.50011654 N 1 S 57 0.75438596 0.43427698 N 2 F 66 0.40909091 0.49543369 N 2 S 57 0.31578947 0.46896142 N 3 F 66 0.78787879 0.41194292 N 3 S 57 0.78947368 0.41130637 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 155 0.60000000 0.49148595 hig 2 155 0.36129032 0.48193160 hig 3 155 0.85806452 0.35011519 low 1 155 0.61935484 0.48711939 low 2 155 0.36129032 0.48193160 low 3 155 0.79354839 0.40607040 uns 1 155 0.66451613 0.47368985 uns 2 155 0.49677419 0.50161031 uns 3 155 0.82580645 0.38050525 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORY MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD A hig 1 75 0.56000000 0.49972966 A hig 2 75 0.41333333 0.49574768 A hig 3 75 0.86666667 0.34222378 A low 1 75 0.64000000 0.48323236 A low 2 75 0.42666667 0.49792362 A low 3 75 0.77333333 0.42149455 A uns 1 75 0.72000000 0.45202248 A uns 2 75 0.49333333 0.50332230 A uns 3 75 0.80000000 0.40269363 B hig 1 80 0.63750000 0.48375509 B hig 2 80 0.31250000 0.46643680 B hig 3 80 0.85000000 0.35932426 B low 1 80 0.60000000 0.49298882 B low 2 80 0.30000000 0.46114881 B low 3 80 0.81250000 0.39277494 B uns 1 80 0.61250000 0.49025310 B uns 2 80 0.50000000 0.50315461 B uns 3 80 0.85000000 0.35932426 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID DELAYMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD L hig 1 78 0.55128205 0.50058241 L hig 2 78 0.37179487 0.48641211 L hig 3 78 0.84615385 0.36313652 L low 1 78 0.60256410 0.49253502 L low 2 78 0.38461538 0.48965318 L low 3 78 0.82051282 0.38624364 L uns 1 78 0.60256410 0.49253502 L uns 2 78 0.48717949 0.50307082 L uns 3 78 0.88461538 0.32155342 N hig 1 77 0.64935065 0.48030237 N hig 2 77 0.35064935 0.48030237 N hig 3 77 0.87012987 0.33836485 N low 1 77 0.63636364 0.48420012 N low 2 77 0.33766234 0.47601387 N low 3 77 0.76623377 0.42600049 N uns 1 77 0.72727273 0.44828221 N uns 2 77 0.50649351 0.50323628 N uns 3 77 0.76623377 0.42600049 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD hig 1 F 78 0.57692308 0.49724516 hig 1 S 77 0.62337662 0.48771651 hig 2 F 78 0.37179487 0.48641211 hig 2 S 77 0.35064935 0.48030237 hig 3 F 78 0.87179487 0.33648197 hig 3 S 77 0.84415584 0.36508597 low 1 F 78 0.57692308 0.49724516 low 1 S 77 0.66233766 0.47601387 low 2 F 78 0.34615385 0.47882223 low 2 S 77 0.37662338 0.48771651 low 3 F 78 0.75641026 0.43202626 low 3 S 77 0.83116883 0.37705917 uns 1 F 78 0.64102564 0.48280455 uns 1 S 77 0.68831169 0.46622053 uns 2 F 78 0.53846154 0.50174521 uns 2 S 77 0.45454545 0.50119474 uns 3 F 78 0.88461538 0.32155342 uns 3 S 77 0.76623377 0.42600049 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L hig 1 39 0.46153846 0.50503537 AL hig 2 39 0.48717949 0.50636968 A L hig 3 39 0.84615385 0.36551777 A L low 1 39 0.64102564 0.48597051 A L low 2 39 0.46153846 0.50503537 AL low 3 39 0.74358974 0.44235903 A L uns 1 39 0.66666667 0.47756693 A L uns 2 39 0.41025641 0.49831024 A L uns 3 39 0.84615385 0.36551777 A N hig 1 36 0.66666667 0.47809144 A N hig 2 36 0.33333333 0.47809144 A N hig 3 36 0.88888889 0.31872763 A N low 1 36 0.63888889 0.48713611 A N low 2 36 0.38888889 0.49441323 A N low 3 36 0.80555556 0.40138649 A N uns 1 36 0.777777/8 0.42163702 A N uns 2 36 0.58333333 0.50000000 A N uns 3 36 0.75000000 0.43915503 BL hig 1 39 0.64102564 0.48597051 BL hig 2 39 0.25641026 0.44235903 B L hig 3 39 0.84615385 0.36551777 B L low 1 39 0.56410256 0.50235612 B L low 2 39 0.30769231 0.46757190 B L low 3 39 0.89743590 0.30735474 B L uns 1 39 0.53846154 0.50503537 B L uns 2 39 0.56410256 0.50235612 BL uns 3 39 0.92307692 0.26995276 B N hig 1 41 0.63414634 0.48765242 B N hig 2 41 0.36585366 0.48765242 B N hig 3 41 0.85365854 0.35783904 B N low 1 41 0.63414634 0.48765242 B N low 2 41 0.29268293 0.46064642 B N low 3 41 0.73170732 0.44857498 B N uns 1 41 0.68292683 0.47111699 B N uns 2 41 0.43902439 0.50243310 B N uns 3 41 0.78048780 0.41905818 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID STORY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A hig 1 F 35 0.60000000 0.49705012 A hig 1 S 40 0.52500000 0.50573633 A hig 2 F 35 0.42857143 0.50209645 A hig 2 S 40 0.40000000 0.49613894 A hig 3 F 35 0.82857143 0.38238526 A hig 3 S 40 0.90000000 0.30382181 A low 1 F 35 0.54285714 0.50543267 A low 1 S 40 0.72500000 0.45220259 A low 2 F 35 0.51428571 0.50709255 A low 2 S 40 0.35000000 0.48304589 A low 3 F 35 0.82857143 0.38238526 A low 3 S 40 0.72500000 0.45220259 A uns 1 F 35 0.74285714 0.44343957 A uns 1 S 40 0.70000000 0.46409548 A uns 2 F 35 0.51428571 0.50709255 A uns 2 S 40 0.47500000 0.50573633 A uns 3 F 35 0.88571429 0.32280285 A uns 3 S 40 0.72500000 0.45220259 B hig 1 F 43 0.55813953 0.50248552 B hig 1 S 37 0.72972973 0.45022517 B hig 2 F 43 0.32558140 0.47413732 B hig 2 S 37 0.29729730 0.46337319 B hig 3 F 43 0.90697674 0.29390260 B hig 3 S 37 0.78378378 0.41734180 B low 1 F 43 0.60465116 0.49471179 B low 1 S 37 0.59459459 0.49774265 B low 2 F 43 0.20930233 0.41162509 B low 2 S 37 0.40540541 0.49774265 B low 3 F 43 0.69767442 0.46470081 B low 3 S 37 0.94594595 0.22924344 B uns 1 F 43 0.55813953 0.50248552 B uns 1 S 37 0.67567568 0.47457900 B uns 2 F 43 0.55813953 0.50248552 B uns 2 S 37 0.43243243 0.50224720 B uns 3 F 43 0.88372093 0.32435301 B uns 3 S 37 0.81081081 0.39706128 285 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID DELAYMEM FEEDBACKRECALPOS N Mean SD hig 1 F 38 0.55263158 0.50389662 hig 1 S 40 0.55000000 0.50383147 hig 2 F 38 0.34210526 0.48078291 hig 2 S 40 0.40000000 0.49613894 hig 3 F 38 0.84210526 0.36953702 hig 3 S 40 0.85000000 0.36162029 low 1 F 38 0.63157895 0.48885153 low 1 S 40 0.57500000 0.50064062 low 2 F 38 0.42105263 0.50035549 low 2 S 40 0.35000000 0.48304589 low 3 F 38 0.81578947 0.39285945 low 3 S 40 0.82500000 0.38480764 uns 1 F 38 0.60526316 0.49535538 uns 1 S 40 0.60000000 0.49613894 uns 2 F 38 0.50000000 0.50671171 uns 2 S 40 0.47500000 0.50573633 uns 3 F 38 0.97368421 0.16222142 uns 3 S 40 0.80000000 0.40509575 N hig 1 F 40 0.60000000 0.49613894 N hig 1 S 37 0.70270270 0.46337319 N hig 2 F 40 0.40000000 0.49613894 N hig 2 S 37 0.29729730 0.46337319 N hig 3 F 40 0.90000000 0.30382181 N hig 3 S 37 0.83783784 0.37368388 N low 1 F 40 0.52500000 0.50573633 N low 1 S 37 0.75675676 0.43495884 N low 2 F 40 0.27500000 0.45220259 N low 2 S 37 0.40540541 0.49774265 N low 3 F 40 0.70000000 0.46409548 N low 3 S 37 0.83783784 0.37368388 N uns 1 F 40 0.67500000 0.47434165 N uns 1 S 37 0.78378378 0.41734180 N uns 2 F 40 0.57500000 0.50064062 N uns 2 S 37 0.43243243 0.50224720 N uns 3 F 40 0.80000000 0.40509575 N uns 3 S 37 0.72972973 0.45022517 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A L hig 1 F 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 A L hig 1 S 22 0.40909091 0.50323628 A L hig 2 F 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 A L hig 2 S 22 0.45454545 0.50964719 A L hig 3 F 17 0.82352941 0.39295262 A L hig 3 S 22 0.86363636 0.35125009 A L low 1 F 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 A L low 1 S 22 0.72727273 0.45584231 A L low 2 F 17 0.64705882 0.49259218 AL low 2 S 22 0.31818182 0.47673129 AL low 3 F 17 0.82352941 0.39295262 AL low 3 S 22 0.68181818 0.47673129 AL uns 1 F 17 0.76470588 0.43723732 AL uns 1 S 22 0.59090909 0.50323628 AL uns 2 F 17 0.47058824 0.51449576 AL uns 2 S 22 0.36363636 0.49236596 AL uns 3 F 17 1.00000000 0.00000000 AL uns 3 S 22 0.72727273 0.45584231 A N hig 1 F 18 0.66666667 0.48507125 AN hig 1 S 18 0.66666667 0.48507125 A N hig 2 F 18 0.33333333 0.48507125 A N hig 2 S 18 0.33333333 0.48507125 A N hig 3 F 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 A N hig 3 S 18 0.94444444 0.23570226 A N low 1 F 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 A N low 1 S 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 A N low 2 F 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 AN low 2 S 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 AN low 3 F 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 AN low 3 S 18 0.77777778 0.42779263 AN uns 1 F 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 AN uns 1 S 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 AN uns 2 F 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 AN uns 2 S 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 AN uns 3 F 18 0.77777778 0.42779263 AN uns 3 S 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 (contined next page) (continued) Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD BL hig 1 F 21 0.57142857 0.50709255 B L hig 1 S 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 BL hig 2 F 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 B L hig 2 S 18 0.33333333 0.48507125 B L hig 3 F 21 0.85714286 0.35856858 B L hig 3 S 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 BL low 1 F 21 0.71428571 0.46291005 BL low 1 S 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 B L low 2 F 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 B L low 2 S 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 B L low 3 F 21 0.80952381 0.40237391 BL low 3 S 18 1.00000000 0.00000000 BL uns 1 F 21 0.47619048 0.51176632 B L uns 1 S 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 B L uns 2 F 21 0.52380952 0.51176632 B L uns 2 S 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 BL uns 3 F 21 0.95238095 0.21821789 B L uns 3 S 18 0.88888889 0.32338083 B N hig 1 F 22 0.54545455 0.50964719 B N hig 1 S 19 0.73684211 0.45241393 B N hig 2 F 22 0.45454545 0.50964719 BN hig 2 S 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 BN hig 3 F 22 0.95454545 0.21320072 B N hig 3 S 19 0.73684211 0.45241393 B N low 1 F 22 0.50000000 0.51176632 BN low 1 S 19 0.78947368 0.41885391 BN low 2 F 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 BN low 2 S 19 0.42105263 0.50725727 B N low 3 F 22 0.59090909 0.50323628 BN low 3 S 19 0.89473684 0.31530177 B N uns 1 F 22 0.63636364 0.49236596 B N uns 1 S 19 0.73684211 0.45241393 BN uns 2 F 22 0.59090909 0.50323628 B N uns 2 S 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 B N uns 3 F 22 0.81818182 0.39477102 BN uns 3 S 19 0.73684211 0.45241393 288 Analysis 18. The yielding analysis controling for source memory, Study 3. The means are adjusted for the covariate. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 195 75.60656268 0.38772596 3.03 0.0001 Error 734 93.92139431 0.12795830 Corrected Total 929 169.52795699 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.445983 149.1806 0.3577126 0.2397849 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*DELAY*RECAL) 147 34.86046410 0.23714601 1.85 0.0001 FEEDID 1 6.73955061 6.73955061 52.67 0.0001 STORY 1 0.19667144 0.19667144 1.54 0.2155 DELAY 1 0.00119752 0.00119752 0.01 0.9230 RECALPOS 1 0.04325223 0.04325223 0.34 0.5612 STORY*DELAY 1 0.02684878 0.02684878 0.21 0.6470 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.00684434 0.00684434 0.05 0.8172 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.19630007 0.19630007 1.53 0.2159 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.00398939 0.00398939 0.03 0.8599 MEM 2 15.60432081 7.80216040 60.97 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 2 0.59729242 0.29864621 2.33 0.0976 DELAY*MEM 2 0.29277223 0.14638611 1.14 0.3191 MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.22659340 0.11329670 0.89 0.4130 STORY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.01890543 0.00945272 0.07 0.9288 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.10919554 0.05459777 0.43 0.6528 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.07570694 0.03785347 0.30 0.7440 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 2 0.04347219 0.02173610 0.17 0.8438 FEEDBACK 1 1.73110583 1.73110583 13.53 0.0003 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.03186082 0.03186082 0.25 0.6179 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.03504841 0.03504841 0.27 0.6009 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 1 0.00093221 0.00093221 0.01 0.9320 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.05948470 0.05948470 0.46 0.4956 STORY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 1 0.00652050 0.00652050 0.05 0.8215 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 1 0.07638579 0.07638579 0.60 0.4400 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 1 0.02363714 0.02363714 0.18 0.6675 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 2.13636619 1.06818309 8.35 0.0003 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.14696524 0.07348262 0.57 0.5634 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.24334729 0.12167365 0.95 0.3869 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 2 0.27901303 0.13950651 1.09 0.3367 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.22099466 0.11049733 0.86 0.4221 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.01286086 0.00643043 0.05 0.9510 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.03752500 0.01876250 0.15 0.8636 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 2 0.18119532 0.09059766 0.71 0.4930 289 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 15.30983578 15.30983578 119.65 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.31052669 0.31052669 2.43 0.1197 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY YIELD LSMEAN A 0.25530837 B 0.22607533 DELAY YIELD LSMEAN L 0.23954487 N 0.24183884 RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN F 0.23383760 S 0.24754610 STORY DELAY YIELD LSMEAN A L 0.24876199 A N 0.26185476 B L 0.23032775 B N 0.22182292 STORY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A F 0.24572464 A S 0.26489211 B F 0.22195056 B S 0.23020010 DELAY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L F 0.24728334 L S 0.23180640 N F 0.22039187 N S 0.26328580 STORY DELAY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A LF 0.25168109 A L S 0.24584289 A N F 0.23976819 A N S 0.28394132 B L F 0.24288558 B LS 0.21776991 B NF 0.20101555 B N S 0.24263029 MEM YIELD LSMEAN hig 0.09556201 low 0.21468233 uns 0.41183122 STORY MEM YIELD LSMEAN A hig 0.07416170 A low 0.24683173 A uns 0.44493169 B hig 0.11696232 B low 0.18253294 B uns 0.37873074 DELAYMEM YIELD LSMEAN L hig 0.09861583 L low 0.18991128 L uns 0.43010750 N hig 0.09250818 N low 0.23945339 N uns 0.39355494 MEM RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN hig F 0.06823235 hig S 0.12289167 low F 0.21067238 low S 0.21869229 uns F 0.42260808 uns S 0.40105436 STORY DELAYMEM YIELD LSMEAN AL hig 0.07772833 AL low 0.21155031 AL uns 0.45700734 AN hig 0.07059507 AN low 0.28211315 A N uns 0.43285605 BL hig 0.11950334 B L low 0.16827225 BL uns 0.40320765 BN hig 0.11442130 BN low 0.19679362 B N uns 0.35425384 STORYMEMRECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A hig F 0.05484837 A hig S 0.09347503 A low F 0.24426583 A low S 0.24939763 A uns F 0.43805972 A uns S 0.45180366 B hig F 0.08161632 B hig S 0.15230831 B low F 0.17707893 B low S 0.18798694 B uns F 0.40715644 B uns S 0.35030505 DELAYMEM RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L hig F 0.08349824 L hig S 0.11373343 L low F 0.21260840 L low S 0.16721416 L uns F 0.44574337 L uns S 0.41447162 N hig F 0.05296645 N hig S 0.13204992 N low F 0.20873637 N low S 0.27017041 N uns F 0.39947279 N uns S 0.38763709 STORY DELAY MEM RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L hig F 0.07439883 L hig S 0.08105783 L low F 0.23738105 L low S 0.18571957 L uns F 0.44326340 L uns S 0.47075128 N hig F 0.03529791 N hig S 0.10589222 N low F 0.25115062 N low S 0.31307569 N uns F 0.43285605 N uns S 0.43285605 hig F 0.09259765 hig S 0.14640902 low F 0.18783575 low S 0.14870876 uns F 0.44822334 uns S 0.35819196 N hig F 0.07063500 N hig S 0.15820761 N low F 0.16632211 N low S 0.22726513 N uns F 0.36608954 N uns S 0.34241813 FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 2 0.19101638 3 0.29036732 STORY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 2 0.19974012 A 3 0.31087663 B 2 0.18229264 B 3 0.26985802 DELAY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN L 2 0.19603734 L 3 0.28305240 N 2 0.18599542 N 3 0.29768225 FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN 2 F 0.18315640 2 S 0.19887637 3 F 0.28451881 3 S 0.29621584 STORY DELAY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A L 2 0.19132273 A L 3 0.30620126 A N 2 0.20815752 A N 3 0.31555199 B L 2 0.20075196 B L 3 0.25990354 B N 2 0.16383333 B N 3 0.27981251 STORY FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A 2 F 0.19181055 A 2 S 0.20766969 A 3 F 0.29963873 A 3 S 0.32211452 B 2 F 0.17450225 B 2 S 0.19008304 B 3 F 0.26939888 B 3 S 0.27031717 DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L 2 F 0.19366425 L 2 S 0.19841043 L 3 F 0.30090242 L 3 S 0.26520237 N 2 F 0.17264855 N 2 S 0.19934230 N 3 F 0.26813519 N 3 S 0.32722931 STORY DELAY FEEDBACKRECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A L 2 F 0.19185894 A L 2 S 0.19078652 AL 3 F 0.31150325 A L 3 S 0.30089927 A N 2 F 0.19176217 AN 2 S 0.22455287 A N 3 F 0.28777422 A N 3 S 0.34332977 B L 2 F 0.19546957 B L 2 S 0.20603435 B L 3 F 0.29030159 B L 3 S 0.22950548 B N 2 F 0.15353494 B N 2 S 0.17413173 B N 3 F 0.24849616 B N 3 S 0.31112886 MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 0.09919565 hig 3 0.09192836 low 2 0.17542597 low 3 0.25393869 uns 2 0.29842752 uns 3 0.52523491 STORYMEMFEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A hig 2 0.08914051 A hig 3 0.05918289 A low 2 0.18901328 A low 3 0.30465018 A uns 2 0.32106658 A uns 3 0.56879681 B hig 2 0.10925080 B hig 3 0.12467384 B low 2 0.16183867 B low 3 0.20322721 B uns 2 0.27578847 B uns 3 0.48167302 DELAY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 0.09732988 hig 3 0.09990179 low 2 0.17980047 low 3 0.20002209 uns 2 0.31098167 uns 3 0.54923332 N hig 2 0.10106143 N hig 3 0.08395494 N low 2 0.17105147 N low 3 0.30785530 N uns 2 0.28587337 N uns 3 0.50123651 MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 F 0.09480463 hig 2 S 0.10358668 hig 3 F 0.04166007 hig 3 S 0.14219666 low 2 F 0.15352669 low 2 S 0.19732526 low 3 F 0.26781807 low 3 S 0.24005932 uns 2 F 0.30113789 uns 2 S 0.29571716 uns 3 F 0.54407828 uns 3 S 0.50639155 296 STORYDELAYMEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN AL hig 2 0.05787975 A L hig 3 0.09757692 A L low 2 0.18703097 A L low 3 0.23606964 A L uns 2 0.32905747 A L uns 3 0.58495722 A N hig 2 0.12040128 A N hig 3 0.02078886 A N low 2 0.19099559 A N low 3 0.37323072 A N uns 2 0.31307569 A N uns 3 0.55263641 B L hig 2 0.13678001 BL hig 3 0.10222666 B L low 2 0.17256997 B L low 3 0.16397453 B L uns 2 0.29290588 BL uns 3 0.51350942 BN hig 2 0.08172158 B N hig 3 0.14712103 B N low 2 0.15110736 BN low 3 0.24247988 B N uns 2 0.25867106 B N uns 3 0.44983662 STORY MEMFEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 F 0.09955464 hig 2 S 0.07872639 hig 3 F 0.01014210 hig 3 S 0.10822367 low 2 F 0.16629806 low 2 S 0.21172850 low 3 F 0.32223361 low 3 S 0.28706676 uns 2 F 0.30957896 uns 2 S 0.33255420 uns 3 F 0.56654049 uns 3 S 0.57105313 hig 2 F 0.09005462 hig 2 S 0.12844697 hig 3 F 0.07317803 hig 3 S 0.17616966 low 2 F 0.14075532 low 2 S 0.18292201 low 3 F 0.21340254 low 3 S 0.19305188 uns 2 F 0.29269682 uns 2 S 0.25888012 uns 3 F 0.52161606 uns 3 S 0.44172997 DELAY HEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSHEAN hig 2 F 0.08815560 hig 2 S 0.10650416 hig 3 F 0.07884088 hig 3 S 0.12096269 low 2 F 0.17565022 low 2 S 0.18395072 low 3 F 0.24956657 low 3 S 0.15047761 uns 2 F 0.31718693 uns 2 S 0.30477642 uns 3 F 0.57429981 uns 3 S 0.52416682 N hig 2 F 0.10145366 N hig 2 S 0.10066919 N hig 3 F 0.00447925 N hig 3 S 0.16343064 N low 2 F 0.13140316 N low 2 S 0.21069979 N low 3 F 0.28606958 N low 3 S 0.32964103 N uns 2 F 0.28508884 N uns 2 S 0.28665790 N uns 3 F 0.51385675 N uns 3 S 0.48861628 STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A L hig 2 F 0.07870800 A L hig 2 S 0.03705149 AL hig 3 F 0.07008966 A L hig 3 S 0.12506417 A L low 2 F 0.16937831 AL low 2 S 0.20468363 A L low 3 F 0.30538378 A L low 3 S 0.16675551 A L uns 2 F 0.32749049 AL uns 2 S 0.33062444 A L uns 3 F 0.55903631 A L uns 3 S 0.61087813 A N hig 2 F 0.12040128 AN hig 2 S 0.12040128 A N hig 3 F -0.04980546 A N hig 3 S 0.09138317 A N low 2 F 0.16321781 A N low 2 S 0.21877337 A N low 3 F 0.33908343 A N low 3 S 0.40737801 A N uns 2 F 0.29166742 A N uns 2 S 0.33448395 AN uns 3 F 0.57404467 A N uns 3 S 0.53122814 B L hig 2 F 0.09760320 B L hig 2 S 0.17595683 B L hig 3 F 0.08759211 B L hig 3 S 0.11686121 B L low 2 F 0.18192213 B L low 2 S 0.16321781 B L low 3 F 0.19374936 B L low 3 S 0.13419971 B L uns 2 F 0.30688337 B L uns 2 S 0.27892840 B L uns 3 F 0.58956331 B L uns 3 S 0.43745552 B N hig 2 F 0.08250604 BN hig 2 S 0.08093711 B N hig 3 F 0.05876395 B N hig 3 S 0.23547810 B N low 2 F 0.09958850 B N low 2 S 0.20262621 B N low 3 F 0.23305572 B N low 3 S 0.25190405 B N uns 2 F 0.27851026 B N uns 2 S 0.23883185 B N uns 3 F 0.45366882 BN uns 3 S 0.44600442 Analysis 19. The change analysis controlling for source memory, Study 3. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 219 117.57572832 0.53687547 3.03 0.0001 Error 1175 208.33394910 0.17730549 Corrected Total 1394 325.90967742 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.360762 113.1795 0.4210766 0.3720430 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STOR*DELAY*RECAL) 147 51.31020065 0.34904898 1.97 0.0001 FEEDID 1 0.18844473 0.18844473 1.06 0.3028 STORY 1 0.09357861 0.09357861 0.53 0.4677 DELAY 1 0.00001014 0.00001014 0.00 0.9940 RECALPOS 1 0.01262091 0.01262091 0.07 0.7897 STORY*DELAY 1 0.30789575 0.30789575 1.74 0.1878 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.00553613 0.00553613 0.03 0.8598 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.12850344 0.12850344 0.72 0.3948 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.36539198 0.36539198 2.06 0.1514 MEM 2 28.19044975 14.09522487 79.50 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 2 0.66963069 0.33481534 1.89 0.1518 DELAY*MEM 2 1.05130127 0.52565063 2.96 0.0520 MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.05308130 0.02654065 0.15 0.8610 ST0RY*DELAY*MEM 2 0.65289077 0.32644539 1.84 0.1591 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.20789918 0.10394959 0.59 0.5566 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 2 0.14444712 0.07222356 0.41 0.6655 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 2 0.15515231 0.07757616 0.44 0.6457 FEEDBACK 2 21.10307147 10.55153574 59.51 0.0001 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.16433505 0.08216752 0.46 0.6292 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.04885934 0.02442967 0.14 0.8713 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 2 0.59467714 0.29733857 1.68 0.1874 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.66779711 0.33389855 1.88 0.1526 STORY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.11671167 0.05835584 0.33 0.7196 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.95818364 0.47909182 2.70 0.0675 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 2 0.07885518 0.03942759 0.22 0.8007 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 6.30350371 1.57587593 8.89 0.0001 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 1.03251367 0.25812842 1.46 0.2135 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.27086373 0.06771593 0.38 0.8217 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 4 0.18550285 0.04637571 0.26 0.9026 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 4 0.04798913 0.01199728 0.07 0.9916 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 4 0.53625174 0.13406294 0.76 0.5540 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 4 0.32803164 0.08200791 0.46 0.7633 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 4 0.81869774 0.20467444 1.15 0.3294 301 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 25.83735939 25.83735939 145.72 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 2.31059250 2.31059250 13.03 0.0003 feedback linear 1 19.76526580 19.76526580 111.48 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 0.73128342 0.73128342 4.12 0.0425 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY CHANGE LSMEAN A 0.37999034 B 0.36355662 DELAY CHANGE LSMEAN L 0.37183192 N 0.37171504 RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN F 0.36876561 S 0.37478135 STORY DELAY CHANGE LSMEAN A L 0.39497832 A N 0.36500235 B L 0.34868552 B N 0.37842772 STORY RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A F 0.37898782 A S 0.38099285 B F 0.35854339 B S 0.36856984 DELAY RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN L F 0.37845698 L S 0.36520686 N F 0.35907423 N S 0.38435584 STORY DELAY RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A LF 0.38733129 AL S 0.40262535 AN F 0.37064435 A N S 0.35936035 B LF 0.36958267 B L S 0.32778837 B NF 0.34750412 B NS 0.40935132 MEM CHANGE LSMEAN hig 0.17511390 low 0.42965367 uns 0.51055286 STORY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 0.15567048 A low 0.46406399 A uns 0.52023654 B hig 0.19455732 B low 0.39524335 B uns 0.50086919 DELAY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN L hig 0.18214229 L low 0.39299346 L uns 0.54036001 N hig 0.16808551 N low 0.46631388 N uns 0.48074571 LSMEAN LSMEAN CHANGE LSMEAN 0.15365957 0.43764410 0.15768139 0.49048388 0.44684179 0.34834282 0.48708874 0.17848964 0.44214388 0.51464964 low low low MEM hig unshig 0.59363128 uns hig 0.21062501 hig L NL low L uns N N N uns low low F low S 0.47576418 0.45236380 low low F low S 0.36865718 0.42182952 hig F hig S uns F uns S hig 0.15248278 F 0.15885818 0.50871650 0.53175657 0.20925519 hig S uns F uns S 0.17985946 0.49771782 0.50402056 low F low S 0.42221068 0.43709666 MEM RECALPOS hig F hig S CHANGE 0.18086898 0.16935882 uns F uns S 0.50321716 0.51788856 STORY DELAY AL B B B B ALALA BN B A AN STORY MEM RECALPOS<<<<< DELAY MEM RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN L hig F 0.15707428 L hig S 0.15024487 L low F 0.45231606 L low S 0.42297214 L uns F 0.55260354 L uns S 0.63465903 N hig F 0.14789129 N hig S 0.16747149 N low F 0.49921230 N low S 0.48175546 N uns F 0.46482947 N uns S 0.42885411 hig F 0.23579085 hig S 0.18545917 low F 0.36414000 low S 0.33254563 uns F 0.50881716 uns S 0.46536031 N hig F 0.18271952 N hig S 0.17425975 N low F 0.37317436 N low S 0.51111340 N uns F 0.48661847 N uns S 0.54268080 FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 0.20515599 2 0.40644758 3 0.50371686 STORY FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 0.22850290 A 2 0.40967406 A 3 0.50179404 B 1 0.18180908 B 2 0.40322110 B 3 0.50563967 DELAY FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN L 1 0.21364495 L 2 0.40228300 L 3 0.49956780 N 1 0.19666704 N 2 0.41061216 N 3 0.50786591 FEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN 1 F 0.23048135 1 S 0.17983063 2 F 0.38258631 2 S 0.43030885 3 F 0.49322916 3 S 0.51420456 STORY DELAY FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN AL 1 0.26968870 A L 2 0.38946278 A L 3 0.52578348 A N 1 0.18731711 A N 2 0.42988534 A N 3 0.47780461 B L 1 0.15760121 BL 2 0.41510323 B L 3 0.47335213 B N 1 0.20601696 B N 2 0.39133898 8 N 3 0.53792721 STORY FEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 F 0.26820100 A 1 S 0.18880481 A 2 F 0.38508789 A 2 S 0.43426023 A 3 F 0.48367457 A 3 S 0.51991351 B 1 F 0.19276171 B 1 S 0.17085646 B 2 F 0.38008473 B 2 S 0.42635747 B 3 F 0.50278375 B 3 S 0.50849560 DELAYFEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN 1 F 0.25939240 1 S 0.16789751 2 F 0.35178725 2 S 0.45277875 3 F 0.52419129 3 S 0.47494432 N 1 F 0.20157031 N 1 S 0.19176376 N 2 F 0.41338537 N 2 S 0.40783895 N 3 F 0.46226703 N 3 S 0.55346479 307 STORY DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A L 1 F 0.31337495 A L 1 S 0.22600245 A L 2 F 0.33129660 AL 2 S 0.44762896 A L 3 F 0.51732231 A L 3 S 0.53424464 AN 1 F 0.22302704 AN 1 S 0.15160717 A N 2 F 0.43887918 A N 2 S 0.42089150 AN 3 F 0.45002683 A N 3 S 0.50558239 B L 1 F 0.20540984 BL 1 S 0.10979257 B L 2 F 0.37227791 B L 2 S 0.45792854 B L 3 F 0.53106027 BL 3 S 0.41564400 BN 1 F 0.18011358 B N 1 S 0.23192035 B N 2 F 0.38789155 BN 2 S 0.39478641 B N 3 F 0.47450722 B N 3 S 0.60134720 MEM FEEDBACKCHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.13505873 hig 2 0.15474153 hig 3 0.23554144 low 1 0.22264037 low 2 0.50889482 low 3 0.55742581 uns 1 0.25776888 uns 2 0.55570639 uns 3 0.71818331 STORY HEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 1 0.12172364 A hig 2 0.18003177 A hig 3 0.16525604 A low 1 0.27296697 A low 2 0.52487097 A low 3 0.59435404 A uns 1 0.29081811 A uns 2 0.52411945 A uns 3 0.74577205 B hig 1 0.14839382 B hig 2 0.12945129 B hig 3 0.30582685 B low 1 0.17231378 B low 2 0.49291867 B low 3 0.52049759 B uns 1 0.22471965 B uns 2 0.58729334 B uns 3 0.69059457 DELAY HEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.16707418 hig 2 0.15718261 hig 3 0.22217008 low 1 0.19631888 low 2 0.45037763 low 3 0.53228387 uns 1 0.27754180 uns 2 0.59928877 uns 3 0.74424946 N hig 1 0.10304328 N hig 2 0.15230045 N hig 3 0.24891280 N low 1 0.24896187 N low 2 0.56741201 N low 3 0.58256776 N uns 1 0.23799595 N uns 2 0.51212401 N uns 3 0.69211717 309 HEMFEEDBACK RECALPOSCHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 F 0.17901692 hig 1 S 0.09110055 hig 2 F 0.14834423 hig 2 S 0.16113884 hig 3 F 0.21524581 hig 3 S 0.25583707 tow 1 F 0.24891486 low 1 S 0.19636589 low 2 F 0.46581454 low 2 S 0.55197510 low 3 F 0.55190264 low 3 S 0.56294899 uns 1 F 0.26351229 uns 1 S 0.25202547 uns 2 F 0.53360016 uns 2 S 0.57781262 uns 3 F 0.71253903 uns 3 S 0.72382760 03CDcs(sa3Qooona>a3aiooo9CDCocBa3O3>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>STORY o 1 3 low hig N N N n 2 uns 2 1 N low 3 N low N hig N N N N N EA E EDAKCHANGE FEEDBACK MEM DELAY n 3 2 uns uns N N uns 2 low M 1 N N hig N i 2 hig N i 3 2 hig hig uns 1 uns hig n 3 2 uns 1 uns uns hig uns i 1 hig i 0.15613965 1 uns uns 3 2 hig hig hig low o 0.60005778 3 2 low 1 low low o 2 low 1 low low low 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 0.66734592 0.62150775 0.28820051 0.16830444 0.71384323 0.55307893 0.27702676 0.57648522 0.53033985 0.12141757 0.44525776 0.26761676 0.17241254 0.46450996 0.45549749 0.12502100 0.17537008 0.67039111 0.47116910 0.19896515 0.58865030 0.27831718 0.17437242 0.21400276 0.08466900 0.82115300 0.21960656 0.32345319 0.09059815 0.38267106 0.14606078 0.57706979 0.15877828 0.60448417 LSMEAN STORY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 1 F 0.17257105 A hig 1 S 0.07087623 A hig 2 F 0.16452551 A hig 2 S 0.19553803 A hig 3 F 0.12035180 A hig 3 S 0.21016027 A Lou 1 F 0.31313539 A low 1 S 0.23279855 A low 2 F 0.47909947 A low 2 S 0.57064246 A low 3 F 0.63505768 A low 3 S 0.55365040 A uns 1 F 0.31889657 A uns 1 S 0.26273965 A uns 2 F 0.51163869 A uns 2 S 0.53660020 A uns 3 F 0.69561425 A uns 3 S 0.79592986 B hig 1 F 0.18546279 B hig 1 S 0.11132486 B hig 2 F 0.13216294 B hig 2 S 0.12673964 B hig 3 F 0.31013983 B hig 3 S 0.30151387 B low 1 F 0.18469433 B low 1 S 0.15993323 B low 2 F 0.45252961 B low 2 S 0.53330773 B low 3 F 0.46874760 B low 3 S 0.57224758 B uns 1 F 0.20812801 B uns 1 S 0.24131129 B uns 2 F 0.55556163 B uns 2 S 0.61902504 B uns 3 F 0.72946381 B uns 3 S 0.65172534 312 DELAYHEMFEEDBACKRECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 F 0.23469809 hig 1 S 0.09945027 hig 2 F 0.14660496 hig 2 S 0.16776026 hig 3 F 0.20799464 hig 3 S 0.23634553 low 1 F 0.24795010 low 1 S 0.14468765 low 2 F 0.38566835 low 2 S 0.51508691 low 3 F 0.59106563 low 3 S 0.47350211 uns 1 F 0.29552900 uns 1 S 0.25955460 uns 2 F 0.52308845 uns 2 S 0.67548909 uns 3 F 0.77351360 uns 3 S 0.71498531 N hig 1 F 0.12333574 N hig 1 S 0.08275082 N hig 2 F 0.15008349 N hig 2 S 0.15451742 N hig 3 F 0.22249699 N hig 3 S 0.27532862 N low 1 F 0.24987961 N low 1 S 0.24804413 N low 2 F 0.54596073 N low 2 S 0.58886329 N low 3 F 0.51273965 N low 3 S 0.65239587 N uns 1 F 0.23149558 N uns 1 S 0.24449633 N uns 2 F 0.54411188 N uns 2 S 0.48013615 N uns 3 F 0.65156445 N uns 3 S 0.73266989 313 STORY DELAYMEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN AL hig 1 F 0.23269532 A L hig 1 S 0.08486125 A L hig 2 F 0.11504826 AL hig 2 S 0.17707331 AL hig 3 F 0.12347925 AL hig 3 S 0.18880006 AL low 1 F 0.35034238 AL tow 1 S 0.18489114 AL low 2 F 0.35371477 AL low 2 S 0.53680076 AL low 3 F 0.65289102 AL low 3 S 0.54722453 AL uns 1 F 0.35708717 AL uns 1 S 0.40825495 AL uns 2 F 0.52512676 A L uns 2 S 0.62901282 AL uns 3 F 0.77559667 A L uns 3 S 0.86670932 AN hig 1 F 0.11244677 A N hig 1 S 0.05689122 AN hig 2 F 0.21400276 AN hig 2 S 0.21400276 AN hig 3 F 0.11722434 A N hig 3 S 0.23152049 A N low 1 F 0.27592840 AN low 1 S 0.28070596 AN low 2 F 0.60448417 AN low 2 S 0.60448417 AN low 3 F 0.61722434 A N low 3 S 0.56007626 A N uns 1 F 0.28070596 A N uns 1 S 0.11722434 A N uns 2 F 0.49815062 AN uns 2 S 0.44418759 AN uns 3 F 0.61563182 AN uns 3 S 0.72515041 (continued next page) (continued) STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN B L hig 1 F 0.23670086 B L hig 1 S 0.11403930 BL hig 2 F 0.17816167 B L hig 2 S 0.15844720 B L hig 3 F 0.29251002 BL hig 3 S 0.28389100 B L low 1 F 0.14555782 B L low 1 S 0.10448417 B L low 2 F 0.41762193 B L low 2 S 0.49337306 B L low 3 F 0.52924024 B L low 3 S 0.39977968 B L uns 1 F 0.23397083 B L uns 1 S 0.11085425 B L uns 2 F 0.52105013 BL uns 2 S 0.72196536 B L uns 3 F 0.77143053 BL uns 3 S 0.56326130 BN hig 1 F 0.13422471 BN hig 1 S 0.10861043 B N hig 2 F 0.08616422 BN hig 2 S 0.09503209 B N hig 3 F 0.32776964 BN hig 3 S 0.31913674 B N low 1 F 0.22383083 BN low 1 S 0.21538229 B N low 2 F 0.48743729 BN low 2 S 0.57324241 BN low 3 F 0.40825495 BN low 3 S 0.74471549 BN uns 1 F 0.18228520 B N uns 1 S 0.37176832 BN uns 2 F 0.59007313 BN uns 2 S 0.51608472 B N uns 3 F 0.68749708 B N uns 3 S 0.74018937 Analysis 20. The yielding analysis controlling for failure to encode, Study 3. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 178 21.26040222 0.11944046 1.38 0.0112 Error 235 20.40384898 0.08682489 Corrected Total 413 41.66425121 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.510279 259.5521 0.2946606 0.1135266 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*DELAY*RECAL) 147 15.57937941 0.10598217 1.22 0.0870 STORY 1 0.07190480 0.07190480 0.83 0.3637 DELAY 1 0.71182834 0.71182834 8.20 0.0046 RECALPOS 1 0.00113992 0.00113992 0.01 0.9089 STORY*DELAY 1 0.13333988 0.13333988 1.54 0.2165 ST0RY*RECALP0S 1 0.00069393 0.00069393 0.01 0.9288 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.03252168 0.03252168 0.37 0.5411 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.01248362 0.01248362 0.14 0.7049 MEM 1 1.40509101 1.40509101 16.18 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.39401601 0.39401601 4.54 0.0342 DELAY*MEM 1 0.41912585 0.41912585 4.83 0.0290 MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.03789555 0.03789555 0.44 0.5095 STORY*DELAY*MEM 1 0.05703735 0.05703735 0.66 0.4185 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.01076154 0.01076154 0.12 0.7251 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.06072519 0.06072519 0.70 0.4038 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 1 0.14132792 0.14132792 1.63 0.2033 FEEDBACK 1 0.81789587 0.81789587 9.42 0.0024 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.04034363 0.04034363 0.46 0.4961 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.01138183 0.01138183 0.13 0.7176 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 1 0.01381982 0.01381982 0.16 0.6903 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.03915657 0.03915657 0.45 0.5025 STORY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 1 0.03683893 0.03683893 0.42 0.5154 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 1 0.00217991 0.00217991 0.03 0.8742 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 1 0.00725816 0.00725816 0.08 0.7727 MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.00882421 0.00882421 0.10 0.7502 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.03041725 0.03041725 0.35 0.5545 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.02624944 0.02624944 0.30 0.5829 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 1 0.13098272 0.13098272 1.51 0.2206 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 1 0.00093143 0.00093143 0.01 0.9176 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 1 0.02017613 0.02017613 0.23 0.6302 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 1 0.16303435 0.16303435 1.88 0.1719 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 1 0.00476466 0.00476466 0.05 0.8150 General Linear Models Procedure Level of -YIELD- STORY Mean SD A 206 0.11650485 0.32161091 B 208 0.11057692 0.31436410 Level of -YIELD- DELAY Mean SD L 211 0.07582938 0.26535448 N 203 0.15270936 0.36059638 Level of -YIELD- RECALPOS N Mean SD 211 0.10426540 0.30633130 203 0.12315271 0.32942481 Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY DELAY N Mean SD A L 106 0.05660377 0.23218173 A N 100 0.18000000 0.38612292 B L 105 0.09523810 0.29495141 B N 103 0.12621359 0.33371385 Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY RECALPOS N Mean SD A F 98 0.11224490 0.31729050 A S 108 0.12037037 0.32691113 B F 113 0.09734513 0.29774755 B S 95 0.12631579 0.33396730 Level of Level of -YIELD- DELAY RECALPOS N Mean SD L F 109 0.08256881 0.27650063 L S 102 0.06862745 0.25406805 N F 102 0.12745098 0.33512429 N S 101 0.17821782 0.38460472 317 Level of Level of Level of YIELD STORY DELAY RECALPOS N Mean SD A L F 47 0.06382979 0.24709225 A LS 59 0.05084746 0.22157188 A N F 51 0.15686275 0.36729002 A NS 49 0.20408163 0.40720551 B LF 62 0.09677419 0.29806355 B L S 43 0.09302326 0.29390260 B N F 51 0.09803922 0.30032662 B NS 52 0.15384615 0.36432131 Level of ...... YIELD..... HEM N Mean SD hig 267 0.,06367041 0.24462341 low 147 0 . 20408163 0.40440681 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-' STORY MEMN Mean SD A hig 130 0.04615385 0.21062986 A low 76 0.23684211 0.42796950 B hig 137 0.08029197 0.27274191 B low 71 0.16901408 0.37743175 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-- DELAY MEM N Mean SD L hig 136 0.05147059 0.22177242 L low 75 0.12000000 0.32714985 N hig 131 0.07633588 0.26655410 N low 72 0.29166667 0.45771939 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-- HEM RECALPOS N Mean SD hig F 135 0.04444444 0.20684794 hig S 132 0.08333333 0.27743830 low F 76 0.21052632 0.41039134 low S 71 0.19718310 0.40070361 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAY MEM N Mean SD A L hig 67 0.02985075 0.17145980 A L low 39 0.10256410 0.30735474 A N hig 63 0.06349206 0.24580453 A N low 37 0.37837838 0.49167239 B L hig 69 0.07246377 0.26115358 B L low 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B N hig 68 0.08823529 0.28574564 B N low 35 0.20000000 0.40583972 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORYMEMRECALPOS N Mean SD A hig F 63 0.03174603 0.17673143 A hig S 67 0.05970149 0.23872115 A low F 35 0.25714286 0.44343957 A low S 41 0.21951220 0.41905818 B hig F 72 0.05555556 0.23066889 B hig S 65 0.10769231 0.31240383 B low F 41 0.17073171 0.38094875 B low S 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAY MEM RECALPOS N Mean SD L hig F 67 0.04477612 0.20837290 L hig S 69 0.05797101 0.23540066 L low F 42 0.14285714 0.35416880 L low S 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 N hig F 68 0.04411765 0.20688331 N hig S 63 0.11111111 0.31679398 N low F 34 0.29411765 0.46249729 N low S 38 0.28947368 0.45960587 Level Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY DELAYMEM RECALPOS N Mean SD L hig F 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 L hig S 37 0.02702703 0.16439899 L low F 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 L low S 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 N hig F 33 0.03030303 0.17407766 N hig S 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 N low F 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 N low S 19 0.36842105 0.49559463 L hig F 37 0.05405405 0.22924344 L hig S 32 0.09375000 0.29614458 L low F 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 L low S 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 N hig F 35 0.05714286 0.23550411 N hig S 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 N low F 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 N low S 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 Level of •--YIELD' FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 205 0.06829268 0.25286498 3 209 0.15789474 0.36551777 Level of Level of ...... YIELD STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 2 98 0.07142857 0.25886350 A 3 108 0.15740741 0.36588229 B 2 107 0.06542056 0.24843009 B 3 101 0.15841584 0.36695158 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAY FEEDBACKN Mean SD L 2 104 0.03846154 0.19323897 L 3 107 0.11214953 0.31703529 N 2 101 0.09900990 0.30016497 N 3 102 0.20588235 0.40634169 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- FEEDBACKRECALPOSN Mean SD 2 F 105 0.06666667 0.25064021 2 S 100 0.07000000 0.25643240 3 F 106 0.14150943 0.35020210 3 S 103 0.17475728 0.38161639 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A L 2 53 0.01886792 0.13736056 A L 3 53 0.09433962 0.29509783 A 2 45 0.13333333 0.34377583 A 3 55 0.21818182 0.41681815 B L 2 51 0.05882353 0.23763541 B L 3 54 0.12962963 0.33904952 B 2 56 0.07142857 0.25987010 B 3 47 0.19148936 0.39772712 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A 2 F 48 0.08333333 0.27931019 A 2 S 50 0.06000000 0.23989794 A 3 F 50 0.14000000 0.35050983 A 3 S 58 0.17241379 0.38103879 B 2 F 57 0.05263158 0.22528178 B 2 S 50 0.08000000 0.27404752 B 3 F 56 0.14285714 0.35309393 B 3 S 45 0.17777778 0.38664577 QOC0O3ODO3O3ISO3^>>>>>>> STORY Level hig A A low B B A A i 3 hig B B TR MEM STORY of Level DELAY S 3 N 52 49 S F S of 2 Level 2 of 3 N N N L S 3 2 2 L L L Level of Level E FEEDBACK MEM 3 N N i 3 2 hig hig 3 of Level F S N 3 2 N N N 2 N RECALPOS FEEDBACK DELAY 3 3 2 L L 2 L L 3 N L L L L o 3 2 low low i 2 .32860.17812704 0.03225806 62 2 hig i 9 .29510.16899482 0.02898551 69 2 hig Level 3 low low low EDAKRCLO Mean N RECALPOS FEEDBACK . of 30 S 2 S 3 20 S 2 ee of Level 31 S 3 28 25 S F 2 2 ee of Level fLevel of 3 .11110.41514875 0.21212121 33 3 8 .58330.23704354 0.32500000 0.05882353 40 68 3 3 8 .35850.34256999 0.13157895 38 2 2 ee of Level EDAKN enSD Mean N FEEDBACK 53 53 F F 56 F 23 S S 25 26 F 31 F F Level 3 .35450.17271280 0.09558824 0.03053435 136 131 101932 0.34077710 0.12903226 31 F 23 22 F F 30.27397260 0.13513514 73 74 of enSD Mean N 8 .33240.34139362 0.35073619 0.13235294 68 0.13888889 36 90.24489796 49 0.02083333 48 of 54 202777 0.42893203 0.22727273 22 0.44657608 0.25925926 27 28 22 ...... enSD Mean N .68120.37906002 0.31722063 0.16981132 0.31987842 0.11111111 0.11320755 .86250.27664167 0.11538462 0.08163265 0.22720778 0.05357143 --YIELD .65630.24973104 0.06451613 .00000.30512858 0.19611614 0.10000000 0.03846154 .60000.37416574 0.16000000 0.22360680 0.13043478 0.39002103 0.05000000 0.35125009 0.34435022 0.17857143 0.13636364 0.00000000 0.13043478 0.20000000 0.09677419 0.09090909 0.00000000 0.04000000 YIELD YIELD ...... 0.44908159 0.34420145 0.29511270 ...... YIELD 0.47434165 0.43448304 0.32260254 0.14433757 SD ...... 0.34435022 0.29424494 0.30053715 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- DELAYMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD L hig 2 68 0.01470588 0.12126781 L hig 3 68 0.08823529 0.28574564 L low 2 36 0.08333333 0.28030596 L low 3 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 N hig 2 63 0.04761905 0.21466940 N hig 3 68 0.10294118 0.30614141 N low 2 38 0.18421053 0.39285945 N low 3 34 0.41176471 0.49955417 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- MEMFEEDBACKRECALPOS N Mean SD hig 2 F 67 0.02985075 0.17145980 hig 2 S 64 0.03125000 0.17536809 hig 3 F 68 0.05882353 0.23704354 hig 3 S 68 0.13235294 0.34139362 I OH 2 F 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 low 2 S 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 I OH 3 F 38 0.28947368 0.45960587 low 3 S 35 0.25714286 0.44343957 level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAYMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL hig 2 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L hig 3 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 AL low 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 AL low 3 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 AN hig 2 29 0.06896552 0.25788071 A N hig 3 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 A N low 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 AN low 3 21 0.47619048 0.51176632 B L hig 2 35 0.02857143 0.16903085 BL hig 3 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 BL low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 BL low 3 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 BN hig 2 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 B N hig 3 34 0.14705882 0.35949063 BN low 2 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 B N low 3 13 0.30769231 0.48038446 Level of Level of Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A hig 2 F 29 0.03448276 0.18569534 A hig 2 S 33 0.03030303 0.17407766 A hig 3 F 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 A hig 3 S 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 A low 2 F 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 A low 2 S 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A low 3 F 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 A low 3 S 24 0.29166667 0.46430562 B hig 2 F 38 0.02631579 0.16222142 B hig 2 S 31 0.03225806 0.17960530 B hig 3 F 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 B hig 3 S 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 B low 2 F 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B low 2 S 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B low 3 F 22 0.22727273 0.42893203 B low 3 S 11 0.18181818 0.40451992 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIEI.D- DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD hig 2 F 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 hig 2 S 35 0.02857143 0.16903085 hig 3 F 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 hig 3 S 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 low 2 F 23 0.13043478 0.34435022 low 2 S 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 low 3 F 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 low 3 S 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 N hig 2 F 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 N hig 2 S 29 0.03448276 0.18569534 N hig 3 F 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 N hig 3 S 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 N low 2 F 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 N low 2 S 23 0.21739130 0.42174117 N low 3 F 19 0.42105263 0.50725727 N low 3 S 15 0.40000000 0.50709255 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD AL hig 2 F 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L hig 2 S 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 AL hig 3 F 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 A L hig 3 S 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 AL low 2 F 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 AL low 2 S 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L low 3 F 6 0.16666667 0.40824829 AL low 3 S 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 A N hig 2 F 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 A N hig 2 S 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 A N hig 3 F 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 AN hig 3 S 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 A N low 2 F 8 0.25000000 0.46291005 A N low 2 S 8 0.25000000 0.46291005 A N low 3 F 10 0.50000000 0.52704628 A N low 3 S 11 0.45454545 0.52223297 B L hig 2 F 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 BL hig 2 S 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 BL hig 3 F 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B L hig 3 S 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B L low 2 F 120.16666667 0.38924947 B L low 2 S 4 0.00000000 0.00000000 BL low 3 F 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 BL low 3 S 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 BN hig 2 F 19 0.05263158 0.22941573 B N hig 2 S 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 F 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B N hig 3 S 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 B N low 2 F 7 0.00000000 0.00000000 BN low 2 S 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 BN low 3 F 9 0.33333333 0.50000000 BN low 3 S 4 0.25000000 0.50000000 324 Analysis 21. The yielding analysis controlling for failure to encode and source memory, Study 3. The means are adjusted for the covariate. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 179 22.22553085 0.12416498 1.49 0.0020 Error 234 19.43872036 0.08307145 Corrected Total 413 41.66425121 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.533444 253.8799 0.2882212 0.1135266 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*DELAY*RECAL) 147 15.54145551 0.10572419 1.27 0.0503 FEED ID 1 0.96512862 0.96512862 11.62 0.0008 STORY 1 0.02742634 0.02742634 0.33 0.5661 DELAY 1 0.71798452 0.71798452 8.64 0.0036 RECALPOS 1 0.00359144 0.00359144 0.04 0.8355 STORY*DELAY 1 0.21575318 0.21575318 2.60 0.1084 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.00000254 0.00000254 0.00 0.9956 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.00407889 0.00407889 0.05 0.8248 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.02702308 0.02702308 0.33 0.5690 MEM 1 1.60268787 1.60268787 19.29 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.36226181 0.36226181 4.36 0.0379 DELAY*MEM 1 0.44114322 0.44114322 5.31 0.0221 MEM*RECALP0S 1 0.03471439 0.03471439 0.42 0.5186 ST0RY*DE LAY*MEM 1 0.05226094 0.05226094 0.63 0.4285 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.00000958 0.00000958 0.00 0.9914 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.00736478 0.00736478 0.09 0.7662 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 1 0.11028044 0.11028044 1.33 0.2504 FEEDBACK 1 0.04269478 0.04269478 0.51 0.4741 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.01301316 0.01301316 0.16 0.6926 DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.01445183 0.01445183 0.17 0.6770 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 1 0.00209705 0.00209705 0.03 0.8739 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 1 0.13919407 0.13919407 1.68 0.1968 STORY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 1 0.02207958 0.02207958 0.27 0.6067 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 1 0.00172761 0.00172761 0.02 0.8855 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 1 0.00972489 0.00972489 0.12 0.7325 MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.00306674 0.00306674 0.04 0.8478 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.06035014 0.06035014 0.73 0.3949 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.04831098 0.04831098 0.58 0.4465 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 1 0.18853614 0.18853614 2.27 0.1333 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 1 0.00216275 0.00216275 0.03 0.8720 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 1 0.00048040 0.00048040 0.01 0.9394 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 1 0.14688378 0.14688378 1.77 0.1849 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 1 0.01126101 0.01126101 0.14 0.7131 325 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY YIELD LSMEAN A 0.14902688 B 0.12881725 DELAY YIELD LSMEAN L 0.08745203 N 0.19039210 RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN F 0.13528781 S 0.14255632 STORY DELAY YIELD LSMEAN A L 0.06920016 A N 0.22885361 B L 0.10570390 B N 0.15193060 STORY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A F 0.14529682 A S 0.15275695 B F 0.12527881 B S 0.13235569 DELAY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L F 0.08771558 L S 0.08718848 N F 0.18286005 N S 0.19792415 STORYDELAY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A LF 0.05937087 ALS 0.07902945 A NF 0.23122276 A NS 0.22648445 B LF 0.11606028 BLS 0.09534752 B NF 0.13449734 B NS 0.16936386 MEM YIELD LSMEAN hig 0.06413972 low 0.21370441 STORY MEMYIELD LSMEAN A hig 0.03881222 A low 0.25924155 B hig 0.08946722 B low 0.16816728 DELAY MEM YIELD LSMEAN L hig 0.05176228 L low 0.12314177 N hig 0.07651715 N low 0.30426705 MEM RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN hig F 0.04954040 hig S 0.07873903 low F 0.22103522 low S 0.20637361 327 STORY DELAYMEM YIELD LSMEAN A L hig 0.01153214 AL low 0.12686818 AN hig 0.06609229 AN low 0.39161492 B L hig 0.09199243 B L low 0.11941536 BN hig 0.08694200 B N low 0.21691919 STORY MEM RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A hig F 0.02393398 A hig S 0.05369045 A low F 0.26665966 A low S 0.25182344 B hig F 0.07514683 B hig S 0.10378761 B low F 0.17541079 B low S 0.16092377 DELAY MEM RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L hig F 0.03594432 L hig S 0.06758025 L low F 0.13948684 L low S 0.10679671 N hig F 0.06313649 N hig S 0.08989781 N low F 0.30258361 N low S 0.30595050 STORY DELAYMEMRECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L hig F 0.00500033 L hig S 0.01806394 L low F 0.11374141 L tow S 0.13999496 N hig F 0.04286762 N hig S 0.08931697 N tow F 0.41957791 N low S 0.36365193 L hig F 0.06688830 L hig S 0.11709657 L low F 0.16523226 L low S 0.07359847 N hig F 0.08340536 N hig S 0.09047865 N low F 0.18558932 N low S 0.24824907 FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 2 0.12397939 3 0.15386474 STORY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 2 0.14097155 A 3 0.15708222 B 2 0.10698723 B 3 0.15064726 DELAY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN L 2 0.07974025 L 3 0.09516381 N 2 0.16821854 N 3 0.21256567 329 FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN 2 F 0.12310664 2 S 0.12485214 3 F 0.14746899 3 S 0.16026049 STORY DELAY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A L 2 0.04555709 A L 3 0.09284323 A N 2 0.23638600 A N 3 0.22132121 B L 2 0.11392340 B L 3 0.09748440 BN 2 0.10005107 BN 3 0.20381013 STORY FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A 2 F 0.13105750 A 2 S 0.15088560 A 3 F 0.15953614 A 3 S 0.15462829 B 2 F 0.11515578 B 2 S 0.09881869 B 3 F 0.13540183 B 3 S 0.16589269 DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN L 2 F 0.08526517 L 2 S 0.07421533 L 3 F 0.09016598 L 3 S 0.10016164 N 2 F 0.16094811 N 2 S 0.17548896 N 3 F 0.20477199 N 3 S 0.22035935 STORY DELAYFEEDBACKRECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A L 2 F 0.03797530 A L 2 S 0.05313889 A L 3 F 0.08076645 A L 3 S 0.10492000 A N 2 F 0.22413970 A N 2 S 0.24863231 A N 3 F 0.23830583 A N 3 S 0.20433659 B L 2 F 0.13255504 B L 2 S 0.09529177 B L 3 F 0.09956552 B L 3 S 0.09540327 B N 2 F 0.09775653 B N 2 S 0.10234561 B N 3 F 0.17123814 B N 3 S 0.23638211 MEH FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 0.05254169 hig 3 0.07573774 low 2 0.19541709 low 3 0.23199174 STORYMEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A hig 2 0.04896697 A hig 3 0.02865746 A low 2 0.23297613 A low 3 0.28550698 B hig 2 0.05611641 B hig 3 0.12281802 B low 2 0.15785806 B low 3 0.17847650 DELAY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN L hig 2 0.03410711 L hig 3 0.06941746 L low 2 0.12537339 L low 3 0.12091016 N hig 2 0.07097627 N hig 3 0.08205802 N low 2 0.26546080 N low 3 0.34307331 HEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 F 0.06698161 hig 2 S 0.03810178 hig 3 F 0.03209920 hig 3 S 0.11937628 low 2 F 0.17923167 low 2 S 0.21160251 low 3 F 0.26283877 low 3 S 0.20114470 STORY DELAY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A L hig 2 -0.00437363 A L hig 3 0.02743790 A L low 2 0.09548782 A L low 3 0.15824855 A N hig 2 0.10230757 A N hig 3 0.02987701 A N low 2 0.37046443 A N low 3 0.41276540 B L hig 2 0.07258785 B L hig 3 0.11139702 B L low 2 0.15525896 B L low 3 0.08357177 B N hig 2 0.03964497 B N hig 3 0.13423903 B N low 2 0.16045716 B N low 3 0.27338122 STORYMEMFEEDBACKRECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A hig 2 F 0.05551505 A hig 2 S 0.04241889 A hig 3 F -0.00764709 A hig 3 S 0.06496201 A low 2 F 0.20659994 A low 2 S 0.25935231 A low 3 F 0.32671938 A low 3 S 0.24429458 B hig 2 F 0.07844816 B hig 2 S 0.03378466 B hig 3 F 0.07184549 B hig 3 S 0.17379056 B low 2 F 0.15186340 B low 2 S 0.16385272 B low 3 F 0.19895817 B low 3 S 0.15799482 DELAYMEMFEEDBACKRECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 F 0.02669379 hig 2 S 0.04152042 hig 3 F 0.04519484 hig 3 S 0.09364008 low 2 F 0.14383654 low 2 S 0.10691024 low 3 F 0.13513713 low 3 S 0.10668319 N hig 2 F 0.10726942 N hig 2 S 0.03468313 N hig 3 F 0.01900356 N hig 3 S 0.14511249 N low 2 F 0.21462681 N low 2 S 0.31629479 N low 3 F 0.39054041 N low 3 S 0.29560621 03 03CBB3a3Q303Q3Q3t9CBQ3Q90aU3aQ>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> STORY o F 3 low N N i F 2 2 hig hig N N o F 3 3 low low 2 3 low N hig 2 N hig hig N N N N DELAY o 2 2 low low N N N N N N i 2 hig hig i 2 hig i 3 hig 2 hig E FEEDBACK MEM i F 3 3 hig hig i F S 3 3 hig 2 hig hig hig o S 3 low 3 low o 2 low o F F 3 2 low 2 low low o 3 2 low low o S 2 low o S 3 low F 3 F 3 2 S S 0.09563979 S S 0.10443415 S S S S S S 0.03428424 S 0.15299593 S YIELD RECALPOS F F 0.12162100 F 0.08654149 F F F F -0.03588576 -0.01362789 -0.01059090 0.27817903 0.26858341 0.21831911 0.06979811 0.08119721 0.06397849 0.31303339 0.32665840 0.12933293 0.10938632 0.20113159 0.10259522 0.19458519 0.07389288 0.09291784 0.03781062 0.02059157 0.17555576 0.14094134 0.51249741 0.41427046 0.08299415 0.00184364 LSMEAN 3 3 3 334 Analysis 22. The change analysis controlling for failure to encode. Study 3. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 194 42.30784242 0.21808166 1.83 0.0001 Error 440 52.50160640 0.11932183 Corrected Total 634 94.80944882 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.446241 189.0931 0.3454299 0.1826772 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*DELAY*RECAL ) 147 25.02087751 0.17021005 1.43 0.0032 STORY 1 0.01037385 0.01037385 0.09 0.7682 DELAY 1 1.14933833 1.14933833 9.63 0.0020 RECALPOS 1 0.00252588 0.00252588 0.02 0.8844 STORY*DELAY 1 0.03079884 0.03079884 0.26 0.6117 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.25703955 0.25703955 2.15 0.1429 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.00032572 0.00032572 0.00 0.9584 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.87662032 0.87662032 7.35 0.0070 MEM 1 5.55688461 5.55688461 46.57 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.03569333 0.03569333 0.30 0.5847 DELAY*MEM 1 1.47356467 1.47356467 12.35 0.0005 MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.00622846 0.00622846 0.05 0.8194 STORY*DELAY*MEM 1 0.04734137 0.04734137 0.40 0.5291 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.01876643 0.01876643 0.16 0.6919 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.00576298 0.00576298 0.05 0.8262 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 1 0.32484895 0.32484895 2.72 0.0997 FEEDBACK 2 1.50583235 0.75291617 6.31 0.0020 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.83367988 0.41683994 3.49 0.0312 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.28558387 0.14279193 1.20 0.3032 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 2 0.32309004 0.16154502 1.35 0.2593 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.65880222 0.32940111 2.76 0.0643 STORY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.18479056 0.09239528 0.77 0.4616 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.01501962 0.00750981 0.06 0.9390 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 2 0.70167234 0.35083617 2.94 0.0539 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.72241064 0.36120532 3.03 0.0495 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.96064402 0.48032201 4.03 0.0185 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.09539986 0.04769993 0.40 0.6707 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 2 0.02934079 0.01467040 0.12 0.8843 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.26609202 0.13304601 1.12 0.3288 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.01132899 0.00566449 0.05 0.9536 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.18029368 0.09014684 0.76 0.4704 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 2 0.37306789 0.18653394 1.56 0.2106 335 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 1.29972556 1.29972556 10.89 0.0010 feedback quadratic 1 0.15373516 0.15373516 1.29 0.2570 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... CHANGE.... STORY N Mean SD A 320 0.17812500 0.38321718 B 315 0.18730159 0.39077420 Level of -CHANGE- DELAY Mean SD L 320 0.15625000 0.36366085 N 315 0.20952381 0.40761630 Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS Mean SD F 318 0.17924528 0.38416208 S 317 0.18611987 0.38981872 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY DELAYN Mean SD A L 163 0.14110429 0.34920192 A N 157 0.21656051 0.41321863 B L 157 0.17197452 0.37856585 B N 158 0.20253165 0.40316414 Level of Level of STORY RECALPOS N Mean SD A F 149 0.16107383 0.36883883 AS 171 0.19298246 0.39579837 B F 169 0.19526627 0.39758357 B S 146 0.17808219 0.38389890 Level of Level of ...... -“LnANub' DELAY RECALPOS N Mean SD L F 160 0.16875000 0.37570688 L S 160 0.14375000 0.35193758 N F 158 0.18987342 0.39344791 N S 157 0.22929936 0.42172739 L L t I I DELAY I ITORY 03030300> ^ 2>> Level of .evel L L A A N A N N B B A L L B B TR DLY EAPS N RECALPOS DELAY STORY ee o Lvlo Lvl of Level Level of of Level E RECALPOS MEM i S hig i F hig low A DELAY low B low hig of Level of Level N N hig A ee o ee of Level of Level B low L o F low L STORY o S low ee of Level N N L L N N hig MEM ee of Level low S N MEM fLevel of i 208 hig hig MEM ee of Level hig i 0 0.13461538 104 hig hig hig MEM low low o 9 .07960.49544978 0.40677966 59 low 0.30458664 0,.10319410 407 low 0.46924091 0.32456140 228 S S S F F F F en SD Mean N 202 205 of 0 .90910.29263659 0.09405941 202 1 .34480.47242820 0.33043478 115 113 0 .11520.31637896 0.11219512 205 1 .19900.49507690 0.41592920 113 115 0 .34800.47471790 0.46606612 0.33644860 0.31404959 107 121 9 0.09547739 199 enSD Mean N enSD Mean N enSD Mean N ...... 0 00634 0.28251907 0.08653846 104 0 00909 0.28632184 0.08910891 101 4 .29530.49912572 0.42592593 54 3 .42320.43437224 0.24528302 53 0.10204082 98 2 .28650.42152552 0.22580645 62 ...... 9 .45630.43012192 0.41806880 0.24050633 0.10447761 0.37946346 79 0.22222222 67 90 0.17204301 93 ...... 9 0.16455696 0.41357993 79 0.21794872 0.21518987 78 0.10000000 79 70 Ma SD Mean N .15470.46800272 0.31858407 0.10396040 0.10243902 .15620.31436410 0.11057692 .37210.42571786 0.23478261 ...... CHANGE en SD Mean ...... CHANGE- CHANGE- CHANGE' ..... CHANGE CHANGE 0.30596745 0.30396708 0.29461437 ...... 0.34296515 0.30425830 0.37314944 0.30818768 0.41552458 0.30216609 337 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- STORYMEM RECALPOS N Mean SD A hig F 94 0.08510638 0.28053614 A hig S 105 0.10476190 0.30771520 A low F 55 0.29090909 0.45836777 A low S 66 0.33333333 0.47501687 B hig F 111 0.11711712 0.32301812 B hig S 97 0.10309278 0.30565967 B low F 58 0.34482759 0.47946330 B low S 49 0.32653061 0.47380354 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- DELAYMEMRECALPOS N Mean SD L hig F 100 0.12000000 0.32659863 L hig S 105 0.10476190 0.30771520 L low F 60 0.25000000 0.43666688 L low S 55 0.21818182 0.41681815 N hig F 105 0.08571429 0.28128434 N hig S 97 0.10309278 0.30565967 N low F 53 0.39622642 0.49379311 N low S 60 0.43333333 0.49971743 Level of Level. of Level. of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY DELAYMEM RECALPOS N Mean SD AL hig F 44 0.06818182 0.25497171 AL hig S 57 0.10526316 0.30962019 A L low F 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 A L low S 36 0.27777778 0.45425676 A N hig F 50 0.10000000 0.30304576 A N hig S 48 0.10416667 0.30870928 AN low F 29 0.41379310 0.50123001 AN low S 30 0.40000000 0.49827288 B L hig F 56 0.16071429 0.37059096 B L hig S 48 0.10416667 0.30870928 B L low F 34 0.32352941 0.47485808 B L low S 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B N hig F 55 0.07272727 0.26208180 B N hig S 49 0.10204082 0.30583887 B N low F 24 0.37500000 0.49453536 BN low S 30 0.46666667 0.50741626 Level of ---CHANGE...... FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 221 0.11764706 0.32292116 2 205 0.20487805 0.40460052 3 209 0.22966507 0.42162732 338 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 114 0.08771930 0.28413519 A 2 98 0.22448980 0.41939112 A 3 108 0.23148148 0.42374568 B 1 107 0.14953271 0.35829097 B 2 107 0.18691589 0.39167856 B 3 101 0.22772277 0.42145434 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD L 1 109 0.11926606 0.32559833 L 2 104 0.16346154 0.37157698 L 3 107 0.18691589 0.39167856 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- DELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 1 112 0.11607143 0.32175016 N 2 101 0.24752475 0.43372666 N 3 102 0.27450980 0.44847073 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 F 107 0.14953271 0.35829097 1 S 114 0.08771930 0.28413519 2 F 105 0.18095238 0.38682515 2 S 100 0.23000000 0.42295258 3 F 106 0.20754717 0.40747728 3 S 103 0.25242718 0.43652924 Level of Level of Level of CHANGE STORYDELAY FEEDBACK N Mean SD AL 1 57 0.10526316 0.30962019 A L 2 53 0.15094340 0.36141955 AL 3 53 0.16981132 0.37906002 AN 1 57 0.07017544 0.25771310 AN 2 45 0.31111111 0.46817937 A N 3 55 0.29090909 0.45836777 B L 1 52 0.13461538 0.34464225 B L 2 51 0.17647059 0.38501337 B L 3 54 0.20370370 0.40653295 BN 1 55 0.16363636 0.37335498 BN 2 56 0.19642857 0.40089186 BN 3 47 0.25531915 0.44075455 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD A 1 F 51 0.11764706 0.32539569 A 1 S 63 0.06349206 0.24580453 A 2 F 48 0.16666667 0.37662179 A 2 S 50 0.28000000 0.45355737 A 3 F 50 0.20000000 0.40406102 A 3 S 58 0.25862069 0.44170105 B 1 F 56 0.17857143 0.38645912 B 1 S 51 0.11764706 0.32539569 B 2 F 57 0.19298246 0.39814734 B 2 S 50 0.18000000 0.38808793 B 3 F 56 0.21428571 0.41403934 B 3 S 45 0.24444444 0.43461349 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 F 51 0.17647059 0.38501337 1 S 58 0.06896552 0.25560859 2 F 56 0.16071429 0.37059096 2 S 48 0.16666667 0.37662179 3 F 53 0.16981132 0.37906002 3 S 54 0.20370370 0.40653295 N 1 F 56 0.12500000 0.33371191 N 1 S 56 0.10714286 0.31209389 N 2 F 49 0.20408163 0.40720551 N 2 S 52 0.28846154 0.45746696 N 3 F 53 0.24528302 0.43437224 N 3 S 49 0.30612245 0.46565731 STORY aa(D00Goo9gaaoa3U9 0 9 Q o o > > > 2 » ^ ^ ^ > > ^ : > ^Level i 2 hig A o 1 low A A o 3 low B A i 3 hig B B B B B A A TR MEM STORY of Level of MEM hig hig hig ee of Level DELAY low low low ee of Level i 2 hig i 3 hig i 1 hig i 1 hig ee o ee of Level of Level o 1 low low low 2 low 303762 0.49271713 0.34796326 0.39726027 73 0.13970588 136 3 3 3 3 2 3 .92640.30012720 0.09923664 131 2 of Level 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 4 0.07142857 140 1 1 FEEDBACK 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 of Level FEEDBACK 3 2 EDAKN enSD Mean N FEEDBACK S S S F S S S S S S F F F F F S S S RECALPOS F F F F F F of Level 81 403198 0.49150503 0.39189189 74 N 8 .97640.49535538 0.39473684 38 8 .91670.39615137 0.30303030 0.30555556 33 0.19117647 36 68 2 0.12903226 62 5 .11110.31782086 0.28574564 0.11111111 0.08823529 45 68 9 .74370.26115358 0.50573633 0.49441323 0.07246377 0.47500000 69 0.38888889 40 36 9 .74370.26115358 0.07246377 69 1 .74240.25767885 0.07042254 71 ...... 0.19753086 enSD Mean 30 22 25 26 27 31 31 28 28 23 24 28 27 23 29 31 34 ...... 20 28 22 28 22 23 28 28 25 CHANGE- 0.31818182 0.26666667 0.11538462 0.14814815 0.20000000 0.17857143 0.17391304 0.22580645 0.25806452 0.08333333 0.17857143 0.06896552 0.07142857 0.22580645 0.09090909 0.05882353 0.17391304 0.05000000 0.29629630 0.28571429 0.31818182 0.30434783 0.25000000 0.04000000 Mean CHANGE- 0.40061681 0.25846412 -CHANGE- 0.46717659 0.33797230 0.46669372 0.47673129 0.40824829 0.44977645 0.32581259 0.36201399 0.39002103 0.44480272 0.38755339 0.42502372 0.22360680 0.28232985 0.39002103 0.46532163 0.46004371 0.47673129 0.25788071 0.26226526 0.47047197 0.42502372 0.29424494 0.44095855 0.20000000 0.23883257 0.38755339 SD 340 341 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAYMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD L hig 1 69 0.10144928 0.30413462 L hig 2 68 0.11764706 0.32458524 L hig 3 68 0.11764706 0.32458524 L low 1 40 0.15000000 0.36162029 L low 2 36 0.25000000 0.43915503 L low 3 39 0.30769231 0.46757190 N hig 1 71 0.04225352 0.20259881 N hig 2 63 0.07936508 0.27247890 N hig 3 68 0.16176471 0.37097267 N low 1 41 0.24390244 0.43476935 N low 2 38 0.52631579 0.50600941 N low 3 34 0.50000000 0.50751922 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE' MEM FEEDBACK RECALPOS N Mean SD hig 1 F 70 0.10000000 0.30216609 hig 1 S 70 0.04285714 0.20399732 hig 2 F 67 0.08955224 0.28769424 hig 2 S 64 0.10937500 0.31457643 hig 3 F 68 0.11764706 0.32458524 hig 3 S 68 0.16176471 0.37097267 lou 1 F 37 0.24324324 0.43495884 low 1 S 44 0.15909091 0.36998943 low 2 F 38 0.34210526 0.48078291 low 2 S 36 0.44444444 0.50395263 low 3 F 38 0.36842105 0.48885153 low 3 S 35 0.42857143 0.50209645 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORYDELAYMEMFEEDBACK N Heart SD A L hig 1 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 A L hig 2 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 A L hig 3 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 A L low 1 23 0.13043478 0.34435022 A L low 2 20 0.20000000 0.41039134 A L low 3 19 0.36842105 0.49559463 A N hig 1 35 0.05714286 0.23550411 A N hig 2 29 0.13793103 0.35093120 A N hig 3 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 A N low 1 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 A N low 2 16 0.62500000 0.50000000 A N low 3 21 0.57142857 0.50709255 B L hig 1 35 0.11428571 0.32280285 B L hig 2 35 0.11428571 0.32280285 B L hig 3 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 B L low 1 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 B L low 2 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 B L low 3 20 0.25000000 0.44426166 B N hig 1 36 0.02777778 0.16666667 B N hig 2 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 B N hig 3 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 B N low 1 19 0.42105263 0.50725727 B N low 2 22 0.45454545 0.50964719 B N low 3 13 0.38461538 0.50636968 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY MEM FEEDBACKRECALPOS N Mean SD A hig 1 F 31 0.09677419 0.30053715 A hig 1 S 38 0.05263158 0.22629429 A hig 2 F 29 0.06896552 0.25788071 A hig 2 S 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 A hig 3 F 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 A hig 3 S 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 A low 1 F 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 A low 1 S 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 A low 2 F 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 A low 2 S 17 0.47058824 0.51449576 A low 3 F 16 0.43750000 0.51234754 A low 3 S 24 0.50000000 0.51075392 B hig 1 F 39 0.10256410 0.30735474 B hig 1 S 32 0.03125000 0.17677670 B hig 2 F 38 0.10526316 0.31101175 B hig 2 S 31 0.03225806 0.17960530 B hig 3 F 34 0.14705882 0.35949063 B hig 3 S 34 0.23529412 0.43056155 B low 1 F 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 B low 1 S 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 B low 2 F 19 0.36842105 0.49559463 B low 2 S 19 0.42105263 0.50725727 B low 3 F 22 0.31818182 0.47673129 B low 3 S 11 0.27272727 0.46709937 344 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE DELAY MEMFEEDBACKRECALPOS N Mean SD hig 1 F 33 0.15151515 0.36410954 hig 1 S 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 hig 2 F 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 hig 2 S 35 0.14285714 0.35503580 hig 3 F 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 hig 3 S 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 low 1 F 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 lou 1 S 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 low 2 F 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 low 2 S 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 low 3 F 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 low 3 S 20 0.35000000 0.48936048 N hig 1 F 37 0.05405405 0.22924344 N hig 1 S 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 N hig 2 F 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 N hig 2 S 29 0.06896552 0.25788071 N hig 3 F 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 N hig 3 S 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 N low 1 F 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 N low 1 S 22 0.22727273 0.42893203 N low 2 F 15 0.46666667 0.51639778 N low 2 S 23 0.56521739 0.50686980 N low 3 F 19 0.47368421 0.51298918 N low 3 S 15 0.53333333 0.51639778 345 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORYDELAY HEHFEEDBACKRECALPOSN Mean SD A L hig 1 F 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 A L hig 1 S 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 A L hig 2 F 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 A L hig 2 S 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 A L hig 3 F 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 AL hig 3 S 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 AL low 1 F 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 AL low 1 S 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 A L low 2 F 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 AL low 2 S 9 0.33333333 0.50000000 AL low 3 F 6 0.16666667 0.40824829 A L low 3 S 13 0.46153846 0.51887452 A N hig 1 F 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 AN hig 1 S 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A N hig 2 F 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 A N hig 2 S 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 A N hig 3 F 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A N hig 3 S 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 AN low 1 F 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 A N low 1 S 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 AN low 2 F 8 0.62500000 0.51754917 AN low 2 S 8 0.62500000 0.51754917 AN low 3 F 10 0.60000000 0.51639778 AN low 3 S 11 0.54545455 0.52223297 BL hig 1 F 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 BL hig 1 S 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B L hig 2 F 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B L hig 2 S 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B L hig 3 F 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 BL hig 3 S 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 BL low 1 F 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 BL low 1 S 8 0.12500000 0.35355339 B L low 2 F 12 0.41666667 0.51492865 BL low 2 S 4 0.00000000 0.00000000 B L low 3 F 13 0.30769231 0.48038446 BL low 3 S 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 B N hig 1 F 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 B N hig 1 S 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 2 F 19 0.05263158 0.22941573 BN hig 2 S 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 F 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 BN hig 3 S 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 B N low 1 F 8 0.50000000 0.53452248 B N low 1 S 11 0.36363636 0.50452498 B N low 2 F 7 0.28571429 0.48795004 BN low 2 S 15 0.53333333 0.51639778 B N low 3 F 9 0.33333333 0.50000000 B N low 3 S 4 0.50000000 0.57735027 346 Analysis 23. The change analysis controlling for failure to encode and source memory, Study 3. The means are adjusted for the covariate. Study 3. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 195 42.30897932 0.21696912 1.81 0.0001 Error 439 52.50046950 0.11959105 Corrected Total 634 94.80944882 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.446253 189.3063 0.3458194 0.1826772 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STOR*DELAY*RECAL) 147 25.00730096 0.17011769 1.42 0.0034 FEED ID 1 0.00113690 0.00113690 0.01 0.9224 STORY 1 0.00972798 0.00972798 0.08 0.7756 DELAY 1 1.14836829 1.14836829 9.60 0.0021 RECALPOS 1 0.00253240 0.00253240 0.02 0.8844 STORY*DELAY 1 0.03117882 0.03117882 0.26 0.6099 ST0RY*RECALP0S 1 0.25778555 0.25778555 2.16 0.1428 DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.00020910 0.00020910 0.00 0.9667 STORY*DELAY*RECALPOS 1 0.87766520 0.87766520 7.34 0.0070 MEM 1 5.55391811 5.55391811 46.44 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.03450089 0.03450089 0.29 0.5915 DELAY*MEM 1 1.47450670 1.47450670 12.33 0.0005 MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.00615125 0.00615125 0.05 0.8207 STORY*DELAY*MEM 1 0.04721917 0.04721917 0.39 0.5301 STORY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.01897427 0.01897427 0.16 0.6906 DELAY*MEM*RECALPOS 1 0.00499204 0.00499204 0.04 0.8382 STOR*DELAY*MEM*RECAL 1 0.32144413 0.32144413 2.69 0.1018 FEEDBACK 2 1.49979909 0.74989954 6.27 0.0021 ST0RY*FEEDBACK 2 0.82392084 0.41196042 3.44 0.0328 DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.28593662 0.14296831 1.20 0.3035 FEEDBACK*RECALPOS 2 0.32422692 0.16211346 1.36 0.2589 STORY*DELAY*FEEDBACK 2 0.65599943 0.32799971 2.74 0.0655 ST0RY*FEEDBA*RECALP0 2 0.18398389 0.09199195 0.77 0.4640 DELAY*FEEDBA*RECALPO 2 0.01496032 0.00748016 0.06 0.9394 STOR*DELA*FEED*RECAL 2 0.70272568 0.35136284 2.94 0.0540 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.72351765 0.36175883 3.02 0.0496 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.96178041 0.48089020 4.02 0.0186 DELAY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.09376142 0.04688071 0.39 0.6759 MEM*FEEDBAC*RECALPOS 2 0.02963703 0.01481852 0.12 0.8835 STOR*DELAY*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.26528229 0.13264115 1.11 0.3308 STOR*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.01208226 0.00604113 0.05 0.9507 DELA*MEM*FEEDB*RECAL 2 0.17940421 0.08970211 0.75 0.4729 STO*DEL*MEM*FEE*RECA 2 0.37370821 0.18685411 1.56 0.2108 347 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 1.22528624 1.22528624 10.25 0.0015 feedback quadratic 1 0.13991855 0.13991855 1.17 0.2800 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY CHANGE LSMEAN A 0.22341865 B 0.21430789 DELAY CHANGE LSMEAN L 0.16912743 N 0.26859911 RECALFOS CHANGE LSMEAN F 0.22122028 S 0.21650626 STORY DELAY CHANGE LSMEAN A L 0.16549881 A N 0.28133849 B L 0.17275604 B N 0.25585973 STORY RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A F 0.20224036 A S 0.24459694 B F 0.24020019 B S 0.18841558 DELAY RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN L F 0.17212088 L S 0.16613398 N F 0.27031968 N S 0.26687854 STORY DELAY RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A L F 0.10152402 A LS 0.22947361 A NF 0.30295671 AN S 0.25972028 B L F 0.24271773 B L S 0.10279436 B N F 0.23768265 B N S 0.27403681 MEM CHANGE LSMEAN hig 0.11189062 low 0.32583592 STORY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 0.10799665 A low 0.33884066 B hig 0.11578459 B low 0.31283118 DELAYMEM CHANGE LSMEAN L hig 0.11726822 L low 0.22098663 N hig 0.10651301 N low 0.43068521 MEM RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN hig F 0.11069029 hig S 0.11309095 low F 0.33175027 low S 0.31992157 STORY DELAY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A L hig 0.09533489 AL low 0.23566274 AN hig 0.12065841 A N low 0.44201858 B L hig 0.13920156 B L low 0.20631052 B N hig 0.09236762 BN low 0.41935184 STORY MEM RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A hig F 0.08950990 A hig S 0.12648339 A low F 0.31497083 A low S 0.36271049 B hig F 0.13187067 B hig S 0.09969851 B low F 0.34852971 B low S 0.27713265 DELAYMEM RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN L hig F 0.11347026 L hig S 0.12106619 L low F 0.23077149 L low S 0.21120177 N hig F 0.10791032 N hig S 0.10511571 N low F 0.43272905 N low S 0.42864138 LSMEAN CHANGE 0.05657568 0.13409409 0.14647236 0.32485312 0.12244412 0.11887269 0.48346930 0.40056787 0.17036483 0.10803829 0.31507063 0.09755042 0.09337651 0.09135873 0.38198880 0.45671489 LSMEAN LSMEAN LSMEAN 0.10040172 0.30277541 0.26707883 0.18661618 0.18839482 0.26791266 0.12672660 0.17457231 0.20608337 0.16029130 0.31659793 0.32890811 F F S S low F low S low S lowlow F S hig F highig F S hig F hig hig S FEEDBACK CHANGE 1 1 0.14350895 2 0.24558512 3 0.26749574 L LL hig DELAYMEMRECALPOS L L LL low low S N N NN L lou N hig F N N N STORY FEEDBACK CHANGE B B B 1 2 3 A A A 1 2 3 L L L L 1 2 3 DELAY FEEDBACK CHANGE N N N 1 2 N N 3 STORY <<<<<<< 1 F 0.18082035 1 S 0.10619755 2 F 0.23618340 2 S 0.25498683 3 F 0.24665708 3 S 0.28833440 STORY DELAYFEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN AL 1 0.12074420 AL 2 0.17929373 AL 3 0.19645851 AN 1 0.08005924 AN 2 0.42625709 A N 3 0.33769915 BL 1 0.13270901 B L 2 0.16985088 B L 3 0.21570824 B N 1 0.24052335 B N 2 0.20693876 BN 3 0.32011708 STORY FEEDBACKRECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 F 0.12569989 A 1 S 0.07510355 A 2 F 0.24167133 A 2 S 0.36387949 A 3 F 0.23934987 A 3 S 0.29480778 B 1 F 0.23594081 B 1 S 0.13729155 B 2 F 0.23069548 B 2 S 0.14609417 B 3 F 0.25396429 B 3 S 0.28186103 352 DELAYFEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSHEAN 1 F 0.15906608 1 S 0.09438713 2 F 0.17342622 2 S 0.17571839 3 F 0.18387033 3 S 0.22829642 N 1 F 0.20257462 N 1 S 0.11800797 N 2 F 0.29894059 N 2 S 0.33425527 N 3 F 0.30944384 N 3 S 0.34837239 STORY DELAY FEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSHEAN A L 1 F 0.14845719 A L 1 S 0.09303121 AL 2 F 0.04598447 A L 2 S 0.31260299 AL 3 F 0.11013040 A L 3 S 0.28278662 A N 1 F 0.10294259 A N 1 S 0.05717589 AN 2 F 0.43735819 AN 2 S 0.41515599 A N 3 F 0.36856934 AN 3 S 0.30682895 B L 1 F 0.16967497 B L 1 S 0.09574305 B L 2 F 0.30086797 BL 2 S 0.03883379 B L 3 F 0.25761025 B L 3 S 0.17380623 B N 1 F 0.30220664 BN 1 S 0.17884005 BN 2 F 0.16052298 BN 2 S 0.25335454 B N 3 F 0.25031833 B N 3 S 0.38991582 HEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.08499835 hig 2 0.09441088 hig 3 0.15626263 low 1 0.20201955 low 2 0.39675935 low 3 0.37872886 STORY MEMFEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 1 0.09349119 A hig 2 0.12640438 A hig 3 0.10409437 A low 1 0.10731225 A low 2 0.47914644 A low 3 0.43006329 B hig 1 0.07650550 B hig 2 0.06241737 B hig 3 0.20843089 B low 1 0.29672685 B low 2 0.31437227 B low 3 0.32739443 DELAYMEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.11441330 hig 2 0.09855487 hig 3 0.13883650 low 1 0.13903991 low 2 0.25058974 low 3 0.27333024 N hig 1 0.05558339 N hig 2 0.09026689 N hig 3 0.17368876 N low 1 0.26499920 N low 2 0.54292896 N low 3 0.48412747 ooooo3oacocD03oaooaaooo3>>>>>>>>>>>>STORY hig hig hig hig hig MEM hig low low low low low low N N N N N N CHANGE FEEDBACK MEM DELAY N N N N N N S 0.39219810 0.36525961 S F 3 3 S 0.41354367 0.18447070 S 0.12805455 S F2 3 3 F 0.37997504 F 0.09642999 2 S 2 S 0.15402294 0.25001617 S 0.09239177 F 1 F 1 2 F 0.11162453 F CHANGE 1 RECALPOS FEEDBACK S 0.05837216 S 1 hig i 3 hig hig hig i 2 1 hig hig 2 hig hig hig hig hig hig o 3 low low low low low 2 low low low low 2 1 low low o 3 low 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.42423650 0.39571948 0.43809954 0.21599766 0.01815804 0.04294715 0.23055235 0.23302506 0.15535417 0.20086413 0.10667670 0.54401844 0.69013845 0.09189886 0.13137986 0.26815443 0.12272565 0.07680887 0.09043304 0.11876275 0.11006386 0.16237573 0.06821963 0.31610814 LSMEAN LSMEAN 03Q0 00 00 00 00 00 09 03 00 00 0 3 > ^ > > ^ ^ > > > ^ ^ > STORY i F S 3 hig hig 1 hig hig MEM i F hig 1 hig S hig hig hig 1 hig hig hig o S F S 3 low low 2 low 1 low low low low low low low low lou 3 F 3 S 3 2 F S 2 3 S 3 3 S 2 S 0.17534667 F 2 S 2 F 2 2 FEEDBACK 1 S F 1 1 1 S RECALPOS F F F F 0.32088912 0.27467503 0.35406951 0.24283293 0.10732144 0.33389973 0.23583381 0.35761990 0.17402885 0.01751330 0.03874929 0.11426172 0.46350709 0.39661949 0.55241231 0.40588056 0.07221207 0.14241243 0.12610848 0.08208026 0.07746210 0.07799503 0.10898735 CHANGE LSMEAN DELAY HEM FEEDBACKRECALPOSCHANGE LSHEAN hig 1 F 0.14861680 hig 1 S 0.08020981 hig 2 F 0.07419052 hig 2 S 0.12291921 hig 3 F 0.11760345 hig 3 S 0.16006956 low 1 F 0.16951536 low 1 S 0.10856446 low 2 F 0.27266192 low 2 S 0.22851757 low 3 F 0.25013720 low 3 S 0.29652328 N hig 1 F 0.07463226 N hig 1 S 0.03653451 N hig 2 F 0.11059302 N hig 2 S 0.06994076 N hig 3 F 0.13850566 N hig 3 S 0.20887185 N low 1 F 0.33051697 N low 1 S 0.19948143 N low 2 F 0.48728815 N low 2 S 0.59856977 N low 3 F 0.48038201 N low 3 S 0.48787292 357 STORY DELAY MEMFEEDBACK RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A L hig 1 F 0.13687859 A L hig 1 S 0.10064691 A L hig 2 F -0.02101550 AL hig 2 S 0.20188157 A L hig 3 F 0.05386395 A L hig 3 S 0.09975380 A L low 1 F 0.16003579 A L low 1 S 0.08541551 A L low 2 F 0.11298445 A L low 2 S 0.42332441 A L low 3 F 0.16639684 A L low 3 S 0.46581943 A N hig 1 F 0.08109611 AN hig 1 S 0.05534315 A N hig 2 F 0.17593970 A N hig 2 S 0.14881176 A N hig 3 F 0.11029656 A N hig 3 S 0.15246316 A N low 1 F 0.12478908 A N low 1 S 0.05900864 A N low 2 F 0.69877668 A N low 2 S 0.68150022 AN low 3 F 0.62684213 A N low 3 S 0.46119474 B L hig 1 F 0.16035501 B L hig 1 S 0.05977270 B L hig 2 F 0.16939655 B L hig 2 S 0.04395685 B L hig 3 F 0.18134294 B L hig 3 S 0.22038532 B L low 1 F 0.17899493 B L low 1 S 0.13171340 B L low 2 F 0.43233939 B L low 2 S 0.03371073 B L low 3 F 0.33387756 B L low 3 S 0.12722713 B N hig 1 F 0.06816842 B N hig 1 S 0.01772588 B N hig 2 F 0.04524633 BN hig 2 S -0.00893024 BN hig 3 F 0.16671477 BN hig 3 S 0.26528054 B N low 1 F 0.53624487 B N low 1 S 0.33995422 B N low 2 F 0.27579963 B N low 2 S 0.51563933 B N low 3 F 0.33392190 B N low 3 S 0.51455110 Analysis 24. The overal yielding analysis, Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 222 45.47563964 0.20484522 1.81 0.0001 Error 635 71.68053752 0.11288274 Corrected Total 857 117.15617716 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.388163 205.9079 0.3359803 0.1631702 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*RECA*SNS*VI) 127 19.57671356 0.15414735 1.37 0.0088 STORY 1 1.66100991 1.66100991 14.71 0.0001 RECALPOS 1 0.98397665 0.98397665 8.72 0.0033 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.39916468 0.39916468 3.54 0.0605 SNS 1 0.23985183 0.23985183 2.12 0.1454 STORY*SNS 1 1.48974316 1.48974316 13.20 0.0003 RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.02607625 0.02607625 0.23 0.6309 STORY*RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.03559001 0.03559001 0.32 0.5747 VI 1 2.36730831 2.36730831 20.97 0.0001 STORY*VI 1 0.10965832 0.10965832 0.97 0.3247 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.60977819 0.60977819 5.40 0.0204 STORY*RECALPOS*VI 1 0.22685571 0.22685571 2.01 0.1568 SNS*VI 1 0.00147820 0.00147820 0.01 0.9089 STORY*SNS*VI 1 0.09960275 0.09960275 0.88 0.3479 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.00050469 0.00050469 0.00 0.9467 STORY*RECALPO*SNS*VI 1 0.12509578 0.12509578 1.11 0.2929 MEM 2 5.99308699 2.99654349 26.55 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 2 0.27726992 0.13863496 1.23 0.2935 RECALPOS*MEM 2 0.21301781 0.10650891 0.94 0.3898 STORY*RECALPOS*MEM 2 0.26124257 0.13062129 1.16 0.3150 SNS*MEM 2 0.04772216 0.02386108 0.21 0.8095 STORY*SNS*MEM 2 0.34192276 0.17096138 1.51 0.2207 RECALPOS*SNS*MEM 2 0.08812332 0.04406166 0.39 0.6770 STORY*RECALP*SNS*MEM 2 0.07296061 0.03648031 0.32 0.7240 VI*MEM 2 0.13809783 0.06904891 0.61 0.5428 ST0RY*VI*MEM 2 0.30246815 0.15123407 1.34 0.2627 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 2 0.28266571 0.14133285 1.25 0.2866 STORY'‘RECALPO*VI*MEM 2 0.02467561 0.01233780 0.11 0.8965 SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.42483244 0.21241622 1.88 0.1532 STORY*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.00813067 0.00406533 0.04 0.9646 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.09111122 0.04555561 0.40 0.6681 STOR*RECA*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.29606807 0.14803404 1.31 0.2702 FEEDBACK 1 3.24335620 3.24335620 28.73 0.0001 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.19705090 0.19705090 1.75 0.1869 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 1 0.56225651 0.56225651 4.98 0.0260 STORY*RECALP*FEEDBAC 1 0.18392489 0.18392489 1.63 0.2023 SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.13771064 0.13771064 1.22 0.2698 STORY*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.07022109 0.07022109 0.62 0.4306 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.15675341 0.15675341 1.39 0.2391 STOR*RECAL*SNS*FEEDB 1 0.11441893 0.11441893 1.01 0.3144 VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.53325152 0.53325152 4.72 0.0301 ST0RY*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.13227293 0.13227293 1.17 0.2794 RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.00286061 0.00286061 0.03 0.8736 STORY*RECAL*VI*FEEDB 1 0.12155958 0.12155958 1.08 0.2998 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.08461301 0.08461301 0.75 0.3869 STORY*SNS*VI*FEEDBAC 1 0.00053570 0.00053570 0.00 0.9451 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 1 0.22670137 0.22670137 2.01 0.1569 STO*RECA*SNS*VI*FEED 1 0.71821402 0.71821402 6.36 0.0119 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.79216754 0.39608377 3.51 0.0305 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.12914594 0.06457297 0.57 0.5647 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.37595252 0.18797626 1.67 0.1900 STOR*RECAL*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.11743120 0.05871560 0.52 0.5947 359 The overal yielding analysis. Study 4, continued. Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.03022619 0.01511309 0.13 0.8747 STORY*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 2 1.11873770 0.55936885 4.96 0.0073 RECAL*SNS*MEH*FEEDBA 2 0.14177569 0.07088784 0.63 0.5340 STO*REC*SNS,*MEM*FEED 2 0.12978783 0.06489392 0.57 0.5631 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.00152914 0.00076457 0.01 0.9932 STORY*VI*MEM*FEEDBAC 2 0.07413415 0.03706707 0.33 0.7202 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.32399688 0.16199844 1.44 0.2389 STO*RECA*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.02596885 0.01298442 0.12 0.8914 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.00340342 0.00170171 0.02 0.9850 STOR*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.09324732 0.04662366 0.41 0.6618 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.16420310 0.08210155 0.73 0.4836 ST*RE*SNS*VI*MEM*FEE 2 0.09014862 0.04507431 0.40 0.6710 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 5.99293401 5.99293401 53.09 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.00015298 0.00015298 0.00 0.9706 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY N Mean SD A 426 0.20422535 0.40360841 B 432 0.12268519 0.32845587 Level of ...... YIELD...... RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 414 0.13526570 0.34242095 2 444 0.18918919 0.39210063 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY RECALPOS N Mean SD A 1 216 0.15740741 0.36503041 A 2 210 0.25238095 0.43541659 B 1 198 0.11111111 0.31506631 B 2 234 0.13247863 0.33973710 Level of SNS N Mean SD N 432 0. 14814815 0.35565866 S 426 0. 17840376 0.38330241 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-' STORY SNS N Mean SD A N 216 0.14814815 0.35607198 A S 210 0.26190476 0.44072167 B N 216 0.14814815 0.35607198 B S 216 0.09722222 0.29694830 Level of Level of ...... TltLUvici n_. RECALPOSSNS N Mean SD 1 N 210 0.12380952 0.33015114 1 S 204 0.14705882 0.35503580 2 N 222 0.17117117 0.37750967 2 S 222 0.20720721 0.40622124 Level of Level of Level of YIELD..... STORY RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD A 1 N 114 0.11403509 0.31925721 A 1 S 102 0.20588235 0.40634169 A 2 N 102 0.18627451 0.39125065 A 2 S 108 0.31481481 0.46660732 B 1 N 96 0.13541667 0.34396425 B 1 S 102 0.08823529 0.28503747 B 2 N 120 0.15833333 0.36658390 B 2 S 114 0.10526316 0.30824714 Level of ...... YIELD..... VI N Mean SD B 480 0..11875000 0.32383161 N 378 0.21957672 0.41450854 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY VI N Mean SD AB 234 0.15384615 0.36157463 A N 192 0.26562500 0.44282012 B B 246 0.08536585 0.27999502 B N 186 0.17204301 0.37843650 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-' RECALPOS VI N Mean SD 1 B 216 0.11111111 0.31499969 1 N 198 0.16161616 0.36903140 2 B 264 0.12500000 0.33134706 2 N 180 0.28333333 0.45187381 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS VI N Mean SD A 1 B 108 0.13888889 0.34744282 A 1 N 108 0.17592593 0.38253223 A 2 B 126 0.16666667 0.37416574 A 2 N 84 0.38095238 0.48853757 B 1 B 108 0.08333333 0.27767392 B 1 N 90 0.14444444 0.35350925 B 2 B 138 0.08695652 0.28279783 B 2 N 96 0.19791667 0.40052049 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-- SNS VI N Mean SD N B 234 0.10256410 0.30403906 N N 198 0.20202020 0.40252497 S B 246 0.13414634 0.34150430 S N 180 0.23888889 0.42759414 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY SNS VI N Mean SD A N B 114 0.10526316 0.30824714 A NN 102 0.19607843 0.39898921 A SB 120 0.20000000 0.40167716 A S N 90 0.34444444 0.47784890 B NB 120 0.10000000 0.30125787 B NN 96 0.20833333 0.40824829 B SB 126 0.07142857 0.25856748 BS N 90 0.13333333 0.34183904 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD 1 N B 108 0. 10185185 0.30386344 1 N N 102 0.,14705882 0.35591352 1 S B 108 0.,12037037 0.32691113 1 S N 96 0. 17708333 0.38374311 2 N B 126 0. 10317460 0.30540112 2 N N 96 0.26041667 0.44116572 2 S B 138 0. 14492754 0.35331020 2 S N 84 0.30952381 0.46507392 Level of Level of Level, of Level of --- YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD A 1 NB 54 0.09259259 0.29258242 A 1 NN 60 0.13333333 0.34280333 A 1 SB 54 0.18518519 0.39209520 A 1 SN 48 0.22916667 0.42474440 A 2 NB 60 0.11666667 0.32373177 A 2 NN 42 0.28571429 0.45722996 A 2 SB 66 0.21212121 0.41194292 A 2 SN 42 0.47619048 0.50548674 B 1 NB 54 0.11111111 0.31722063 B 1 NN 42 0.16666667 0.37719547 B 1 SB 54 0.05555556 0.23121228 B 1 S N 48 0.12500000 0.33421868 B 2 N B 66 0.09090909 0.28968273 B 2 NN 54 0.24074074 0.43154768 B 2 S B 72 0.08333333 0.27832497 B 2 SN 42 0.14285714 0.35416880 Level of ■...... YIELD..... MEM N Mean SD hig 286 0..05944056 0.23686187 low 286 0.,16083916 0.36802650 uns 286 0.26923077 0.44433759 Level of Level of ---YIELD-' STORYMEMN Mean SD A hig 142 0.08450704 0.27913132 A low 142 0.22535211 0.41929299 A uns 142 0.30281690 0.46110316 B hig 144 0.03472222 0.18371437 B low 144 0.09722222 0.29729420 B uns 144 0.23611111 0.42617359 Level of Level of ---YIELD-- RECALPOS MEMN Mean SD 1 hig 138 0.04347826 0.20467404 1 low 138 0.11594203 0.32132172 1 uns 138 0.24637681 0.43247031 Level of Level of ---YIELD-- RECALPOS MEM N Mean SD 2 hig 148 0.07432432 0.26318862 2 low 148 0.20270270 0.40337790 2 uns 148 0.29054054 0.45555346 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY RECALPOS MEM N Mean SD A 1 hig 72 0.05555556 0.23066889 A 1 low 72 0.13888889 0.34825746 A 1 uns 72 0.27/777/8 0.45104643 A 2 hig 70 0.11428571 0.32045516 A 2 low 70 0.31428571 0.46758266 A 2 uns 70 0.32857143 0.47308511 B 1 hig 66 0.03030303 0.17273341 B 1 low 66 0.09090909 0.28968273 B 1 uns 66 0.21212121 0.41194292 B 2 hig 78 0.03846154 0.19355242 B 2 low 78 0.10256410 0.30535241 B 2 uns 78 0.25641026 0.43947718 Level of Level of -YIELD- SNS MEM N Mean SD hig 144 0.04166667 0.20052379 low 144 0.15972222 0.36762695 uns 144 0.24305556 0.43042551 hig 142 0.07746479 0.26827380 low 142 0.16197183 0.36972913 uns 142 0.29577465 0.45800574 Level of Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY SNS MEM N Mean SD A N hig 72 0.04166667 0.20122862 A N low 72 0.19444444 0.39854980 A N uns 72 0.20833333 0.40896641 A S hig 70 0.12857143 0.33714180 A S low 70 0.25714286 0.44021452 A S uns 70 0.40000000 0.49343516 B N hig 72 0.04166667 0.20122862 B N low 72 0.12500000 0.33303978 B N uns 72 0.277777/8 0.45104643 B S hig 72 0.02777778 0.16548880 B S low 72 0.06944444 0.25599235 B S uns 72 0.19444444 0.39854980 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS SNS MEMN Mean SD 1 N hig 70 0.01428571 0.11952286 1 N low 70 0.12857143 0.33714180 1 N uns 70 0.22857143 0.42294443 Level of Level of Level of -YIELD- RECALPOS SNS MEM N Mean SD 1 S hig 68 0.07352941 0.26294409 1 S low 68 0.10294118 0.30614141 1 S uns 68 0.26470588 0.44445664 2 N hig 74 0.06756757 0.25271572 2 N low 74 0.18918919 0.39433230 2 N uns 74 0.25675676 0.43982596 2 S hig 74 0.08108108 0.27482282 2 S low 74 0.21621622 0.41447343 2 S uns 74 0.32432432 0.47131725 STORY 0303D303CD0303030a030a03>>>>>>>>>>>> Level uns N N N B B 2 2 2 2 2 RECALPOS uns B 2 i 78 hig B A B B A A N A n 64 uns N N B N B N B B A A B B B ee of Level TR VI STORY ee o Lvl f ee of Level of Level of Level fLvl of Level of N N B VI N B 2 2 2 B 2 2 ee of Level 2 RECALPOS VI N B N N o 72 low B B o 20.06097561 82 low B n 82 of uns Level N B E Mean uns N MEM hig uns hig n 40 uns S N ee of Level S S o 32 uns N low N S S N N N S S i 36 hig S S N N N o 34 low S S n 38 38 uns low S N N N low low SNS ee of Level E N MEM i 00.15000000 60 0.02272727 88 hig hig uns i 20.04166667 72 hig i 60.04545455 66 72 hig uns n 203286 0.47127986 0.32258065 0.04838710 62 62 of Level uns hig E N MEM n 78 uns i 20.02439024 82 0.14062500 64 hig hig o 80.11363636 88 low low o 60.13636364 66 tow o 20.14516129 62 low o 78 low o 40.31250000 64 low i 38 hig n 802023 0.41315495 126 126 0.21052632 160 38 uns i 34 hig i 00.05000000 40 32 hig 32 uns hig 126 160 160 n 36 uns n 34 34 34 uns hig uns E Mean N MEM i 34 38 hig hig o 38 low o 001500 0.33493206 0.12500000 40 low low ee of Level o 60.36111111 36 low low 00.36666667 60 60 80.23863636 88 66 0.33333333 0.23015873 0.09523810 0.21875000 0.10625000 0.03125000 ...... 40.05882353 34 34 34 0.33333333 0.30303030 .94440.39854980 0.19444444 .77110.37858991 0.17073171 .92220.29833917 0.09722222 .58650.36313652 0.15384615 .62070.44643107 0.26923077 0.34375000 0.03846154 Mean enSD Mean ...... 0.07894737 .00000.46409548 0.02631579 0.30000000 0.43994135 0.25000000 .74090.38695299 0.17647059 0.33601075 0.17677670 0.02941176 0.12500000 0.03125000 0.44444444 .08250.41042563 0.20588235 .38890.35073619 0.28790224 0.13888889 0.48507125 0.35949063 0.26470588 0.08823529 0.35294118 0.14705882 .35850.34256999 0.00000000 0.11764706 0.13157895 0.00000000 .15620.41315495 0.21052632 -YIELD- YIELD- 0.47328638 0.42261469 0.29471536 0.41469660 0.17453893 0.30912486 YIELD- SD 0.48596110 0.47538269 0.36008474 0.14988676 0.42869270 0.31918784 0.46308986 0.20122862 0.34580402 0.20989508 0.21633454 0.24075811 0.15520673 0.35038244 0.35513905 0.19355242 0.47871355 0.46717659 SD 0.27327631 0.16222142 0.22072143 0.23883257 0.17149859 0.50395263 0.48713611 0.44781108 0.32703497 SD 363 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS VI MEM N Mean SD A 1 B hig 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 A 1 B low 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 A 1 B uns 36 0.25000000 0.43915503 A 1 N hig 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 A 1 N low 36 0.16666667 0.37796447 A 1 N uns 36 0.30555556 0.46717659 A 2 B hig 42 0.02380952 0.15430335 A 2 B low 42 0.19047619 0.39743662 A 2 B uns 42 0.28571429 0.45722996 A 2 N hig 28 0.25000000 0.44095855 A 2 N low 28 0.50000000 0.50917508 A 2 N uns 28 0.39285714 0.49734746 B 1 B hig 36 0.02777778 0.16666667 B 1 B low 36 0.08333333 0.28030596 B 1 B uns 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B 1 N hig 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 B 1 N low 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 B 1 N uns 30 0.30000000 0.46609160 B 2 B hig 46 0.02173913 0.14744196 B 2 B low 46 0.04347826 0.20618457 B 2 B uns 46 0.19565217 0.40108548 B 2 N hig 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 B 2 N low 32 0.18750000 0.39655777 B 2 N uns 32 0.34375000 0.48255870 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS VI MEM N Mean SD NB hig 78 0 .01282051 0.11322770 N B low 78 0 .12820513 0.33648197 NB uns 78 0 .16666667 0.37509018 N N hig 66 0.07575758 0.26663753 N N low 66 0 .19696970 0.40075686 N N uns 66 0.33333333 0.47501687 SB hig 82 0 .04878049 0.21673441 S B low 82 0 .08536585 0.28114490 S B uns 82 0 .26829268 0.44579740 S N hig 60 0 .11666667 0.32373177 S N low 60 0 .26666667 0.44594849 S N uns 60 0 .33333333 0.47538269 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY SNS VI MEM N Mean SD A N B hig 38 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N B low 38 0.15789474 0.36953702 A N B uns 38 0.15789474 0.36953702 A N N hig 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 A N N low 34 0.23529412 0.43056155 A N N uns 34 0.26470588 0.44781108 ASB hig 40 0.07500000 0.26674678 A SB low 40 0.15000000 0.36162029 A S B uns 40 0.37500000 0.49029034 AS N hig 30 0.20000000 0.40683810 A S N low 30 0.40000000 0.49827288 A S N uns 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 BNB hig 40 0.02500000 0.15811388 B N B low 40 0.10000000 0.30382181 B N B uns 40 0.17500000 0.38480764 B N N hig 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 B N N low 32 0.15625000 0.36890203 B N N uns 32 0.40625000 0.49899092 BSB hig 42 0.02380952 0.15430335 B S B low 42 0.02380952 0.15430335 B S B uns 42 0.16666667 0.37719547 BSN hig 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 B S N low 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 B S N uns 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 365 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS VI MEMN Mean SD 1 N B hig 36 0.00000000 0.00000000 1 N B low 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 1 NB uns 36 0.16666667 0.37796447 1 N N hig 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 1 NN low 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 1 NN uns 34 0.29411765 0.46249729 1 S B hig 36 0.08333333 0.28030596 1 SB low 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 1 SB uns 36 0.22222222 0.42163702 1 S N hig 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 1 S N low 32 0.15625000 0.36890203 1 S N uns 32 0.31250000 0.47092907 2 NB hig 42 0.02380952 0.15430335 2 NB low 42 0.11904762 0.32777007 2 N B uns 42 0.16666667 0.37719547 2 N N hig 32 0.12500000 0.33601075 2 N N low 32 0.28125000 0.45680341 2 NN uns 32 0.37500000 0.49186938 2 S B hig 46 0.02173913 0.14744196 2 S B low 46 0.10869565 0.31469639 2 S B uns 46 0.30434783 0.46521513 2 S N hig 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 2 S N low 28 0.39285714 0.49734746 2 SN uns 28 0.35714286 0.48795004 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM N Mean SD A 1 N B hig 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A 1 N B uns 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A 1 NN hig 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N N low 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 A 1 NN uns 20 0.25000000 0.44426166 A 1 S B hig 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A 1 S B low 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A 1 S B uns 18 0.33333333 0.48507125 A 1 S N hig 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 A 1 S N low 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 A 1 SN uns 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 A 2 N B hig 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 20 0.20000000 0.41039134 A 2 N B uns 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 A 2 N N hig 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 A 2 N N low 14 0.35714286 0.49724516 A 2 N N uns 14 0.28571429 0.46880723 A 2 S B hig 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 A 2 S B low 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 A 2 S B uns 22 0.40909091 0.50323628 A 2 S N hig 14 0.28571429 0.46880723 A 2 S N low 14 0.64285714 0.49724516 A 2 S N uns 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 B 1 N B hig 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 B 1 NB uns 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 B 1 N N hig 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 1 N N low 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 1 NN uns 14 0.35714286 0.49724516 B 1 S B hig 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 B 1 S B low 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S B uns 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B 1 S N hig 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 1 S N uns 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 B 2 N B hig 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 B 2 N B low 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 B 2 N B uns 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 B 2 N N hig 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 B 2 N N low 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 B 2 N N uns 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 B 2 S B hig 24 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 24 0.04166667 0.20412415 B 2 S B uns 24 0.20833333 0.41485112 B 2 S N hig 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 2 S N low 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 B 2 S N uns 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 Level of ...... YIELD— FEEDBACKN Mean SD 2 429 0 .10489510 0.30677597 3 429 0.22144522 0.41570429 Level of Level of -YIELD...... STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 2 213 0.13145540 0.33869372 A 3 213 0.27699531 0.44856836 B 2 216 0.07870370 0.26990125 B 3 216 0.16666667 0.37354368 Level of Level of -YIELD...... RECALPOS FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 2 207 0.10144928 0.30265464 1 3 207 0.16908213 0.37573311 2 2 222 0.10810811 0.31121863 2 3 222 0.27027027 0.44510299 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD..... STORY RECALPOS FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 2 108 0.12037037 0.32691113 A 1 3 108 0.19444444 0.39761752 A 2 2 105 0.14285714 0.35160542 A 2 3 105 0.36190476 0.48285628 B 1 2 99 0.08080808 0.27392713 B 1 3 99 0.14141414 0.35022153 B 2 2 117 0.07692308 0.26761547 B 2 3 117 0.18803419 0.39242008 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 2 216 0 .07870370 0.26990125 N 3 216 0 .21759259 0.41356728 S 2 213 0 .13145540 0.33869372 S 3 213 0.22535211 0.41879825 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N 2 108 0.07407407 0.26311235 A N 3 108 0.22222222 0.41767790 A S 2 105 0.19047619 0.39456008 A S 3 105 0.33333333 0.47366547 B N 2 108 0.08333333 0.27767392 B N 3 108 0.21296296 0.41131033 BS 2 108 0.07407407 0.26311235 B S 3 108 0.12037037 0.32691113 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N 2 105 0.06666667 0.25064021 1 N 3 105 0.18095238 0.38682515 1 S 2 102 0.13725490 0.34581560 1 S 3 102 0.15686275 0.36546723 2 N 2 111 0.09009009 0.28760925 2 N 3 111 0.25225225 0.43627490 2 S 2 111 0.12612613 0.33349709 2 S 3 111 0.28828829 0.45502023 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORYRECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 N 2 57 0.07017544 0.25771310 A 1 N 3 57 0.15789474 0.36788360 A 1 S 2 51 0.17647059 0.38501337 A 1 s 3 51 0.23529412 0.42840333 A 2 N 2 51 0.07843137 0.27152438 A 2 N 3 51 0.29411765 0.46017899 A 2 S 2 54 0.20370370 0.40653295 A 2 S 3 54 0.42592593 0.49912572 B 1 N 2 48 0.06250000 0.24462303 B 1 N 3 48 0.20833333 0.41041408 B 1 S 2 51 0.09803922 0.30032662 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 1 S 3 51 0.07843137 0.27152438 B 2 N 2 60 0.10000000 0.30253169 B 2 N 3 60 0.21666667 0.41545020 B 2 S 2 57 0.05263158 0.22528178 B 2 S 3 57 0.15789474 0.36788360 368 Level of Level of ...... YIELD VI FEEDBACKN Mean SD B 2 240 0.07916667 0.27056298 B 3 240 0.15833333 0.36581618 N 2 189 0.13756614 0.34535890 N 3 189 0.30158730 0.46016604 Level of Level of Level of YIELD...... STORY VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD AB 2 117 0.11111111 0.31562138 A B 3 117 0.19658120 0.39912223 A N 2 96 0.15625000 0.36499820 AN 3 96 0.37500000 0.48666426 BB 2 123 0.04878049 0.21628982 B B 3 123 0.12195122 0.32856783 BN 2 93 0.11827957 0.32468923 BN 3 93 0.22580645 0.42037851 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 B 2 108 0.10185185 0.30386344 1 B 3 108 0.12037037 0.32691113 1 N 2 99 0.10101010 0.30287566 1 N 3 99 0.22222222 0.41785545 2 B 2 132 0.06060606 0.23951528 2 B 3 132 0.18939394 0.39331389 2 N 2 90 0.17777778 0.38446746 2 N 3 90 0.38888889 0.49022912 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 B 2 54 0.12962963 0.33904952 A 1 B 3 54 0.14814815 0.35858250 A 1 N 2 54 0.11111111 0.31722063 A 1 N 3 54 0.24074074 0.43154768 A 2 B 2 63 0.09523810 0.29590134 A 2 B 3 63 0.23809524 0.42933879 A 2 N 2 42 0.21428571 0.41529973 A 2 N 3 42 0.54761905 0.50376054 B 1 B 2 54 0.07407407 0.26435053 B 1 B 3 54 0.09259259 0.29258242 B 1 N 2 45 0.08888889 0.28779903 B 1 N 3 45 0.20000000 0.40451992 8 2 B 2 69 0.02898551 0.16899482 B 2 B 3 69 0.14492754 0.35460675 B 2 N 2 48 0.14583333 0.35667396 B 2 N 3 48 0.25000000 0.43759497 Level of Level of Level of ■..... YIELD..... SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD NB 2 117 0.05982906 0.23818995 N B 3 117 0.14529915 0.35391791 N N 2 99 0.10101010 0.30287566 N N 3 99 0.30303030 0.46190699 S B 2 123 0.09756098 0.29793371 S B 3 123 0.17073171 0.37781332 S N 2 90 0.17777778 0.38446746 S N 3 90 0.30000000 0.46082486 369 Level of Level of Level of Level of YIELD STORY SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD AN B 2 57 0.07017544 0.25771310 AN B 3 57 0.14035088 0.35043832 ANN 2 51 0.07843137 0.27152438 ANN 3 51 0.31372549 0.46862335 A SB 2 60 0.15000000 0.36008474 A s B 3 60 0.25000000 0.43666688 A s N 2 45 0.24444444 0.43461349 A s N 3 45 0.44444444 0.50251891 BN B 2 60 0.05000000 0.21978418 BN B 3 60 0.15000000 0.36008474 BNN 2 48 0.12500000 0.33421868 BN N 3 48 0.29166667 0.45933964 BS B 2 63 0.04761905 0.21466940 B S B 3 63 0.09523810 0.29590134 BSN 2 45 0.11111111 0.31782086 B S N 3 45 0.15555556 0.36652890 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N B 2 54 0.09259259 0.29258242 1 N B 3 54 0.11111111 0.31722063 1 N N 2 51 0.03921569 0.19603921 1 N N 3 51 0.25490196 0.44014258 1 S B 2 54 0.11111111 0.31722063 1 S B 3 54 0.12962963 0.33904952 1 S N 2 48 0.16666667 0.37662179 1 SN 3 48 0.18750000 0.39444278 2 N B 2 63 0.03174603 0.17673143 2 N B 3 63 0.17460317 0.38267659 2 N N 2 48 0.16666667 0.37662179 2 N N 3 48 0.35416667 0.48332111 2 S B 2 69 0.08695652 0.28383562 2 S B 3 69 0.20289855 0.40510384 2 S N 2 42 0.19047619 0.39743662 2 S N 3 42 0.42857143 0.50087032 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 N B 2 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 A 1 N B 3 27 0.11111111 0.32025631 A 1 N N 2 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 A 1 N N 3 30 0.20000000 0.40683810 A 1 S B 2 27 0.18518519 0.39584739 A 1 S B 3 27 0.18518519 0.39584739 A 1 S N 2 24 0.16666667 0.38069349 A 1 S N 3 24 0.29166667 0.46430562 A 2 N B 2 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 A 2 N B 3 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 A 2 N N 2 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 A 2 N N 3 21 0.47619048 0.51176632 A 2 S B 2 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 A 2 S B 3 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 A 2 S N 2 21 0.33333333 0.48304589 A 2 SN 3 21 0.61904762 0.49761335 B 1 N B 2 27 0.11111111 0.32025631 B 1 N B 3 27 0.11111111 0.32025631 B 1 N N 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N N 3 21 0.33333333 0.48304589 B 1 S B 2 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 B 1 S B 3 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 B 1 S N 2 24 0.16666667 0.38069349 B 1 S N 3 24 0.08333333 0.28232985 B 2 N B 2 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N B 3 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 B 2 N N 2 27 0.22222222 0.42365927 B 2 N N 3 27 0.25925926 0.44657608 B 2 S B 2 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 B 2 S B 3 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 B 2 S N 2 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 B 2 S N 3 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 STORY coD3oooocooacacsa3CDoooo>>>>>>>>>>>> Level i 3 of Level of hig hig 2 2 2 low hig A A o 3 low low 2 2 uns 2 2 hig A o 72 3 2 3 2 3 uns uns 3 low RECALPOS 2 low hig B uns B uns B low B B A A A ee of Level hig B TR E FEEDBACK MEM STORY ee o Lvl f ee of Level of Level of Level RECALPOS hig MEM n 143 3 uns uns i 2 hig ee of Level low o 2 low uns 3 hig hig MEM n 3 uns uns ee of Level o 2 low o 3 low n 90.33333333 39 3 2 uns uns i 900000 0.00000000 0.07692308 0.00000000 39 39 3 2 hig hig n 302222 0.45226702 0.27272727 0.15151515 0.00000000 33 33 0.06060606 0.00000000 0.45714286 0.40583972 33 33 3 35 2 0.20000000 3 uns 35 2 uns 3 hig hig 3 uns hig n 50.20000000 35 2 uns n 60.13888889 36 0.05555556 36 2 hig uns 2 uns FEEDBACK hig hig MEM o 90.15384615 0.05128205 39 39 0.09090909 3 33 2 low low 3 low ee o Lvl f-YIELD- of Level of Level o 502000 0.40583972 0.20000000 2 35 low 2 low 3 low o 60.11111111 0.16666667 36 36 3 2 low low 3 2 ee of Level EDAKN FEEDBACK 403198 0.49150503 0.39189189 74 3 401126 0.32907936 0.11624764 0.12162162 0.01351351 74 74 2 2 3 401981 0.39433230 0.18918919 74 0.16899482 2 0.02898551 69 2 901425 0.35460675 0.14492754 69 2 2 2 3 EDAKN FEEDBACK of Level 35 3 36 3 60.05555556 36 2 3 4 0.09790210 143 4 0.19580420 143 143 143 143 402387 0.45391057 0.28378378 0.13513514 0.30413462 74 0.34782609 74 0.10144928 69 0.05797101 69 69 90.13043478 69 72 203555 0.46387495 0.25599235 0.30555556 72 0.06944444 0.00000000 0.38950001 72 72 72 0.18309859 0.12676056 71 71 71 104617 0.49949673 0.37743175 0.43661972 0.16901408 71 71 0.04225352 71 ...... enSD Mean N .76970.48467096 0.37062937 0.16783217 0.12587413 0.02097902 Mean 39 33 500874 0.16903085 0.02857143 35 ...... N .66670.37529331 0.16666667 0.12500000 0.06944444 .66530.44586181 0.26760563 enSD Mean .74780.38877641 0.17948718 .99990.29193710 0.09090909 .25130.50209645 0.42857143 .16670.50000000 0.41666667 YIELD- Mean -YIELD- YIELD- 0.37503078 0.39821329 0.33287338 0.29822681 0.14381774 SD 0.34420145 0.47976977 0.33924845 0.23540066 0.33303978 0.25599235 0.00000000 0.33507259 0.20259881 0.47756693 0.36551777 0.22345587 0.26995276 0.29193710 0.24230584 0.36410954 0.50543267 0.40583972 0.35073619 0.31872763 0.37796447 0.23231068 0.23231068 SD Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 2 72 0 00000000 0.00000000 N hig 3 72 0.08333333 0.27832497 N low 2 72 0. 11111111 0.31647511 N low 3 72 0.20833333 0.40896641 N uns 2 72 0. 12500000 0.33303978 N uns 3 72 0.36111111 0.48369341 S hig 2 71 0.04225352 0.20259881 S hig 3 71 0. 11267606 0.31844694 S low 2 71 0.14084507 0.35033758 S low 3 71 0. 18309859 0.38950001 S uns 2 71 0.21126761 0.41111323 S uns 3 71 0.38028169 0.48891124 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N hig 2 36 0.00000000 0.00000000 AN hig 3 36 0.08333333 0.28030596 A N low 2 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 A N low 3 36 0.27777778 0.45425676 A N uns 2 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 A N uns 3 36 0.30555556 0.46717659 A S hig 2 35 0.08571429 0.28402864 A S hig 3 35 0.17142857 0.38238526 A S low 2 35 0.25714286 0.44343957 A s low 3 35 0.25714286 0.44343957 A s uns 2 35 0.22857143 0.42604296 A s uns 3 35 0.57142857 0.50209645 B N hig 2 36 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 36 0.08333333 0.28030596 B N low 2 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 B N low 3 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B N uns 2 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B N uns 3 36 0.41666667 0.50000000 B S hig 2 36 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S hig 3 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 BS low 2 36 0.02777778 0.16666667 B S low 3 36 0.11111111 0.31872763 B S uns 2 36 0.19444444 0.40138649 B S uns 3 36 0.19444444 0.40138649 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD 1 N hig 2 35 0.00000000 0.00000000 1 N hig 3 35 0.02857143 0.16903085 1 N low 2 35 0.11428571 0.32280285 1 N low 3 35 0.14285714 0.35503580 1 N uns 2 35 0.08571429 0.28402864 1 N uns 3 35 0.37142857 0.49024089 1 S hig 2 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 1 S hig 3 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 1 S low 2 34 0.14705882 0.35949063 1 S low 3 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 1 S uns 2 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 1 S uns 3 34 0.32352941 0.47485808 2 N hig 2 37 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N hig 3 37 0.13513514 0.34658350 2 N low 2 37 0.10810811 0.31480009 2 N low 3 37 0.27027027 0.45022517 2 N uns 2 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 2 N uns 3 37 0.35135135 0.48397751 2 S hig 2 37 0.02702703 0.16439899 2 S hig 3 37 0.13513514 0.34658350 2 S low 2 37 0.13513514 0.34658350 2 S low 3 37 0.29729730 0.46337319 2 S uns 2 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 2 S uns 3 37 0.43243243 0.50224720 372 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 N hig 2 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N hig 3 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N low 2 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 A 1 N low 3 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 A 1 N uns 2 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 A 1 N uns 3 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 A 1 S hig 2 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A 1 S hig 3 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A 1 S low 2 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 A 1 s low 3 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A 1 s uns 2 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 A 1 s uns 3 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 A 2 N hig 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 N hig 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 A 2 N low 2 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A 2 N low 3 17 0.41176471 0.50729966 A 2 N uns 2 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A 2 N uns 3 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 A 2 S hig 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A 2 S hig 3 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 A 2 S low 2 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 A 2 S low 3 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 A 2 S uns 2 18 0.27/77778 0.46088860 A 2 S uns 3 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 B 1 N hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N hig 3 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B 1 N low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 1 N low 3 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 1 N uns 2 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B 1 N uns 3 16 0.43750000 0.51234754 B 1 S hig 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S hig 3 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 B 1 S low 2 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 B 1 S low 3 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 B 1 S uns 2 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 B 1 S uns 3 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 B 2 N hig 2 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 3 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 B 2 N low 2 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 B 2 N low 3 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 B 2 N uns 2 20 0.20000000 0.41039134 B 2 N uns 3 20 0.40000000 0.50262469 B 2 S hig 2 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S hig 3 19 0.05263158 0.22941573 B 2 S low 2 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S low 3 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B 2 S uns 2 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B 2 S uns 3 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 Level of Level of Level of --YIELD... VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 2 80 0.01250000 0.11180340 B hig 3 80 0.05000000 0.21932001 B low 2 80 0.08750000 0.28434913 B low 3 80 0.12500000 0.33280549 B uns 2 80 0.13750000 0.34654716 B uns 3 80 0.30000000 0.46114881 N hig 2 63 0.03174603 0.17673143 N hig 3 63 0.15873016 0.36835945 N low 2 63 0.17460317 0.38267659 N low 3 63 0.28571429 0.45538256 N uns 2 63 0.20634921 0.40793462 N uns 3 63 0.46031746 0.50242627 373 Level of Level of Level Level of YIELD STORY VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A B hig 2 39 0.02564103 0.16012815 A B hig 3 39 0.05128205 0.22345587 A B low 2 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 A B low 3 39 0.17948718 0.38877641 A B uns 2 39 0.17948718 0.38877641 A B uns 3 39 0.35897436 0.48597051 A N hig 2 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 A N hig 3 32 0.21875000 0.42001344 A N low 2 32 0.25000000 0.43994135 A N low 3 32 0.37500000 0.49186938 A N uns 2 32 0.15625000 0.36890203 A N uns 3 32 0.53125000 0.50700735 B B hig 2 41 0.00000000 0.00000000 B B hig 3 41 0.04878049 0.21808479 B B low 2 41 0.04878049 0.21808479 B B low 3 41 0.07317073 0.26365165 B B uns 2 41 0.09756098 0.30040623 B B uns 3 41 0.24390244 0.43476935 B N hig 2 31 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 31 0.09677419 0.30053715 B N low 2 31 0.09677419 0.30053715 B N low 3 31 0.19354839 0.40160966 B N uns 2 31 0.25806452 0.44480272 B N uns 3 31 0.38709677 0.49513765 Level of Level of Level Level of RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 B hig 2 36 0.02777778 0.16666667 1 B hig 3 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 1 B low 2 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 1 B low 3 36 0.05555556 0.23231068 1 B uns 2 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 1 B uns 3 36 0.25000000 0.43915503 1 N hig 2 33 0.03030303 0.17407766 1 N hig 3 33 0.06060606 0.24230584 1 N low 2 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 1 N low 3 33 0.15151515 0.36410954 1 N uns 2 33 0.15151515 0.36410954 1 N uns 3 33 0.45454545 0.50564990 2 B hig 2 44 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 B hig 3 44 0.04545455 0.21070705 2 B low 2 44 0.04545455 0.21070705 2 B low 3 44 0.18181818 0.39015365 2 B uns 2 44 0.13636364 0.34714176 2 B uns 3 44 0.34090909 0.47949498 2 N hig 2 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 2 N hig 3 30 0.26666667 0.44977645 2 N low 2 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 2 N low 3 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 2 N uns 2 30 0.26666667 0.44977645 2 N uns 3 30 0.46666667 0.50741626 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 B hig 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A 1 B hig 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A 1 B low 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A 1 B low 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A 1 B uns 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A 1 B uns 3 18 0.33333333 0.48507125 A 1 N hig 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A 1 N hig 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A 1 N low 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A 1 N low 3 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A 1 N uns 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A 1 N uns 3 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 A 2 B hig 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 B hig 3 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 A 2 B low 2 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 A 2 B low 3 21 0.28571429 0.46291005 A 2 B uns 2 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 A 2 B uns 3 21 0.38095238 0.49761335 A 2 N hig 2 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 A 2 N hig 3 14 0.42857143 0.51355259 A 2 N low 2 14 0.35714286 0.49724516 A 2 N low 3 14 0.64285714 0.49724516 A 2 N uns 2 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 A 2 N uns 3 14 0.57142857 0.51355259 B 1 B hig 2 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 B hig 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 B 1 B low 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B 1 B low 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 B 1 B uns 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B 1 B uns 3 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 B 1 N hig 2 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N hig 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 B 1 N low 2 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 B 1 N low 3 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 B 1 N uns 2 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 B 1 N uns 3 15 0.40000000 0.50709255 B 2 B hig 2 23 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B hig 3 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 B 2 B low 2 23 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B low 3 23 0.08695652 0.28810407 B 2 B uns 2 23 0.08695652 0.28810407 B 2 B uns 3 23 0.30434783 0.47047197 B 2 N hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 3 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 2 N low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 2 N low 3 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 B 2 N uns 2 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 B 2 N uns 3 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 2 39 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B hig 3 39 0.02564103 0.16012815 N B low 2 39 0.10256410 0.30735474 N B low 3 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 N B uns 2 39 0.07692308 0.26995276 N B uns 3 39 0.25641026 0.44235903 N N hig 2 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 N N hig 3 33 0.15151515 0.36410954 N N low 2 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 N N low 3 33 0.27272727 0.45226702 N N uns 2 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 NN uns 3 33 0.48484848 0.50751922 S B hig 2 41 0.02439024 0.15617376 SB hig 3 41 0.07317073 0.26365165 S B low 2 41 0.07317073 0.26365165 SB low 3 41 0.09756098 0.30040623 s B uns 2 41 0.19512195 0.40121766 s B uns 3 41 0.34146341 0.48009145 s N hig 2 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 s N hig 3 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 s N low 2 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 s N low 3 30 0.30000000 0.46609160 s N uns 2 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 s N uns 3 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N B hig 2 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N B hig 3 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N B low 2 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 A N B low 3 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 A N B uns 2 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 A N B uns 3 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 A N N hig 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N N hig 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 A N N low 2 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 A NN low 3 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 A N N uns 2 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 AN N uns 3 17 0.41176471 0.50729966 AS B hig 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 A S B hig 3 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 A S B low 2 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 A S B low 3 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 A S B uns 2 20 0.25000000 0.44426166 AS B uns 3 20 0.50000000 0.51298918 AS N hig 2 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 AS N hig 3 15 0.26666667 0.45773771 AS N low 2 15 0.40000000 0.50709255 A S N low 3 15 0.40000000 0.50709255 A S N uns 2 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 AS N uns 3 15 0.66666667 0.48795004 B N B hig 2 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N B hig 3 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 B N B low 2 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 B N B low 3 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 B N B uns 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 B N B uns 3 20 0.30000000 0.47016235 B N N hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N N hig 3 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B N N low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B N N low 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 B N N uns 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 B NN uns 3 16 0.56250000 0.51234754 BS B hig 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 BSB hig 3 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 BS B low 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 BSB low 3 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 B S B uns 2 21 0.14285714 0.35856858 BS B uns 3 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 BS N hig 2 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S N hig 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 B S N low 2 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 BS N low 3 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 B S N uns 2 15 0.26666667 0.45773771 BS N uns 3 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 2 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B hig 3 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 NB low 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 NB low 3 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 NB uns 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 NB uns 3 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 N N hig 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 N N hig 3 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 N N low 2 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 N N low 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 NN uns 2 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 NN uns 3 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 SB hig 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 SB hig 3 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 S B low 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 SB low 3 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 S B uns 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 S B uns 3 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 s N hig 2 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 s N hig 3 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 s N low 2 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 s N low 3 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 s N uns 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 s N uns 3 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 2 N B hig 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 NB hig 3 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 2 N B low 2 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 2 N B low 3 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 2 NB uns 2 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 2 NB uns 3 21 0.28571429 0.46291005 2 N N hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N N hig 3 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 2 NN low 2 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 2 N N low 3 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 2 NN uns 2 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 2 NN uns 3 16 0.43750000 0.51234754 2 SB hig 2 23 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 S B hig 3 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 2 SB low 2 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 2 S B low 3 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 2 S B uns 2 23 0.21739130 0.42174117 2 SB uns 3 23 0.39130435 0.49901088 2 S N hig 2 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 2 S N hig 3 14 0.28571429 0.46880723 2 S N low 2 14 0.28571429 0.46880723 2 S N low 3 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 SN uns 2 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 2 S N uns 3 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --- YIELD— STORYRECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean A 1 N B hig 2 9 0.00000000 A 1 N B hig 3 9 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 2 9 0.11111111 A 1 N B low 3 9 0.11111111 A 1 N B uns 2 9 0.11111111 A 1 N B uns 3 9 0.22222222 A 1 N N hig 2 10 0.00000000 A 1 N N hig 3 10 0.00000000 A 1 N N low 2 10 0.10000000 A 1 N N tow 3 10 0.20000000 A 1 N N uns 2 10 0.10000000 A 1 N N uns 3 10 0.40000000 A 1 S B hig 2 9 0.11111111 A 1 S B hig 3 9 0.11111111 A 1 S B low 2 9 0.22222222 A 1 S B low 3 9 0.00000000 A 1 S B uns 2 9 0.22222222 A 1 S B uns 3 9 0.44444444 A 1 S N hig 2 8 0.12500000 A 1 S N hig 3 8 0.12500000 A 1 S N low 2 8 0.25000000 A 1 S N low 3 8 0.12500000 A 1 S N uns 2 8 0.12500000 A 1 S N uns 3 8 0.62500000 A 2 N B hig 2 10 0.00000000 A 2 N B hig 3 10 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 2 10 0.10000000 A 2 N B low 3 10 0.30000000 A 2 N B uns 2 10 0.10000000 A 2 N B uns 3 10 0.20000000 A 2 N N hig 2 7 0.00000000 A 2 N N hig 3 7 0.42857143 A 2 N N low 2 7 0.14285714 A 2 N N low 3 7 0.57142857 A 2 NN uns 2 7 0.14285714 A 2 N N uns 3 7 0.42857143 A 2 S B hig 2 11 0.00000000 A 2 S B hig 3 11 0.09090909 A 2 S B low 2 11 0.09090909 A 2 S B low 3 11 0.27272727 A 2 S B uns 2 11 0.27272727 A 2 S B uns 3 11 0.54545455 A 2 S N hig 2 7 0.14285714 A 2 S N hig 3 7 0.42857143 A 2 S N low 2 7 0.57142857 A 2 S N low 3 7 0.71428571 A 2 S N uns 2 7 0.28571429 A 2 S N uns 3 7 0.71428571 B 1 N B hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 N B hig 3 9 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 2 9 0.22222222 B 1 N B low 3 9 0.11111111 B 1 N B uns 2 9 0.11111111 B 1 N B uns 3 9 0.22222222 B 1 N N hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 NN hig 3 7 0.14285714 B 1 N N low 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 N N low 3 7 0.14285714 B 1 N N uns 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 N N uns 3 7 0.71428571 B 1 S B hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 S B hig 3 9 0.11111111 B 1 S B low 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 S B low 3 9 0.00000000 B 1 S B uns 2 9 0.11111111 B 1 S B uns 3 9 0.11111111 B 1 S N hig 2 8 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 3 8 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 2 8 0.12500000 B 1 S N low 3 8 0.12500000 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --- YIELD— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean B 1 S N uns 2 8 0.37500000 B 1 S N uns 3 8 0.12500000 B 2 N B hig 2 11 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 3 11 0.09090909 B 2 N B low 2 11 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 3 11 0.09090909 B 2 N B uns 2 11 0.00000000 B 2 N B uns 3 11 0.36363636 B 2 N N hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 3 9 0.11111111 B 2 N N low 2 9 0.22222222 B 2 N N low 3 9 0.22222222 B 2 N N uns 2 9 0.44444444 B 2 N N uns 3 9 0.44444444 B 2 S B hig 2 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B hig 3 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 2 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 3 12 0.08333333 B 2 S B uns 2 12 0.16666667 B 2 S B uns 3 12 0.25000000 B 2 S N hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 3 7 0.14285714 B 2 S N low 2 7 0.00000000 B 2 s N low 3 7 0.28571429 B 2 s N uns 2 7 0.14285714 B 2 s N uns 3 7 0.28571429 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --- YIELD— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N SD A 1 N B hig 2 9 0.00000000 A 1 N B hig 3 9 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 2 9 0.33333333 A 1 N B low 3 9 0.33333333 A 1 N B uns 2 9 0.33333333 A 1 N B uns 3 9 0.44095855 A 1 N N hig 2 10 0.00000000 A 1 N N hig 3 10 0.00000000 A 1 N N low 2 10 0.31622777 A 1 N N low 3 10 0.42163702 A 1 N N uns 2 10 0.31622777 A 1 N N uns 3 10 0.51639778 A 1 S B hig 2 9 0.33333333 A 1 S B hig 3 9 0.33333333 A 1 S B low 2 9 0.44095855 A 1 S B low 3 9 0.00000000 A 1 S B uns 2 9 0.44095855 A 1 S B uns 3 9 0.52704628 A 1 S N hig 2 8 0.35355339 A 1 S N hig 3 8 0.35355339 A 1 S N low 2 8 0.46291005 A 1 S N low 3 8 0.35355339 A 1 S N uns 2 8 0.35355339 A 1 S N uns 3 8 0.51754917 A 2 N B hig 2 10 0.00000000 A 2 N B hig 3 10 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 2 10 0.31622777 A 2 N B low 3 10 0.48304589 A 2 N B uns 2 10 0.31622777 A 2 N B uns 3 10 0.42163702 A 2 N N hig 2 7 0.00000000 A 2 N N hig 3 7 0.53452248 A 2 N N low 2 7 0.37796447 A 2 N N low 3 7 0.53452248 A 2 N N uns 2 7 0.37796447 A 2 N N uns 3 7 0.53452248 A 2 S B hig 2 11 0.00000000 A 2 S B hig 3 11 0.30151134 A 2 S B low 2 11 0.30151134 A 2 S B low 3 11 0.46709937 380 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --- YIELD— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N SD A 2 S B uns 2 11 0.46709937 A 2 S B uns 3 11 0.52223297 A 2 S N hig 2 7 0.37796447 A 2 SN hig 3 7 0.53452248 A 2 S N low 2 7 0.53452248 A 2 S N low 3 7 0.48795004 A 2 S N uns 2 7 0.48795004 A 2 S N uns 3 7 0.48795004 B 1 NB hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 N B hig 3 9 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 2 9 0.44095855 B 1 NB low 3 9 0.33333333 B 1 N B uns 2 9 0.33333333 B 1 N B uns 3 9 0.44095855 B 1 N N hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 3 7 0.37796447 B 1 N N low 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 N N low 3 7 0.37796447 B 1 N N uns 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 N N uns 3 7 0.48795004 B 1 S B hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 S B hig 3 9 0.33333333 B 1 S B low 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 S B low 3 9 0.00000000 B 1 S B uns 2 9 0.33333333 B 1 SB uns 3 9 0.33333333 B 1 SN hig 2 8 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 3 8 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 2 8 0.35355339 B 1 S N low 3 8 0.35355339 B 1 S N uns 2 8 0.51754917 B 1 S N uns 3 8 0.35355339 B 2 N B hig 2 11 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 3 11 0.30151134 B 2 N B low 2 11 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 3 11 0.30151134 B 2 N B uns 2 11 0.00000000 B 2 N B uns 3 11 0.50452498 B 2 N N hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 3 9 0.33333333 B 2 N N low 2 9 0.44095855 B 2 N N low 3 9 0.44095855 B 2 N N uns 2 9 0.52704628 B 2 N N uns 3 9 0.52704628 B 2 S B hig 2 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B hig 3 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 2 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 3 12 0.28867513 B 2 S B uns 2 12 0.38924947 B 2 S B uns 3 12 0.45226702 B 2 S N hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 3 7 0.37796447 B 2 S N low 2 7 0.00000000 B 2 S N low 3 7 0.48795004 B 2 S N uns 2 7 0.37796447 B 2 S N uns 3 7 0.48795004 381 Analysis 25. The overall change analysis. Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 206 97.71569653 0.47434804 2.66 0.0001 Error 1080 192.48632368 0.17822808 Corrected Total 1286 290.20202020 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.336716 122.9262 0.4221707 0.3434343 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(RECALPOS*SNS*VI) 135 52.67755963 0.39020415 2.19 0.0001 RECALPOS 1 0.01728069 0.01728069 0.10 0.7556 SNS 1 0.35427926 0.35427926 1.99 0.1589 RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.00075607 0.00075607 0.00 0.9481 VI 1 0.04539699 0.04539699 0.25 0.6139 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.04887735 0.04887735 0.27 0.6006 SNS*VI 1 0.67833713 0.67833713 3.81 0.0513 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.55640305 0.55640305 3.12 0.0775 MEM 2 16.59994091 8.29997045 46.57 0.0001 RECALPOS*MEM 2 0.18264072 0.09132036 0.51 0.5992 SNS*MEM 2 0.13129359 0.06564680 0.37 0.6920 RECALPOS*SNS*MEM 2 0.29998561 0.14999280 0.84 0.4313 VI*MEM 2 1.15270092 0.57635046 3.23 0.0398 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 2 0.14053371 0.07026686 0.39 0.6743 SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.22308871 0.11154436 0.63 0.5350 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.14909609 0.07454804 0.42 0.6583 FEEDBACK 2 8.09059048 4.04529524 22.70 0.0001 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 2 3.43682067 1.71841034 9.64 0.0001 SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.42163513 0.21081757 1.18 0.3068 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.12131782 0.06065891 0.34 0.7116 VI*FEEDBACK 2 1.16805060 0.58402530 3.28 0.0381 RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.71034878 0.35517439 1.99 0.1368 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.04622015 0.02311007 0.13 0.8784 RECALP*SNS*Vl*FEEDBA 2 0.16003450 0.08001725 0.45 0.6384 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 4.11585658 1.02896414 5.77 0.0001 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.49484042 0.12371010 0.69 0.5961 SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.37049893 0.09262473 0.52 0.7213 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 4 0.18801446 0.04700362 0.26 0.9013 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.76231649 0.19057912 1.07 0.3704 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 4 0.48008389 0.12002097 0.67 0.6105 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 2.47962514 0.61990628 3.48 0.0078 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 4 0.42921585 0.10730396 0.60 0.6612 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 15.65471680 15.65471680 87.84 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.94522411 0.94522411 5.30 0.0215 feedback linear 1 8.09058624 8.09058624 45.39 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 0.00000424 0.00000424 0.00 0.9961 Level of CHANGE...... RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 621 0.33977456 0.47401437 2 666 0.34684685 0.47632424 382 Level of...... CHANGE...... SNS N Mean SD N 648 0.36111111 0.48069373 S 639 0.32550861 0.46893164 Level of Level of CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD 1 N 315 0.35873016 0.48039094 1 S 306 0.32026144 0.46734120 2 N 333 0.36336336 0.48169203 2 S 333 0.33033033 0.47103981 Level of...... CHANGE...... VI N Mean SD B 720 0.34861111 0.47686186 N 567 0.33686067 0.47305415 Level of Level of CHANGE...... RECALPOS VI N Mean SD 1 B 324 0.35185185 0.47828670 1 N 297 0.32659933 0.46976081 2 B 396 0.34595960 0.47628184 2 N 270 0.34814815 0.47726791 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE SNS VI N Mean SD NB 351 0.38746439 0.48786662 NN 297 0.32996633 0.47099413 SB 369 0.31165312 0.46379780 SN 270 0.34444444 0.47606920 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD 1 N B 162 0.41358025 0.49400206 1 N N 153 0.30065359 0.46004816 1 S B 162 0.29012346 0.45522636 1 S N 144 0.35416667 0.47992934 2 N B 189 0.36507937 0.48273117 2 N N 144 0.36111111 0.48199920 2 S B 207 0.32850242 0.47080718 2 S N 126 0.33333333 0.47328638 overall change analysis, mct4 5 12:59 Saturday, October 31, 1992 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ■...... CHANGE..... MEN N Mean SD hig 429 0.18181818 0.38614492 low 429 0.38461538 0.48707227 uns 429 0.46386946 0.49927512 Level. of Level, of ...... CHANGE- RECALPOS HEM N Mean SD 1 hig 207 0.17874396 0.38406660 1 low 207 0.36714976 0.48319637 1 uns 207 0.47342995 0.50050394 2 hig 222 0.18468468 0.38891849 2 low 222 0.40090090 0.49118851 2 uns 222 0.45495495 0.49909216 383 Level of Level of -CHANGE- SNS MEM N Mean SD N hig 216 0.19444444 0.39669175 N low 216 0.41203704 0.49334503 N uns 216 0.47685185 0.50062407 S hig 213 0.16901408 0.37564720 S low 213 0.35680751 0.48018584 S uns 213 0.45070423 0.49873611 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE RECALPOS SNS MEM N Mean SD N hig 105 0.17142857 0.37869063 N low 105 0.41904762 0.49576965 N uns 105 0.48571429 0.50219299 S hig 102 0.18627451 0.39125065 S low 102 0.31372549 0.46629766 S uns 102 0.46078431 0.50092130 N hig 111 0.21621622 0.41353037 N low 111 0.40540541 0.49319696 N uns 111 0.46846847 0.50126784 S hig 111 0.15315315 0.36176834 S low 111 0.39639640 0.49136691 S uns 111 0.44144144 0.49881104 of Level of ..... CHANGE.... VI MEM N Mean SD B hig 240 0.15000000 0.35781765 B low 240 0.40416667 0.49175560 B uns 240 0.49166667 0.50097534 N hig 189 0.22222222 0.41684393 N low 189 0.35978836 0.48121296 N uns 189 0.42857143 0.49618606 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- RECALPOS VI MEM N Mean SD 1 B hig 108 0.14814815 0.35690295 1 B low 108 0.40740741 0.49364252 1 B uns 108 0.50000000 0.50233101 1 N hig 99 0.21212121 0.41089070 1 N low 99 0.32323232 0.47009080 1 N uns 99 0.44444444 0.49943278 2 B hig 132 0.15151515 0.35991620 2 B low 132 0.40151515 0.49207224 2 B uns 132 0.48484848 0.50167427 2 N hig 90 0.23333333 0.42532209 2 N low 90 0.40000000 0.49264250 2 N uns 90 0.41111111 0.49479185 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE SNS VI MEM N Mean SD N B hig 117 0.19658120 0.39912223 N B low 117 0.43589744 0.49800664 N B uns 117 0.52991453 0.50125101 NN hig 99 0.19191919 0.39581401 NN low 99 0.38383838 0.48879424 NN uns 99 0.41414141 0.49507989 S B hig 123 0.10569106 0.30869923 S B low 123 0.37398374 0.48583837 S B uns 123 0.45528455 0.50003332 S N hig 90 0.25555556 0.43861660 S N low 90 0.33333333 0.47404546 s N uns 90 0.44444444 0.49968779 384 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS VI MEM N Mean SD N B hig 54 0.18518519 0.39209520 I N B low 54 0.50000000 I0.50469494 N B uns 54 0.55555556 I0.50156986 N N hig 51 0.15686275 0.36729002 I N N low 51 0.33333333 0.47609523 I N N uns 51 0.41176471 10.49705012 S B hig 54 0.11111111 I0.31722063 SB low 54 0.31481481 I0.46880314 S B uns 54 0.44444444 I0.50156986 S N hig 48 0.27083333 I0.44909286 S N low 48 0.31250000 I0.46841744 S N uns 48 0.47916667 I0.50485234 N B hig 63 0.20634921 I0.40793462 N B low 63 0.38095238 0.48952154 I N B uns 63 0.50793651 0.50395263 I N N hig 48 0.22916667 0.42474440 I N N low 48 0.43750000 I0.50132802 N N uns 48 0.41666667 I0.49822380 S B hig 69 0.10144928 0.30413462 I SB low 69 0.42028986 0.49722161 I S B uns 69 0.46376812 0.50233895 I S N hig 42 0.23809524 0.43108054 I S N low 42 0.35714286 I0.48496560 S N uns 42 0.40476190 0.49679577 I Level Or FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 429 0.24941725 0.43318089 2 429 0.34032634 0.47437207 3 429 0.44055944 0.49703388 Level of Level of LnANbtruAurc--______------RECALPOSFEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 1 207 0.29951691 0.45915684 1 2 207 0.35265700i 0.47895537 1 3 207 0.36714976 0.48319637 2 1 222 0.20270270 0.40292134 2 2 222 0.32882883 0.47084931 2 3 222 0.50900901 0.50104859 Level of Level of LnnnUuruAurc.- SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 1 216 0.27777778 0.44894364 N 2 216 0.33333333 0.47249954 N 3 216 0.47222222 0.50038745 S 1 213 0.22065728 0.41566671 S 2 213 0.34741784 0.47727153 S 3 213 0.40845070 0.49270522 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 1 105 0.33333333 0.47366547 N 2 105 0.33333333 0.47366547 N 3 105 0.40952381 0.49410444 S 1 102 0.26470588 0.44335513 S 2 102 0.37254902 0.48587104 S 3 102 0.32352941 0.47013301 N 1 111 0.22522523 0.41962504 N 2 111 0.33333333 0.47354242 N 3 111 0.53153153 0.50126784 S 1 111 0.18018018 0.38608050 S 2 111 0.32432432 0.47024485 S 3 111 0.48648649 0.50208411 385 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 1 240 0.28333333 0.45155859 B 2 240 0.34583333 0.47663321 B 3 240 0.41666667 0.49403697 N 1 189 0.20634921 0.40575895 N 2 189 0.33333333 0.47265659 N 3 189 0.47089947 0.50047821 of Level of Level of --CHANGE...... RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 1 108 0.32407407 0.47020981 B 2 108 0.39814815 0.49179843 B 3 108 0.33333333 0.47360222 N 1 99 0.27272727 0.44762826 N 2 99 0.30303030 0.46190699 N 3 99 0.40404040 0.49320261 B 1 132 0.25000000 0.43466228 B 2 132 0.30303030 0.46131895 B 3 132 0.48484848 0.50167427 N 1 90 0.13333333 0.34183904 N 2 90 0.36666667 0.48459412 N 3 90 0.54444444 0.50081083 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD NB 1 117 0.33333333 0.47343208 NB 2 117 0.36752137 0.48420377 NB 3 117 0.46153846 0.50066269 NN 1 99 0.21212121 0.41089070 NN 2 99 0.29292929 0.45742235 NN 3 99 0.48484848 0.50231376 SB 1 123 0.23577236 0.42621669 SB 2 123 0.32520325 0.47036670 SB 3 123 0.37398374 0.48583837 SN 1 90 0.20000000 0.40224091 s N 2 90 0.37777778 0.48754781 s N 3 90 0.45555556 0.50081083 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N B 1 54 0.38888889 0.49207557 1 NB 2 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 1 N B 3 54 0.40740741 0.49596555 1 N N 1 51 0.27450980 0.45070750 1 N N 2 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 1 N N 3 51 0.41176471 0.49705012 1 S B 1 54 0.25925926 0.44234304 1 S B 2 54 0.35185185 0.48203215 1 s B 3 54 0.25925926 0.44234304 1 s N 1 48 0.27083333 0.44909286 1 s N 2 48 0.39583333 0.49420399 1 s N 3 48 0.39583333 0.49420399 2 N B 1 63 0.28571429 0.45538256 2 NB 2 63 0.30158730 0.46263344 2 N B 3 63 0.50793651 0.50395263 2 N N 1 48 0.14583333 0.35667396 2 NN 2 48 0.37500000 0.48924605 2 N N 3 48 0.56250000 0.50132802 2 SB 1 69 0.21739130 0.41549281 2 SB 2 69 0.30434783 0.46350163 2 S B 3 69 0.46376812 0.50233895 2 SN 1 42 0.11904762 0.32777007 2 S N 2 42 0.35714286 0.48496560 2 S N 3 42 0.52380952 0.50548674 386 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE HEH FEEDBACKN Mean SD hig 1 143 0.15384615 0.36206941 hig 2 143 0.18181818 0.38705030 hig 3 143 0.20979021 0.40858993 low 1 143 0.32167832 0.46876221 low 2 143 0.37062937 0.48467096 low 3 143 0.46153846 0.50027078 uns 1 143 0.27272727 0.44692720 uns 2 143 0.46853147 0.50076274 uns 3 143 0.65034965 0.47853564 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 69 0.18840580 0.39390064 hig 2 69 0.17391304 0.38181154 hig 3 69 0.17391304 0.38181154 low 1 69 0.36231884 0.48419170 low 2 69 0.39130435 0.49161772 low 3 69 0.34782609 0.47976977 uns 1 69 0.34782609 0.47976977 uns 2 69 0.49275362 0.50361016 uns 3 69 0.57971014 0.49722161 2 hig 1 74 0.12162162 0.32907936 2 hig 2 74 0.18918919 0.39433230 2 hig 3 74 0.24324324 0.43196939 2 low 1 74 0.28378378 0.45391057 2 low 2 74 0.35135135 0.48065117 2 low 3 74 0.56756757 0.49879529 2 uns 1 74 0.20270270 0.40475698 2 uns 2 74 0.44594595 0.50046258 2 uns 3 74 0.71621622 0.45391057 Level of Level of Level of SNS HEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 1 72 0.18055556 0.38734884 N hig 2 72 0.18055556 0.38734884 N hig 3 72 0.22222222 0.41865722 N low 1 72 0.36111111 0.48369341 N low 2 72 0.38888889 0.49091910 N low 3 72 0.48611111 0.50331452 N uns 1 72 0.29166667 0.45771939 N uns 2 72 0.43055556 0.49862879 N uns 3 72 0.70833333 0.45771939 S hig 1 71 0.12676056 0.33507259 S hig 2 71 0.18309859 0.38950001 S hig 3 71 0.19718310 0.40070361 S low 1 71 0.28169014 0.45302471 S low 2 71 0.35211268 0.48102841 S low 3 71 0.43661972 0.49949673 S uns 1 71 0.25352113 0.43812294 S uns 2 71 0.50704225 0.50350881 S uns 3 71 0.59154930 0.49504588 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 1 35 0.20000000 0.40583972 N hig 2 35 0.14285714 0.35503580 N hig 3 35 0.17142857 0.38238526 N low 1 35 0.42857143 0.50209645 N low 2 35 0.40000000 0.49705012 N low 3 35 0.42857143 0.50209645 N uns 1 35 0.37142857 0.49024089 N uns 2 35 0.45714286 0.50543267 N uns 3 35 0.62857143 0.49024089 S hig 1 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 S hig 2 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 S hig 3 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 S low 1 34 0.29411765 0.46249729 3 8 7 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD S low 2 34 0.38235294 0.49327022 S low 3 34 0.26470588 0.44781108 S uns 1 34 0.32352941 0.47485808 S uns 2 34 0.52941176 0.50664040 S uns 3 34 0.52941176 0.50664040 N hig 1 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 N hig 2 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 N hig 3 37 0.27027027 0.45022517 N low 1 37 0.29729730 0.46337319 N low 2 37 0.37837838 0.49167239 N low 3 37 0.54054054 0.50522792 N uns 1 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 N uns 2 37 0.40540541 0.49774265 N uns 3 37 0.78378378 0.41734180 S hig 1 37 0.08108108 0.27672473 S hig 2 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 S hig 3 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 S low 1 37 0.27027027 0.45022517 S low 2 37 0.32432432 0.47457900 S low 3 37 0.59459459 0.49774265 S uns 1 37 0.18918919 0.39706128 S uns 2 37 0.48648649 0.50671171 S uns 3 37 0.64864865 0.48397751 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- VI MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD B hig 1 80 0.12500000 0.33280549 B hig 2 80 0.13750000 0.34654716 B hig 3 80 0.18750000 0.39277494 B low 1 80 0.37500000 0.48717735 B low 2 80 0.40000000 0.49298882 B low 3 80 0.43750000 0.49920823 B uns 1 80 0.35000000 0.47997890 B uns 2 80 0.50000000 0.50315461 B uns 3 80 0.62500000 0.48717735 N hig 1 63 0.19047619 0.39583081 N hig 2 63 0.23809524 0.42933879 N hig 3 63 0.23809524 0.42933879 N low 1 63 0.25396825 0.43877594 N low 2 63 0.33333333 0.47519096 N low 3 63 0.49206349 0.50395263 N uns 1 63 0.17460317 0.38267659 N uns 2 63 0.42857143 0.49884660 N uns 3 63 0.68253968 0.46922712 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS VI MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 1 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B hig 2 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B hig 3 36 0.16666667 0.37796447 B low 1 36 0.41666667 0.50000000 B low 2 36 0.47222222 0.50630940 B low 3 36 0.33333333 0.47809144 B uns 1 36 0.41666667 0.50000000 B uns 2 36 0.58333333 0.50000000 B uns 3 36 0.50000000 0.50709255 N hig 1 33 0.24242424 0.43519414 N hig 2 33 0.21212121 0.41514875 N hig 3 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 N low 1 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 N low 2 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 N low 3 33 0.36363636 0.48850421 N uns 1 33 0.27272727 0.45226702 N uns 2 33 0.39393939 0.49619766 N uns 3 33 0.66666667 0.47871355 B hig 1 44 0.11363636 0.32103822 B hig 2 44 0.13636364 0.34714176 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 B hig 3 44 0.20454545 0.40803246 2 B low 1 44 0.34090909 0.47949498 2 B low 2 44 0.34090909 0.47949498 2 B low 3 44 0.52272727 0.50525777 2 B uns 1 44 0.29545455 0.46152152 2 B uns 2 44 0.43181818 0.50105597 2 B uns 3 44 0.72727273 0.45051063 2 N hig 1 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 2 N hig 2 30 0.26666667 0.44977645 2 N hig 3 30 0.30000000 0.46609160 2 N low 1 30 0.20000000 0.40683810 2 N low 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 2 N low 3 30 0.63333333 0.49013252 2 N uns 1 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 2 N uns 2 30 0.46666667 0.50741626 2 N uns 3 30 0.70000000 0.46609160 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD NB hig 1 39 0.25641026 0.44235903 N B hig 2 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 NB hig 3 39 0.20512821 0.40907387 N B low 1 39 0.35897436 0.48597051 N B low 2 39 0.46153846 0.50503537 N B low 3 39 0.48717949 0.50636968 N B uns 1 39 0.38461538 0.49286406 NB uns 2 39 0.51282051 0.50636968 N B uns 3 39 0.69230769 0.46757190 N N hig 1 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 N N hig 2 33 0.24242424 0.43519414 N N hig 3 33 0.24242424 0.43519414 NN low 1 33 0.36363636 0.48850421 NN low 2 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 N N low 3 33 0.48484848 0.50751922 N N uns 1 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 N N uns 2 33 0.33333333 0.47871355 NN uns 3 33 0.72727273 0.45226702 SB hig 1 41 0.00000000 0.00000000 SB hig 2 41 0.14634146 0.35783904 S B hig 3 41 0.17073171 0.38094875 S B low 1 41 0.39024390 0.49386480 SB low 2 41 0.34146341 0.48009145 SB low 3 41 0.39024390 0.49386480 SB uns 1 41 0.31707317 0.47111699 SB uns 2 41 0.48780488 0.50606083 S B uns 3 41 0.56097561 0.50243310 SN hig 1 30 0.30000000 0.46609160 S N hig 2 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 S N hig 3 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 S N low 1 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 S N low 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 S N low 3 30 0.50000000 0.50854763 S N uns 1 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 s N uns 2 30 0.53333333 0.50741626 s N uns 3 30 0.63333333 0.49013252 Level of Level Df Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 1 18 0.2/7/7778 0.46088860 NB hig 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 N B hig 3 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 N B low 1 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 N B low 2 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 N B low 3 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 N B uns 1 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 N B uns 2 18 0.66666667 0.48507125 N B uns 3 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 N N hig 1 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 389 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N N hig 2 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 1 N N hig 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 1 NN low 1 17 0.41176471 0.50729966 1 N N low 2 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 1 N N low 3 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 1 N N uns 1 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 1 N N uns 2 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 1 N N uns 3 17 0.70588235 0.46966822 1 SB hig 1 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 1 S B hig 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 1 S B hig 3 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 1 SB low 1 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 1 S e low 2 18 0.38888089 0.50163133 1 SB low 3 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 1 S B uns 1 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 1 S B uns 2 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 1 SB uns 3 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 1 S N hig 1 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 1 S N hig 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 1 S N hig 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 1 S N low 1 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 1 S N low 2 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 1 SN low 3 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 1 s N uns 1 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 1 s N uns 2 16 0.56250000 0.51234754 1 s N uns 3 16 0.62500000 0.50000000 2 N B hig 1 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 2 N B hig 2 21 0.14285714 0.35856858 2 NB hig 3 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 2 N B low 1 21 0.28571429 0.46291005 2 NB low 2 21 0.38095238 0.49761335 2 N B low 3 21 0.47619048 0.51176632 2 N B uns 1 21 0.33333333 0.48304589 2 N B uns 2 21 0.38095238 0.49761335 2 NB uns 3 21 0.80952381 0.40237391 2 N N hig 1 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 2 N N hig 2 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 2 N N hig 3 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 2 NN low 1 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 2 NN low 2 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 2 N N low 3 16 0.62500000 0.50000000 2 N N uns 1 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 2 N N uns 2 16 0.43750000 0.51234754 2 N N uns 3 16 0.75000000 0.44721360 2 SB hig 1 23 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 S B hig 2 23 0.13043478 0.34435022 2 S B hig 3 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 2 s B low 1 23 0.39130435 0.49901088 2 s B low 2 23 0.30434783 0.47047197 2 s B low 3 23 0.56521739 0.50686980 2 s B uns 1 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 2 s B uns 2 23 0.47826087 0.51075392 2 s B uns 3 23 0.65217391 0.48698475 2 s N hig 1 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 2 s N hig 2 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 2 s N hig 3 14 0.28571429 0.46880723 2 s N low 1 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 2 s N low 2 14 0.35714286 0.49724516 2 s N low 3 14 0.64285714 0.49724516 2 s N uns 1 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 2 s N uns 2 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 s N uns 3 14 0.64285714 0.49724516 Analysis 26. The source memory analysis, Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: FEEDID Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 206 99.52768102 0.48314408 2.54 0.0001 Error 1080 205.08770360 0.18989602 Corrected Total 1286 304.61538462 R-Square C.V. Root MSE FEEDID Mean 0.326732 70.81272 0.4357706 0.6153846 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(RECALPOS*SNS*VI) 135 46.13401117 0.34173342 1.80 0.0001 RECALPOS 1 1.46806939 1.46806939 7.73 0.0055 SNS 1 0.21559530 0.21559530 1.14 0.2869 RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.09209787 0.09209787 0.48 0.4863 VI 1 0.35414111 0.35414111 1.86 0.1723 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.00000858 0.00000858 0.00 0.9946 SNS*VI 1 0.47065228 0.47065228 2.48 0.1157 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.26819126 0.26819126 1.41 0.2349 MEM 2 1.02237586 0.51118793 2.69 0.0682 RECALPOS*MEM 2 0.13472006 0.06736003 0.35 0.7015 SNS*MEM 2 0.09690364 0.04845182 0.26 0.7748 RECALPOS*SNS*MEM 2 0.18404440 0.09202220 0.48 0.6161 VI*MEM 2 0.28891290 0.14445645 0.76 0.4676 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 2 0.99946550 0.49973275 2.63 0.0724 SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.49569844 0.24784922 1.31 0.2715 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.16072322 0.08036161 0.42 0.6551 FEEDBACK 2 33.19299538 16.59649769 87.40 0.0001 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 2 0.40838458 0.20419229 1.08 0.3416 SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.29651732 0.14825866 0.78 0.4583 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.40042708 0.20021354 1.05 0.3488 VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.01184502 0.00592251 0.03 0.9693 RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 1.59834082 0.79917041 4.21 0.0151 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.38554981 0.19277491 1.02 0.3627 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 2 0.24092289 0.12046145 0.63 0.5305 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.62743043 0.15685761 0.83 0.5086 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 1.39827914 0.34956979 1.84 0.1187 SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 1.46106933 0.36526733 1.92 0.1043 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 4 0.38120217 0.09530054 0.50 0.7344 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 1.60718511 0.40179628 2.12 0.0768 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 4 1.14675869 0.28668967 1.51 0.1971 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.66158657 0.16539664 0.87 0.4807 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 4 0.99475783 0.24868946 1.31 0.2644 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 0.89852524 0.89852524 4.73 0.0298 mem quadratic 1 0.12385062 0.12385062 0.65 0.4195 feedback linear 1 11.16761147 11.16761147 58.81 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 22.02538391 22.02538391 115.99 0.0001 General Linear Models Procedure Level of FEEDID..... RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 621 0.57971014 0.49400331 2 666 0.64864865 0.47775129 391 Level of FEEDID...... SNS N Mean SD N 648 0.63117284 0.48285970 S 639 0.59937402 0.49040919 Level of Level of ...... —FEEDID----- RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD 1 N 315 0.58412698 0.49365604 1 S 306 0.57516340 0.49512787 2 N 333 0.67567568 0.46882631 2 S 333 0.62162162 0.48571251 Level of VI N Mean SD B 720 0.63194444 0.48261181 N 567 0 .,59435626 0.49144976 Level of Level of ______--- rccUIUcccn in. RECALPOS VI N Mean SD 1 B 324 0.59567901 0.49151926 1 N 297 0.56228956 0.49694215 2 B 396 0.66161616 0.47375838 2 N 270 0.62962963 0.48380064 Level of Level of ______cccnrccUIU t n. SNS VI N Mean SD NB 351 0.66666667 0.47207748 N N 297 0.58922559 0.49280472 S B 369 0.59891599 0.49078344 S N 270 0.60000000 0.49080769 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID- RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD 1 N B 162 0.60493827 0.49037981 1 N N 153 0.56209150 0.49775900 1 S B 162 0.58641975 0.49400206 1 S N 144 0.56250000 0.49780989 2 N B 189 0.71957672 0.45039915 2 N N 144 0.61805556 0.48755889 2 S B 207 0.60869565 0.48922540 2 S N 126 0.64285714 0.48107024 Level of ...... FEEDID...... MEM N Mean SD hig 429 0.59207459 0.49202294 low 429 0.60139860 0.49018202 uns 429 0.65268065 0.47667417 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID- RECALPOS MEM N Mean SD 1 hig 207 0.54106280 0.49951902 1 low 207 0.56521739 0.49693021 1 uns 207 0.63285024 0.48319637 2 hig 222 0.63963964 0.48118994 2 low 222 0.63513514 0.48248014 2 uns 222 0.67117117 0.47084931 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID SNS MEM N Mean SD N hig 216 0.59722222 0.49159604 N low 216 0.62962963 0.48402561 N uns 216 0.66666667 0.47249954 S hig 213 0.58685446 0.49355847 S low 213 0.57276995 0.49584151 S uns 213 0.63849765 0.48156741 3 9 2 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOS SNS MEM N Mean SD hig 105 0.53333333 0.50128041 low 105 0.60000000 0.49224759 uns 105 0.61904762 0.48795004 hig 102 0.54901961 0.50004853 low 102 0.52941176 0.50159907 uns 102 0.64705882 0.48024455 hig 1 0.65765766 0.47664539 low 1 0.65765766 0.47664539 uns 1 0.71171171 0.45502023 hig 1 0.62162162 0.48718214 low 1 0.61261261 0.48936269 uns 1 0.63063063 0.48482289 Level of Level of ...... FEEDID' VI HEMN Mean SD B hig 240 0.61666667 0.48721449 B low 240 0.60000000 0.49092177 B uns 240 0.67916667 0.46777240 N hig 189 0.56084656 0.49760204 N low 189 0.60317460 0.49053865 N uns 189 0.61904762 0.48691074 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOS VI MEM N Mean SD B hig 108 0.56481481 0.49809259 B low 108 0.52/77778 0.50155521 B uns 108 0.69444444 0.46278986 N hig 99 0.51515152 0.50231376 N low 99 0.60606061 0.49110832 N uns 99 0.56565657 0.49819298 B hig 132 0.65909091 0.47582063 B low 132 0.65909091 0.47582063 B uns 132 0.66666667 0.47320035 N hig 90 0.61111111 0.49022912 N low 90 0.60000000 0.49264250 N uns 90 0.67777778 0.46994568 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- SNS VI MEM N Mean SD N B hig 117 0.61538462 0.48859676 N B low 117 0.65811966 0.47637990 N B uns 117 0.72649573 0.44767467 N N hig 99 0.57575758 0.49674264 NN low 99 0.59595960 0.49320261 N N uns 99 0.59595960 0.49320261 S B hig 123 0.61788618 0.48789150 SB low 123 0.54471545 0.50003332 S B uns 123 0.63414634 0.48363875 S N hig 90 0.54444444 0.50081083 S N low 90 0.61111111 0.49022912 S N uns 90 0.64444444 0.48136303 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS SNS VI MEMN Mean SD N B hig 54 0.53703704 0.50330841 NB low 54 0.59259259 0.49596555 N B uns 54 0.68518519 0.46880314 NN hig 51 0.52941176 0.50410083 N N low 51 0.60784314 0.49308950 N N uns 51 0.54901961 0.50254256 SB hig 54 0.59259259 0.49596555 SB low 54 0.46296296 0.50330841 S B uns 54 0.70370370 0.46091090 SN hig 48 0.50000000 0.50529115 S N low 48 0.60416667 0.49420399 S N uns 48 0.58333333 0.49822380 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS SNS VI HEM N Mean SD 2 NB hig 63 0.68253968 0.46922712 2 NB low 63 0.71428571 0.45538256 2 N B uns 63 0.76190476 0.42933879 2 N N hig 48 0.62500000 0.48924605 2 N N low 48 0.58333333 0.49822380 2 N N uns 48 0.64583333 0.48332111 2 S B hig 69 0.63768116 0.48419170 2 S B low 69 0.60869565 0.49161772 2 S B uns 69 0.57971014 0.49722161 2 S N hig 42 0.59523810 0.49679577 2 S N low 42 0.61904762 0.49150743 2 S N uns 42 0.71428571 0.45722996 Level of ...... FEEDID' FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 429 0.59440559 0.49157998 2 429 0.42424242 0.49480450 3 429 0.82750583 0.37825050 Level of Level of ...... j:ccnin...... fcfcuiu--- ...... RECALPOS FEEDBACKN Mean SD 1 1 207 0.57971014 0.49480202 1 2 207 0.39130435 0.48922540 1 3 207 0.76811594 0.42305847 2 1 222 0.60810811 0.48927597 2 2 222 0.45495495 0.49909216 2 3 222 0.88288288 0.32228648 Level of Level of — ” 1■fcfcUIU"•:ccnvn...... SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 1 216 0.60648148 0.48966493 N 2 216 0.46296296 0.49978462 N 3 216 0.82407407 0.38164159 S 1 213 0.58215962 0.49436545 S 2 213 0.38497653 0.48773603 S 3 213 0.83098592 0.37564720 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 1 105 0.60000000 0.49224759 N 2 105 0.39047619 0.49019694 N 3 105 0.76190476 0.42796049 S 1 102 0.55882353 0.49897974 S 2 102 0.39215686 0.49064239 S 3 102 0.77450980 0.41996847 N 1 111 0.61261261 0.48936269 N 2 111 0.53153153 0.50126784 N 3 111 0.88288288 0.32301812 S 1 111 0.60360360 0.49136691 S 2 111 0.37837838 0.48718214 s 3 111 0.88288288 0.32301812 Level of Level of -FEEDID- VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 1 240 0.60833333 0.48914293 B 2 240 0.43750000 0.49711511 B 3 240 0.85000000 0.35781765 N 1 189 0.57671958 0.49539135 N 2 189 0.40740741 0.49265687 N 3 189 0.79894180 0.40185599 394 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 1 108 0.56481481 0.49809259 B 2 108 0.45370370 0.50017304 B 3 108 0.76851852 0.42374568 N 1 99 0.59595960 0.49320261 N 2 99 0.32323232 0.47009080 N 3 99 0.76767677 0.42446323 B 1 132 0.64393939 0.48065756 B 2 132 0.42424242 0.49611025 B 3 132 0.91666667 0.27743830 N 1 90 0.55555556 0.49968779 N 2 90 0.50000000 0.50280114 N 3 90 0.83333333 0.37476584 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID' SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B 1 117 0.65811966 0.47637990 NB 2 117 0.49572650 0.50213221 N B 3 117 0.84615385 0.36235305 N N 1 99 0.54545455 0.50046361 N N 2 99 0.42424242 0.49674264 N N 3 99 0.79797980 0.40355052 S B 1 123 0.56097561 0.49829778 S B 2 123 0.38211382 0.48789150 S B 3 123 0.85365854 0.35489382 S N 1 90 0.61111111 0.49022912 S N 2 90 0.38888889 0.49022912 S N 3 90 0.80000000 0.40224091 Level of Level of Level of Level of ■FEEDID- RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B 1 54 0.62962963 0.48743829 N B 2 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 N B 3 54 0.74074074 0.44234304 N N 1 51 0.56862745 0.50019604 N N 2 51 0.33333333 0.47609523 N N 3 51 0.78431373 0.41539020 S B 1 54 0.50000000 0.50469494 S B 2 54 0.46296296 0.50330841 S B 3 54 0.79629630 0.40653295 S N 1 48 0.62500000 0.48924605 S N 2 48 0.31250000 0.46841744 S N 3 48 0.75000000 0.43759497 N B 1 63 0.68253968 0.46922712 N B 2 63 0.53968254 0.50242627 N B 3 63 0.93650794 0.24580453 N N 1 48 0.52083333 0.50485234 N N 2 48 0.52083333 0.50485234 N N 3 48 0.81250000 0.39444278 S B 1 69 0.60869565 0.49161772 S B 2 69 0.31884058 0.46944127 S B 3 69 0.89855072 0.30413462 S N 1 42 0.59523810 0.49679577 S N 2 42 0.47619048 0.50548674 s N 3 42 0.85714286 0.35416880 Level of Level of --FEEDID...... MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD hig 1 143 0.59440559 0.49273257 hig 2 143 0.35664336 0.48069191 hig 3 143 0.82517483 0.38115254 low 1 143 0.57342657 0.49631757 low 2 143 0.41958042 0.49522491 low 3 143 0.81118881 0.39273417 uns 1 143 0.61538462 0.48821429 uns 2 143 0.49650350 0.50174521 uns 3 143 0.84615385 0.36206941 395 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 1 69 0.57971016 0.69722161 hig 2 69 0.28985507 0.65701877 hig 3 69 0.75362319 0.63605737 low 1 69 0.59620290 0.69666309 low 2 69 0.36782609 0.67976977 low 3 69 0.75362319 0.63605737 uns 1 69 0.56521739 0.69936020 uns 2 69 0.53623188 0.50233895 uns 3 69 0.79710165 0.60510386 2 hig 1 76 0.60810811 0.69150503 2 hig 2 76 0.61891892 0.69676990 2 hig 3 76 0.89189189 0.31263669 2 low 1 76 0.55605605 0.50066258 2 low 2 76 0.68668669 0.50322911 2 low 3 76 0.86686686 0.36620165 2 uns 1 76 0.66216216 0.67620169 2 uns 2 76 0.65965966 0.50175553 2 uns 3 76 0.89189189 0.31263669 . 1 X. Level of LCVGlof LfiVGl O t SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 1 72 0.62500000 0.68752031 N hig 2 72 0.36111111 0.68369361 N hig 3 72 0.80555556 0.39856980 N low 1 72 0.61111111 0.69091910 N low 2 72 0.63055556 0.69862879 N low 3 72 0.86722222 0.36229792 N uns 1 72 0.58333333 0.69666639 N uns 2 72 0.59722222 0.69389861 N uns 3 72 0.81966666 0.38736886 S hig 1 71 0.56338028 0.69969673 S hig 2 71 0.35211268 0.68102861 S hig 3 71 0.86507062 0.36661293 S low 1 71 0.53521127 0.50230855 S low 2 71 0.60865070 0.69506588 S low 3 71 0.77666789 0.62078780 S uns 1 71 0.66788732 0.68102861 S uns 2 71 0.39636620 0.69219257 S uns 3 71 0.87323966 0.33507259 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD N hig 1 35 0.62857163 0.69026089 N hig 2 35 0.25716286 0.66363957 N hig 3 35 0.71628571 0.65836925 N low 1 35 0.65716286 0.68159399 N low 2 35 0.31628571 0.67100822 N low 3 35 0.82857163 0.38238526 N uns 1 35 0.51628571 0.50709255 N uns 2 35 0.60000000 0.69705012 N uns 3 35 0.76285716 0.66363957 S hig 1 36 0.52961176 0.50666060 S hig 2 36 0.32352961 0.67685808 S hig 3 36 0.79611765 0.61062563 S low 1 36 0.52961176 0.50666060 S low 2 36 0.38235296 0.69327022 S low 3 36 0.67667059 0.67685808 S uns 1 36 0.61766706 0.69327022 S uns 2 36 0.67058826 0.50666060 S uns 3 36 0.85296118 0.35969063 N hig 1 37 0.62162162 0.69167239 N hig 2 37 0.65965966 0.50522792 N hig 3 37 0.89189189 0.31680009 N low 1 37 0.56756757 0.50226720 N low 2 37 0.56056056 0.50522792 N low 3 37 0.86686686 0.36658350 N uns 1 37 0.66866865 0.68397751 N uns 2 37 0.59659659 0.69776265 396 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOSSNSMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 N uns 3 37 0.89189189 0.31480009 2 S hig 1 37 0.59459459 0.49774265 2 S hig 2 37 0.37837838 0.49167239 2 S hig 3 37 0.89189189 0.31480009 2 S low 1 37 0.54054054 0.50522792 2 S low 2 37 0.43243243 0.50224720 2 S low 3 37 0.86486486 0.34658350 2 S uns 1 37 0.67567568 0.47457900 2 s uns 2 37 0.32432432 0.47457900 2 s uns 3 37 0.89189189 0.31480009 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 1 80 0.66250000 0.47584036 B hig 2 80 0.36250000 0.48375509 B hig 3 80 0.82500000 0.38236440 B low 1 80 0.57500000 0.49746191 B low 2 80 0.40000000 0.49298882 B low 3 80 0.82500000 0.38236440 B uns 1 80 0.58750000 0.49539014 B uns 2 80 0.55000000 0.50063251 B uns 3 80 0.90000000 0.30189276 N hig 1 63 0.50793651 0.50395263 N hig 2 63 0.34920635 0.48054842 N hig 3 63 0.82539683 0.38267659 N low 1 63 0.57142857 0.49884660 N low 2 63 0.44444444 0.50089526 N low 3 63 0.79365079 0.40793462 N uns 1 63 0.65079365 0.48054842 N uns 2 63 0.42857143 0.49884660 N uns 3 63 0.77777778 0.41907904 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 1 36 0.66666667 0.47809144 B hig 2 36 0.30555556 0.46717659 B hig 3 36 0.72222222 0.45425676 B low 1 36 0.50000000 0.50709255 B low 2 36 0.38888889 0.49441323 B low 3 36 0.69444444 0.46717659 B uns 1 36 0.527777/8 0.50630940 B uns 2 36 0.66666667 0.47809144 B uns 3 36 0.88888889 0.31872763 N hig 1 33 0.48484848 0.50751922 N hig 2 33 0.27272727 0.45226702 N hig 3 33 0.78787879 0.41514875 N low 1 33 0.69696970 0.46669372 N low 2 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 N low 3 33 0.81818182 0.39167473 N uns 1 33 0.60606061 0.49619766 N uns 2 33 0.39393939 0.49619766 N uns 3 33 0.69696970 0.46669372 B hig 1 44 0.65909091 0.47949498 B hig 2 44 0.40909091 0.49735027 B hig 3 44 0.90909091 0.29080336 B low 1 44 0.63636364 0.48660710 B low 2 44 0.40909091 0.49735027 B low 3 44 0.93181818 0.25497171 B uns 1 44 0.63636364 0.48660710 B uns 2 44 0.45454545 0.50368620 B uns 3 44 0.90909091 0.29080336 N hig 1 30 0.53333333 0.50741626 N hig 2 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 N hig 3 30 0.86666667 0.34574590 N low 1 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 N low 2 30 0.60000000 0.49827288 N low 3 30 0.76666667 0.43018307 N uns 1 30 0.70000000 0.46609160 N uns 2 30 0.46666667 0.50741626 N uns 3 30 0.86666667 0.34574590 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEED ID SNS VI MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD N B hig 1 39 0.71794872 0.45588075 N B hig 2 39 0.38461538 0.49286406 N B hig 3 39 0.74358974 0.44235903 N B low 1 39 0.66666667 0.47756693 N B low 2 39 0.41025641 0.49831024 N B low 3 39 0.89743590 0.30735474 N B uns 1 39 0.58974359 0.49831024 N B uns 2 39 0.69230769 0.46757190 NB uns 3 39 0.89743590 0.30735474 N N hig 1 33 0.51515152 0.50751922 N N hig 2 33 0.33333333 0.47871355 NN hig 3 33 0.87878788 0.33143398 N N low 1 33 0.54545455 0.50564990 N N low 2 33 0.45454545 0.50564990 NN low 3 33 0.78787879 0.41514875 NN uns 1 33 0.57575758 0.50189037 N N uns 2 33 0.48484848 0.50751922 N N uns 3 33 0.72727273 0.45226702 S B hig 1 41 0.60975610 0.49386480 SB hig 2 41 0.34146341 0.48009145 S B hig 3 41 0.90243902 0.30040623 S B low 1 41 0.48780488 0.50606083 S B low 2 41 0.39024390 0.49386480 S B low 3 41 0.75609756 0.43476935 S B uns 1 41 0.58536585 0.49877900 S B uns 2 41 0.41463415 0.49877900 S B uns 3 41 0.90243902 0.30040623 S N hig 1 30 0.50000000 0.50854763 S N hig 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 S N hig 3 30 0.76666667 0.43018307 S N low 1 30 0.60000000 0.49827288 S N low 2 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 S N low 3 30 0.80000000 0.40683810 S N uns 1 30 0.73333333 0.44977645 S N uns 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 S N uns 3 30 0.83333333 0.37904902 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 1 18 0.77777778 0.42779263 N B hig 2 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 N B hig 3 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 N B low 1 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 N B low 2 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 N B low 3 18 0.777777/8 0.42779263 N B uns 1 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 N B uns 2 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 N B uns 3 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 N N hig 1 17 0.47058824 0.51449576 N N hig 2 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 N N hig 3 17 0.82352941 0.39295262 N N low 1 17 0.70588235 0.46966822 N N low 2 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 N N low 3 17 0.88235294 0.33210558 N N uns 1 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 N N uns 2 17 0.47058824 0.51449576 N N uns 3 17 0.64705882 0.49259218 S B hig 1 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 S B hig 2 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 S B hig 3 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 S B low 1 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 S B low 2 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 S B low 3 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 S B uns 1 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 S B uns 2 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 S B uns 3 18 0.94444444 0.23570226 S N hig 1 16 0.50000000 0.51639778 S N hig 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 S N hig 3 16 0.75000000 0.44721360 398 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 SN low 1 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 1 S N low 2 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 1 S N low 3 16 0.75000000 0.44721360 1 S N uns 1 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 1 S N uns 2 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 1 S N uns 3 16 0.75000000 0.44721360 2 N B hig 1 21 0.66666667 0.48304589 2 N B hig 2 21 0.52380952 0.51176632 2 N B hig 3 21 0.85714286 0.35856858 2 N B low 1 21 0.71428571 0.46291005 2 N B low 2 21 0.42857143 0.50709255 2 N B low 3 21 1.00000000 0.00000000 2 N B uns 1 21 0.66666667 0.48304589 2 N B uns 2 21 0.66666667 0.48304589 2 N B uns 3 21 0.95238095 0.21821789 2 N N hig 1 16 0.56250000 0.51234754 2 N N hig 2 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 2 N N hig 3 16 0.93750000 0.25000000 2 N N low 1 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 2 N N low 2 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 2 N N low 3 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 2 N N uns 1 16 0.62500000 0.50000000 2 N N uns 2 16 0.50000000 0.51639778 2 NN uns 3 16 0.81250000 0.40311289 2 S B hig 1 23 0.65217391 0.48698475 2 S B hig 2 23 0.30434783 0.47047197 2 S B hig 3 23 0.95652174 0.20851441 2 SB low 1 23 0.56521739 0.50686980 2 S B low 2 23 0.39130435 0.49901088 2 SB low 3 23 0.86956522 0.34435022 2 S B uns 1 23 0.60869565 0.49901088 2 S B uns 2 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 2 S B uns 3 23 0.86956522 0.34435022 2 SN hig 1 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 S N hig 2 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 S N hig 3 14 0.78571429 0.42581531 2 S N low 1 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 S N low 2 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 S N low 3 14 0.85714286 0.36313652 2 S N uns 1 14 0.78571429 0.42581531 2 S N uns 2 14 0.42857143 0.51355259 2 S N uns 3 14 0.92857143 0.26726124 Analysis 27. The yielding analysis controlling for source memory. Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 223 46.39816120 0.20806350 1.86 0.0001 Error 634 70.75801595 0.11160570 Corrected Total 857 117.15617716 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.396037 204.7399 0.3340744 0.1631702 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*RECA*SNS*V1) 127 18.35584790 0.14453424 1.30 0.0248 FEEDID 1 0.92252156 0.92252156 8.27 0.0042 STORY 1 1.62204771 1.62204771 14.53 0.0002 RECALPOS 1 0.74472823 0.74472823 6.67 0.0100 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.46295151 0.46295151 4.15 0.0421 SNS 1 0.28342843 0.28342843 2.54 0.1115 ST0RY*SNS 1 1.42454204 1.42454204 12.76 0.0004 RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.04294593 0.04294593 0.38 0.5353 STORY*RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.05908335 0.05908335 0.53 0.4671 VI 1 2.50755596 2.50755596 22.47 0.0001 ST0RY*VI 1 0.11017436 0.11017436 0.99 0.3208 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.54930748 0.54930748 4.92 0.0269 STORY*RECALPOS*VI 1 0.19438434 0.19438434 1.74 0.1874 SNS*VI 1 0.00031329 0.00031329 0.00 0.9578 STORY*SNS*VI 1 0.08167672 0.08167672 0.73 0.3926 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.00818244 0.00818244 0.07 0.7867 STORY*RECALPO*SNS*VI 1 0.12616673 0.12616673 1.13 0.2881 MEM 2 5.52579452 2.76289726 24.76 0.0001 STORY*MEM 2 0.24246713 0.12123357 1.09 0.3381 RECALPOS*MEM 2 0.19083382 0.09541691 0.85 0.4258 STORY*RECALPOS*MEM 2 0.20954691 0.10477345 0.94 0.3916 SNS*MEM 2 0.04868909 0.02434454 0.22 0.8041 STORY*SNS*MEM 2 0.29401810 0.14700905 1.32 0.2686 RECALP0S*SNS*MEM 2 0.07333140 0.03666570 0.33 0.7201 STORY*RECALP*SNS*MEM 2 0.06566764 0.03283382 0.29 0.7452 VI*MEM 2 0.16301428 0.08150714 0.73 0.4822 STORY*VI*MEM 2 0.27259051 0.13629525 1.22 0.2956 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 2 0.35782427 0.17891214 1.60 0.2021 STORY*RECALPO*VI*MEM 2 0.01610966 0.00805483 0.07 0.9304 SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.43866013 0.21933006 1.97 0.1410 STORY*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.00529685 0.00264842 0.02 0.9766 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.09155719 0.04577860 0.41 0.6637 STOR*RECA*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.35866183 0.17933091 1.61 0.2013 FEEDBACK 1 1.22888909 1.22888909 11.01 0.0010 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.25040885 0.25040885 2.24 0.1347 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 1 0.52579395 0.52579395 4.71 0.0303 STORY*RECALP*FEEDBAC 1 0.15741237 0.15741237 1.41 0.2354 SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.18065268 0.18065268 1.62 0.2037 ST0RY*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.07546167 0.07546167 0.68 0.4112 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.12598520 0.12598520 1.13 0.2884 STOR*RECAL*SNS*FEEDB 1 0.16739864 0.16739864 1.50 0.2211 VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.54809965 0.54809965 4.91 0.0270 STORY*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.09548751 0.09548751 0.86 0.3553 RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.00146209 0.00146209 0.01 0.9089 STORY*RECAL*VI*FEEDB 1 0.14494305 0.14494305 1.30 0.2549 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.07186871 0.07186871 0.64 0.4226 STORY*SNS*VI*FEEDBAC 1 0.00651030 0.00651030 0.06 0.8092 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 1 0.23783099 0.23783099 2.13 0.1448 STO*RECA*SNS*VI*FEED 1 0.71645775 0.71645775 6.42 0.0115 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.86803869 0.43401935 3.89 0.0210 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.08688095 0.04344048 0.39 0.6777 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.45878664 0.22939332 2.06 0.1289 400 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F STOR*RECAL*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.11367494 0.05683747 0.51 0.6012 SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.05091631 0.02545815 0.23 0.7961 STORY*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 2 1.22535820 0.61267910 5.49 0.0043 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.14777352 0.07388676 0.66 0.5162 STO*REC*SNS*MEM*FEED 2 0.08139306 0.04069653 0.36 0.6946 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.00017835 0.00008917 0.00 0.9992 STORY*VI*MEM*FEEDBAC 2 0.04423458 0.02211729 0.20 0.8203 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.33144547 0.16572273 1.48 0.2273 STO*RECA*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.02534686 0.01267343 0.11 0.8927 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.00202807 0.00101404 0.01 0.9910 STOR*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.08115670 0.04057835 0.36 0.6953 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.17755486 0.08877743 0.80 0.4518 ST*RE*SNS*VI*MEM*FEE 2 0.09044698 0.04522349 0.41 0.6670 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 5.52484852 5.52484852 49.50 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.00075120 0.00075120 0.01 0.9346 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY YIELD LSMEAN A 0.21598108 B 0.12767795 RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN 1 0.14168699 2 0.20197204 STORY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN A 1 0.16219491 A 2 0.26976726 B 1 0.12117907 B 2 0.13417682 SNS YIELD LSMEAN N 0.15335685 S 0.19030218 STORY SNS YIELD LSMEAN A N 0.15611538 A S 0.27584678 B N 0.15059831 B S 0.10475758 RECALPOS SNS YIELD LSHEAN 0.13038046 0.15299351 0.17633323 0.22761085 STORY RECALPOS SNS YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N 0.11800132 A 1 S 0.20638849 A 2 N 0.19422944 A 2 S 0.34530507 B 1 N 0.14275961 B 1 S 0.09959853 B 2 N 0.15843702 B 2 S 0.10991662 VI YIELD LSMEAN 0.11694833 0.22671070 STORY VI YIELD LSMEAN A 0.14960503 A 0.28235713 B 0.08429163 B 0.17106427 RECALPOS VI YIELD LSMEAN 0.11249748 0.17087649 0.12139918 0.28254490 STORY RECALPOS VI YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B 0.13679717 A 1 N 0.18759264 A 2 B 0.16241289 A 2 N 0.37712162 B 1 B 0.08819779 B 1 N 0.15416035 B 2 B 0.08038546 B 2 N 0.18796818 SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN 0.09912349 0.20759021 0.13477317 0.24583119 402 STORYSNS VI YIELD LSMEAN A NB 0.10027716 ANN 0.21195361 A SB 0.19893290 ASN 0.35276066 BN B 0.09796982 BN N 0.20322681 BS B 0.07061343 B S N 0.13890172 RECALPOS SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN 1 N B 0.10497726 1 N N 0.15578366 1 S B 0.12001770 1 S N 0.18596933 2 N B 0.09326971 2 N N 0.25939675 2 S B 0.14952864 2 S N 0.30569305 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N B 0.09397896 A 1 NN 0.14202368 A 1 SB 0.17961538 A 1 S N 0.23316160 A 2 N B 0.10657535 A 2 N N 0.28188353 A 2 SB 0.21825043 A 2 SN 0.47235972 B 1 N B 0.11597557 B 1 N N 0.16954364 B 1 S B 0.06042001 B 1 SN 0.13877705 B 2 NB 0.07996407 B 2 N N 0.23690998 B 2 SB 0.08080686 B 2 SN 0.13902638 MEM YIELD LSMEAN hig 0.07104855 low 0.17317200 uns 0.27126799 STORYMEM YIELD LSMEAN A hig 0.10247088 A low 0.24144177 A uns 0.30403059 B hig 0.03962622 B low 0.10490223 B uns 0.23850538 RECALPOSMEMYIELD LSMEAN 1 hig 0.05513000 1 low 0.12207213 1 uns 0.24785883 2 hig 0.08696710 2 low 0.22427187 2 uns 0.29467714 STORYRECALPOS MEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 hig 0.06983759 A 1 low 0.14474067 A 1 uns 0.27200647 A 2 hig 0.13510418 A 2 low 0.33814288 A 2 uns 0.33605471 B 1 hig 0.04042241 B 1 low 0.09940360 B 1 uns 0.22371119 B 2 hig 0.03883003 B 2 low 0.11040086 B 2 uns 0.25329957 SNS HEM YIELD LSMEAN N hig 0.05239053 N low 0.16414978 N uns 0.24353023 S hig 0.08970657 S low 0.18219423 S uns 0.29900574 STORY SNS MEM YIELD LSMEAN A N hig 0.05710055 A N low 0.20287548 A N uns 0.20837011 A S hig 0.14784122 A S low 0.28000806 A s uns 0.39969107 B N hig 0.04768052 B N low 0.12542407 B N uns 0.27869035 B S hig 0.03157192 B S low 0.08438039 B S uns 0.19832041 RECALPOS SNS MEM YIELD LSMEAN N hig 0.03073983 N low 0.12935550 N uns 0.23104607 S hig 0.07952016 S low 0.11478877 S uns 0.26467160 N hig 0.07404124 N low 0.19894405 N uns 0.25601440 S hig 0.09989297 S low 0.24959969 S uns 0.33333988 404 STORY RECALPOS SNS MEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N hig 0.01469005 A 1 N low 0.13715905 A 1 N uns 0.20215487 A 1 S hig 0.12498512 A 1 S low 0.15232228 A 1 S uns 0.34185807 A 2 N hig 0.09951105 A 2 N low 0.26859191 A 2 N uns 0.21458536 A 2 S hig 0.17069731 A 2 S low 0.40769384 A 2 S uns 0.45752406 B 1 N hig 0.04678961 B 1 N low 0.12155194 B 1 N uns 0.25993726 B 1 S hig 0.03405521 B 1 S tow 0.07725526 B 1 S uns 0.18748512 B 2 N hig 0.04857143 B 2 N low 0.12929620 B 2 N uns 0.29744344 B 2 S hig 0.02908864 B 2 S low 0.09150553 B 2 S uns 0.20915570 VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN B hig 0.03594883 B low 0.10895580 B uns 0.20594035 N hig 0.10614827 N low 0.23738821 N uns 0.33659562 STORY VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN A B hig 0.04496234 A B low 0.15115147 A B uns 0.25270128 A N hig 0.15997942 AN low 0.33173207 A N uns 0.35535991 B B hig 0.02693532 B B low 0.06676012 B B uns 0.15917943 B N hig 0.05231712 B N low 0.14304435 B N uns 0.31783133 RECALPOS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN B hig 0.05218301 B low 0.10513000 B uns 0.18017943 N hig 0.05807698 N low 0.13901427 N uns 0.31553824 B hig 0.01971465 B low 0.11278159 B uns 0.23170128 N hig 0.15421956 N low 0.33576215 N uns 0.35765300 405 STORY RECALPOS VI HEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B hig 0.06476762 A 1 B low 0.11771461 A 1 B uns 0.22790929 A 1 N hig 0.07490755 A 1 N low 0.17176672 A 1 N uns 0.31610365 A 2 B hig 0.02515707 A 2 B low 0.18458834 A 2 B uns 0.27749326 A 2 N hig 0.24505129 A 2 N low 0.49169742 A 2 N uns 0.39461616 B 1 B hig 0.03959840 B 1 B low 0.09254540 B 1 B uns 0.13244957 B 1 N hig 0.04124641 B 1 N low 0.10626181 B 1 M uns 0.31497282 B 2 B hig 0.01427224 B 2 B low 0.04097484 B 2 B uns 0.18590930 B 2 N hig 0.06338783 B 2 N low 0.17982688 B 2 N uns 0.32068984 SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN N B hig 0.01813313 N B low 0.12857803 N B uns 0.15065930 N N hig 0.08664793 N N low 0.19972152 N N uns 0.33640117 S B hig 0.05376453 S B low 0.08933356 s B uns 0.26122141 s N hig 0.12564860 s N low 0.27505489 s N uns 0.33679007 STORY SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN AN B hig 0.00764692 AN B low 0.15042051 AN B uns 0.14276404 AN N hig 0.10655417 A N N low 0.25533045 ANN uns 0.27397619 AS B hig 0.08227776 A S B low 0.15188243 ASB uns 0.36263852 A S N hig 0.21340467 A S N low 0.40813369 A SN uns 0.43674362 B NB hig 0.02861934 BN B low 0.10673555 BN B uns 0.15855456 BN N hig 0.06674169 B N N low 0.14411259 BNN uns 0.39882615 BSB hig 0.02525130 BSB low 0.02678469 BSB uns 0.15980431 B SN hig 0.03789254 B S N low 0.14197610 BSN uns 0.23683651 rorv)rororvjr\)rurororor\jro RECALPOS n 0.31448562 uns B S S 0.11427224 low B N N N N 0.02280936 N S hig S B B S S N N N n 0.32138599 0.16220136 0.07432063 uns low 0.20795721 hig N uns N 0.30969048 N S B S uns B S S N S uns S N B N N N N N N VI SNS N B B B o 0.28361587 low N N N o 0.11582718 low N N B B hig 0.14891694 uns uns 0.36311187 uns hig hig i 0.08471970 hig 0.04183334 hig 0.01964632 YIELD hig MEM low low low 0.142B8382 low 0.17697658 0.35219414 0.38790843 0.11129094 0.13146253 0.01661995 0.06737618 0.15240165 LSMEAN 407 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEMYIELD LSMEAN A 1 N B hig 0.02225488 A 1 NB low 0.11249748 A 1 N B uns 0.14718452 A 1 N N hig 0.00712521 A 1 N N low 0.16182063 A 1 N N uns 0.25712521 A 1 S B hig 0.10728035 A 1 S B low 0.12293174 A 1 S B uns 0.30863406 A 1 SN hig 0.14268990 A 1 S N low 0.18171282 A 1 S N uns 0.37508209 A 2 N B hig -0.00696104 A 2 N B low 0.18834355 A 2 N B uns 0.13834355 A 2 N N hig 0.20598313 A 2 N N low 0.34884027 A 2 N N uns 0.29082718 A 2 SB hig 0.05727517 A 2 SB low 0.18083313 A 2 SB uns 0.41664298 A 2 SN hig 0.28411944 A 2 S N low 0.63455456 A 2 s N uns 0.49840515 B 1 NB hig 0.01703776 B 1 N B low 0.17327016 B 1 N B uns 0.15761878 B 1 N N hig 0.07654146 B 1 N N low 0.06983372 B 1 N N uns 0.36225575 B 1 SB hig 0.06215905 B 1 S B low 0.01182063 B 1 S B uns 0.10728035 B 1 SN hig 0.00595136 B 1 S N low 0.14268990 B 1 S N uns 0.26768990 B 2 N B hig 0.04020093 B 2 N B low 0.04020093 B 2 N B uns 0.15949033 B 2 N N hig 0.05694193 B 2 N N low 0.21839146 B 2 N N uns 0.43539656 B 2 S B hig -0.01165645 B 2 SB low 0.04174875 B 2 S B uns 0.21232827 B 2 S N hig 0.06983372 B 2 S N low 0.14126230 B 2 s N uns 0.20598313 FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 2 0.12792262 3 0.21573641 STORY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 0.15471361 0.27724855 0.10113162 0.15422427 RECALPOS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 0.12289977 0.16047421 0.13294546 0.27099861 408 STORY RECALPOS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 2 0.13979462 A 1 3 0.18459520 A 2 2 0.16963260 A 2 3 0.36990191 B 1 2 0.10600492 B 1 3 0.13635322 B 2 2 0.09625833 B 2 3 0.17209532 SNS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N 2 0.09470686 N 3 0.21200684 S 2 0.16113838 S 3 0.21946598 STORY SNS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A N 2 0.08961854 A N 3 0.22261222 A S 2 0.21980868 A S 3 0.33188489 B N 2 0.09979517 B N 3 0.20140146 B S 2 0.10246807 B S 3 0.10704708 RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 N 2 0.08454707 1 N 3 0.17621386 1 S 2 0.16125246 1 S 3 0.14473456 2 N 2 0.10486664 2 N 3 0.24779983 2 S 2 0.16102429 2 S 3 0.29419740 STORY RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N 2 0.09227745 A 1 N 3 0.14372520 A 1 S 2 0.18731179 A 1 S 3 0.22546519 A 2 N 2 0.08695964 A 2 N 3 0.30149924 A 2 S 2 0.25230556 A 2 S 3 0.43830458 B 1 N 2 0.07681670 B 1 N 3 0.20870251 B 1 S 2 0.13519313 B 1 S 3 0.06400393 B 2 N 2 0.12277364 B 2 N 3 0.19410041 B 2 S 2 0.06974301 B 2 s 3 0.15009023 VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN B 2 0.09868150 B 3 0.13521516 N 2 0.15716373 N 3 0.29625766 STORY VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A B 2 0.12469599 AB 3 0.17451407 AN 2 0.18473123 AN 3 0.37998304 BB 2 0.07266700 BB 3 0.09591625 BN 2 0.12959624 BN 3 0.21253229 RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 B 2 0.11802009 1 B 3 0.10697488 1 N 2 0.12777945 1 N 3 0.21397354 2 B 2 0.07934291 2 B 3 0.16345544 2 N 2 0.18654802 2 N 3 0.37854179 STORY RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B 2 0.13623313 A 1 B 3 0.13736122 A 1 N 2 0.14335611 A 1 N 3 0.23182917 A 2 B 2 0.11315886 A 2 B 3 0.21166692 A 2 N 2 0.22610634 A 2 N 3 0.52813690 B 1 B 2 0.09980704 B 1 B 3 0.07658853 B 1 N 2 0.11220279 B 1 N 3 0.19611790 B 2 B 2 0.04552696 B 2 B 3 0.11524396 B 2 N 2 0.14698970 B 2 N 3 0.22894667 SNS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N B 2 0.07540016 N B 3 0.12284682 N N 2 0.11401355 N N 3 0.30116687 S B 2 0.12196283 S B 3 0.14758350 s N 2 0.20031392 s N 3 0.29134846 STORY SNS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN ANB 2 0.07662606 A N B 3 0.12392826 A N N 2 0.10261102 A N N 3 0.32129619 A S B 2 0.17276593 A S B 3 0.22509988 A S N 2 0.26685143 A S N 3 0.43866989 B N B 2 0.07417426 B N B 3 0.12176537 B N N 2 0.12541608 BNN 3 0.28103754 B S B 2 0.07115974 BSB 3 0.07006712 B S N 2 0.13377640 B S N 3 0.14402703 RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 N B 2 0.10963035 1 N B 3 0.10032418 1 N N 2 0.05946380 1 N N 3 0.25210353 1 S B 2 0.12640982 1 S B 3 0.11362557 1 S N 2 0.19609510 1 S N 3 0.17584355 2 N B 2 0.04116997 2 N B 3 0.14536945 2 N N 2 0.16856331 2 N N 3 0.35023020 2 S B 2 0.11751585 2 S B 3 0.18154144 2 S N 2 0.20453273 2 S N 3 0.40685337 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N B 2 0.08415566 A 1 N B 3 0.10380227 A 1 N N 2 0.10039923 A 1 N N 3 0.18364813 A 1 S B 2 0.18831060 A 1 S B 3 0.17092017 A 1 S N 2 0.18631299 A 1 S N 3 0.28001022 A 2 N B 2 0.06909646 A 2 N B 3 0.14405425 A 2 N N 2 0.10482281 A 2 N N 3 0.45894424 A 2 S B 2 0.15722125 A 2 S B 3 0.27927960 A 2 S N 2 0.34738987 A 2 S N 3 0.59732956 B 1 N B 2 0.13510504 B 1 NB 3 0.09684610 B 1 N N 2 0.01852836 B 1 N N 3 0.32055893 B 1 S B 2 0.06450905 B 1 S B 3 0.05633097 B 1 S N 2 0.20587722 B 1 S N 3 0.07167688 B 2 N B 2 0.01324348 B 2 NB 3 0.14668465 B 2 N N 2 0.23230381 B 2 N N 3 0.24151616 B 2 S B 2 0.07781044 B 2 S B 3 0.08380327 B 2 S N 2 0.06167559 B 2 S N 3 0.21637718 HEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN hig 2 0.04886233 hig 3 0.09323477 low 2 0.15320431 tow 3 0.19313969 uns 2 0.18170120 uns 3 0.36083477 STORY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A hig 2 0.06860536 A hig 3 0.13633641 A low 2 0.21279321 A low 3 0.27009033 411 STORY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A uns 2 0.18274226 A uns 3 0.42531893 B hig 2 0.02911930 B hig 3 0.05013314 B low 2 0.09361541 B low 3 0.11618905 B uns 2 0.18066015 B uns 3 0.29635061 RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 hig 2 0.06119687 1 hig 3 0.04906312 1 low 2 0.15432572 1 low 3 0.08981855 1 uns 2 0.15317672 1 uns 3 0.34254095 2 hig 2 0.03652779 2 hig 3 0.13740642 2 low 2 0.15208291 2 low 3 0.29646083 2 uns 2 0.21022569 2 uns 3 0.37912860 STORY RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 hig 2 0.08141309 A 1 hig 3 0.05826208 A 1 low 2 0.19432729 A 1 low 3 0.09515405 A 1 uns 2 0.14364348 A 1 uns 3 0.40036946 A 2 hig 2 0.05579762 A 2 hig 3 0.21441073 A 2 low 2 0.23125914 A 2 low 3 0.44502661 A 2 uns 2 0.22184103 A 2 uns 3 0.45026840 B 1 hig 2 0.04098065 B 1 hig 3 0.03986417 B 1 low 2 0.11432415 B 1 low 3 0.08448306 B 1 uns 2 0.16270995 B 1 uns 3 0.28471243 B 2 hig 2 0.01725796 B 2 hig 3 0.06040211 B 2 low 2 0.07290668 B 2 low 3 0.14789505 B 2 uns 2 0.19861035 B 2 uns 3 0.30798880 SNS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N hig 2 0.02525304 N hig 3 0.07952803 N low 2 0.12902089 N low 3 0.19927866 N uns 2 0.12984664 N uns 3 0.35721383 S hig 2 0.07247162 S hig 3 0.10694151 S low 2 0.17738773 S low 3 0.18700072 S uns 2 0.23355577 S uns 3 0.36445571 STORY SNS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A N hig 2 0.01741041 A N hig 3 0.09679069 A N low 2 0.12762313 AN low 3 0.27812783 A N uns 2 0.12382208 A N uns 3 0.29291815 A S hig 2 0.11980031 A S hig 3 0.17588212 AS low 2 0.29796330 AS low 3 0.26205283 A S uns 2 0.24166243 A S uns 3 0.55771971 B N hig 2 0.03309567 B N hig 3 0.06226537 B N low 2 0.13041866 B N low 3 0.12042949 B N uns 2 0.13587119 BN uns 3 0.42150952 B S hig 2 0.02514294 B S hig 3 0.03800091 B S low 2 0.05681217 B S low 3 0.11194862 BS uns 2 0.22544911 B S uns 3 0.17119171 RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N hig 2 0.03458967 N hig 3 0.02688999 N low 2 0.13643885 N low 3 0.12227214 N uns 2 0.08261270 N uns 3 0.37947943 S hig 2 0.08780407 S hig 3 0.07123626 S low 2 0.17221258 S low 3 0.05736496 S uns 2 0.22374074 S uns 3 0.30560246 N hig 2 0.01591641 N hig 3 0.13216607 N low 2 0.12160293 N low 3 0.27628518 N uns 2 0.17708057 N uns 3 0.33494823 S hig 2 0.05713917 S hig 3 0.14264677 S low 2 0.18256289 S low 3 0.31663648 S uns 2 0.24337081 S uns 3 0.42330896 (J0 09a)aaQ0CDaiQ300a3Q0Q08)a)03Q303 03 09 0 9 ( D a 3 0 0 Q a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > STORY uns uns 3 S S hig S S S 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 hig S 2 i 3 hig N 2 2 2 i 2 3 hig uns S N 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 i 2 hig N N 2 2 2 i 2 hig S uns S N N 1 N 1 1 N 1 1 1 1 1 RECALPOS n 2 uns S S 1 1 1 1 N 1 1 1 1 1 S 1 1 1 N 1 1 1 1 n 3 uns N N N n 0.26925631 3 N hig 3 2 uns N uns N B 3 B hig B B B IMMFEEDBACK MEM VI hig B uns hig low low low low N N N N N N uns S s s N n 3 hig uns S N S s s 2 uns S hig S 3 uns S N N low 3 N hig N N i 0.11618122 3 hig S N S N E EDAKYIELD FEEDBACK MEM SNS 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 n 2 uns uns hig hig uns hig hig uns uns n 0.30506667 2 uns i 3 hig uns hig low low low low low low low low low low low low low low low 3 3 0.16392371 3 3 3 2 2 0.46367791 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 0.12672601 2 0.10899259 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 0.13555170 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.28289326 0.19188316 0.45241324 0.22077800 0.15346650 0.05883004 0.14262440 0.10338613 0.11452547 0.03300304 0.03889462 LSMEAN YIELD 0.18167494 0.01908734 0.04971052 0.00846676 0.37934113 0.21554576 0.13186638 0.23663646 0.02604916 0.02629130 0.04181912 0.05619662 0.13411130 0.05343704 0.04014218 0.60998146 0.07109370 0.26922329 0.05997352 0.09453700 0.10574696 0.46934926 0.34603843 0.23558303 0.13861539 0.13378903 0.29528096 0.24988816 0.17825819 0.05475639 0.10581158 0.29055534 0.50545796 0.42070397 0.11647986 0.19323843 0.00578366 0.10902878 0.13876641 0.00034294 0.02903715 LSMEAN 413 STORY VI HEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A B hig 2 0.04450725 A B hig 3 0.04541744 A B low 2 0.15129978 A B low 3 0.15100317 A B uns 2 0.17828095 A B uns 3 0.32712161 A N hig 2 0.09270347 A N hig 3 0.22725537 A N low 2 0.27428665 A N low 3 0.38917749 A N uns 2 0.18720356 A N uns 3 0.52351625 B B hig 2 0.03328200 B B hig 3 0.02058865 B B low 2 0.07775115 B B low 3 0.05576909 B B uns 2 0.10696785 B B uns 3 0.21139101 B N hig 2 0.02495661 B N hig 3 0.07967762 B N low 2 0.10947967 B N low 3 0.17660902 B N uns 2 0.25435245 B N uns 3 0.38131022 ECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN B hig 2 0.05785835 B hig 3 0.04650767 B low 2 0.16114377 B low 3 0.04911623 B uns 2 0.13505813 B uns 3 0.22530073 N hig 2 0.06453538 N hig 3 0.05161858 N low 2 0.14750766 N low 3 0.13052087 N uns 2 0.17129530 N uns 3 0.45978117 B hig 2 0.01993089 B hig 3 0.01949842 B low 2 0.06790716 B low 3 0.15765602 B uns 2 0.15019067 B uns 3 0.31321189 N hig 2 0.05312469 N hig 3 0.25531442 N low 2 0.23625866 N low 3 0.43526564 N uns 2 0.27026071 N uns 3 0.44504530 STORY RECALPOS VI HEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B hig 2 0.06737618 A 1 B hig 3 0.06215905 A 1 B low 2 0.18892155 A 1 B low 3 0.04650767 A 1 B uns 2 0.15240165 A 1 B uns 3 0.30341693 A 1 N hig 2 0.09545000 A 1 N hig 3 0.05436511 A 1 N lou 2 0.19973302 A 1 N low 3 0.14380043 A 1 N uns 2 0.13488531 A 1 N uns 3 0.49732199 A 2 B hig 2 0.02163831 A 2 B hig 3 0.02867582 A 2 B low 2 0.11367801 A 2 B low 3 0.25549867 A 2 B uns 2 0.20416025 A 2 B uns 3 0.35082628 A 2 N hig 2 0.08995693 A 2 N hig 3 0.40014564 A 2 N low 2 0.34884027 A 2 H low 3 0.63455456 A 2 H uns 2 0.23952181 A 2 H uns 3 0.54971052 B 1 B hig 2 0.04834053 B 1 B hig 3 0.03085628 B 1 B low 2 0.13336599 B 1 B low 3 0.05172480 B 1 B uns 2 0.11771461 B 1 B uns 3 0.14718452 B 1 N hig 2 0.03362077 B 1 N hig 3 0.04887205 B 1 N low 2 0.09528230 B 1 N low 3 0.11724132 B 1 N uns 2 0.20770530 B 1 N uns 3 0.42224035 B 2 B hig 2 0.01822347 B 2 B hig 3 0.01032102 B 2 B low 2 0.02213631 B 2 B low 3 0.05981338 B 2 B uns 2 0.09622110 B 2 B uns 3 0.27559750 B 2 N hig 2 0.01629245 B 2 N hig 3 0.11048320 B 2 N low 2 0.12367704 B 2 N low 3 0.23597672 B 2 N uns 2 0.30099960 B 2 N uns 3 0.34038009 416 SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N B hig 2 0.02336945 N B hig 3 0.01289682 N B low 2 0.12857251 N B low 3 0.12858356 N B uns 2 0.07425852 N B uns 3 0.22706007 N N hig 2 0.02713663 NN hig 3 0.14615924 N N low 2 0.12946928 N N low 3 0.26997376 N N uns 2 0.18543475 N N uns 3 0.48736759 S B hig 2 0.05441979 S B hig 3 0.05310927 S B low 2 0.10047843 S B low 3 0.07818870 S B uns 2 0.21099029 S B uns 3 0.31145254 S N hig 2 0.09052345 S N hig 3 0.16077376 S N low 2 0.25429704 S N low 3 0.29581275 S N uns 2 0.25612126 S N uns 3 0.41745888 !Y SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A N B hig 2 0.01025549 AN B hig 3 0.00503836 A N B low 2 0.11998475 AN B low 3 0.18085628 A N B uns 2 0.09963795 AN B uns 3 0.18589013 A N N hig 2 0.02456533 AN N hig 3 0.18854302 AN N low 2 0.13526152 A N N low 3 0.37539938 A N N uns 2 0.14800622 A N N uns 3 0.39994617 A S B hig 2 0.07875901 A SB hig 3 0.08579652 A S B low 2 0.18261482 A SB low 3 0.12115005 AS B uns 2 0.25692395 AS B uns 3 0.46835308 A SN hig 2 0.16084161 A SN hig 3 0.26596773 A SN low 2 0.41331177 AS N low 3 0.40295560 A S N uns 2 0.22640091 AS N uns 3 0.64708633 BN B hig 2 0.03648342 BN B hig 3 0.02075527 BN B low 2 0.13716027 BN B low 3 0.07631083 B N B uns 2 0.04887909 BN B uns 3 0.26823002 B N N hig 2 0.02970792 BN N hig 3 0.10377546 BN N low 2 0.12367704 BN N low 3 0.16454815 BN N uns 2 0.22286329 BN N uns 3 0.57478902 B S B hig 2 0.03008058 BS B hig 3 0.02042203 BS B low 2 0.01834204 B SB low 3 0.03522734 B S B uns 2 0.16505662 B S B uns 3 0.15455200 STORY SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN BS N hig 2 0.02020530 BSN hig 3 0.05557978 B S N low 2 0.09528230 B S N low 3 0.18866989 B S N uns 2 0.28584161 B S N uns 3 0.18783142 RECALPOS SNS VI MEMFEEDBACKYIELD LSMEAN 1 N B hig 2 0.03790627 1 N B hig 3 0.00138637 1 N B low 2 0.18892155 1 N B low 3 0.09684610 1 N B uns 2 0.10206322 1 N B uns 3 0.20274008 1 N N hig 2 0.03127306 1 N N hig 3 0.05239361 1 N N low 2 0.08395616 1 N N low 3 0.14769819 1 N N uns 2 0.06316217 1 N N uns 3 0.55621878 1 S B hig 2 0.07781044 1 S B hig 3 0.09162897 1 S B low 2 0.13336599 1 S B low 3 0.00138637 1 S B uns 2 0.16805304 1 S B uns 3 0.24786138 1 S N hig 2 0.09779770 1 s N hig 3 0.05084355 1 s N low 2 0.21105917 1 s N low 3 0.11334355 1 s N uns 2 0.27942844 1 s N uns 3 0.36334355 2 N B hig 2 0.00883263 2 N B hig 3 0.02440726 2 N B low 2 0.06822347 2 N B low 3 0.16032102 2 N B uns 2 0.04645381 2 NB uns 3 0.25138007 2 N N hig 2 0.02300019 2 N N hig 3 0.23992487 2 N N low 2 0.17498240 2 N N low 3 0.39224933 2 N N uns 2 0.30770733 2 N N uns 3 0.41851640 2 S B hig 2 0.03102915 2 S B hig 3 0.01458958 2 S B low 2 0.06759086 2 S B low 3 0.15499103 2 S B uns 2 0.25392753 2 SB uns 3 0.37504371 2 S N hig 2 0.08324920 2 S N hig 3 0.27070397 2 S N low 2 0.29753491 2 S N low 3 0.47828194 2 s N uns 2 0.23281408 2 s N uns 3 0.47157421 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK Y1 LSMEAN A 1 N B hig 2 0.02747201 A 1 N B hig 3 0.01703776 A 1 N B low 2 0.12814887 A 1 N B low 3 0.09684610 A 1 NB uns 2 0.09684610 A 1 N B uns 3 0.19752295 A 1 N N hig 2 0.03060229 O3CD0DCDCDG90Oa3O3Q9QBa>a3BI09O3CD00C10CSCDCDQa(D0Da3Q0Q38>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> STORY i 3 2 hig hig B B B N N N 2 2 2 B N 2 2 o 2 low N N N S S S 2 2 2 2 2 N 2 N 2 2 N N uns B B 2 N 2 N 2 2 i 2 hig B B 3 S 2 S hig 2 N 2 2 N 2 2 B B 2 N 2 N 2 2 2 2 2 1 SNS RECALPOS B S 1 1 1 1 1 N N 1 N S 1 1 1 1 i 2 hig B S 1 N N 1 1 1 1 1 o 3 low B N N S S S S S N S N 2 S N hig N N N N S B S B S 3 S S low N N N N o 3 2 low B low B 2 B N hig B N N B N N S B N S S S S S S N N 2 N N hig B N S S S N N N i 2 S hig N 3 S S hig S S B N S N N N B B N N N B B N N N B B B N N N B N B N N N N B B B N VI n 3 2 uns uns uns 2 uns uns 3 2 hig hig hig hig uns 3 hig uns n 2 uns uns 3 2 uns uns 2 3 hig uns i 3 hig 3 hig 2 uns hig 3 uns uns 2 3 hig uns 3 hig 2 uns hig o 2 low n 3 uns 3 uns uns uns 3 hig MEM o 3 2 low low uns o 3 2 low low 2 low low 3 2 low low 3 2 low low 2 low low low o 2 0.24969423 low 3 2 low low o 3 low low 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 EDAKYIELD FEEDBACK -0.02339499 -0.00952217 -0.01426502 -0.00696104 -0.00696104 -0.00383076 -0.01635187 0.02462631 0.05577556 0.17203624 0.05577556 0.02462631 0.12508209 0.41029770 0.11334355 0.03529770 0.08641184 0.12814887 0.00660350 0.01703776 0.07597758 0.71939860 0.00511289 0.12113909 0.12113909 0.03194384 0.04834053 0.20795721 0.01852836 0.10728035 0.09684610 0.24969423 0.04834053 0.69256766 0.30424265 0.69256766 0.52739525 0.30589070 0.40685337 0.57654146 0.40685337 0.16138551 0.24613086 0.11553540 0.06431268 0.05023766 0.17480098 0.57654146 0.12113909 0.39343790 0.01852836 0.10242980 0.26486647 0.11182063 0.14855917 0.11334355 0.25008209 0.12508209 0.17425730 0.14938395 0.17425730 0.60160501 0.16029770 0.40931091 0.20795721 0.10728035 0.10728035 0.39303896 0.12121146 LSMEAN 419 YIELD LSMEAN 0.22269216 0.16138551 0.25058076 0.32850283 0.02747201 0.08641184 0.44061369 0.01964632 0.20196437 0.00511289 0.13455456 0.01852836 0.26399623 -0.03513353 FEEDBACK 2 22 0.22882572 2 3 2 0.01182063 2 3 3 3 33 0.43017943 3 0.06385119 3 low low 3low 0.20795721 low hig uns hig unshig 3 hig 2 unsuns 2 hig uns 2 MEM N N B N N N NB uns B B B N N NN low low B VI S NN BN N uns N S S S S s s N S N NN hig S S s s SNS 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 RECALPOS STORY CQGQGQCDCQCQCQCQC0CQCQCQ6QCQCBCQCQCQCQ Analysis 28. The change analysis controlling for source memory. Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 207 99.13956789 0.47893511 2.70 0.0001 Error 1079 191.06245231 0.17707364 Corrected Total 1286 290.20202020 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.341623 122.5274 0.4208012 0.3434343 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F FEED ID 1 1.42387137 1.42387137 8.04 0.0047 SN(RECALPOS*SNS*VI) 135 52.15235173 0.38631372 2.18 0.0001 RECALPOS 1 0.05363217 0.05363217 0.30 0.5822 SNS 1 0.40141031 0.40141031 2.27 0.1325 RECALP0S*SNS 1 0.00000488 0.00000488 0.00 0.9958 VI 1 0.06886667 0.06886667 0.39 0.5330 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.04876947 0.04876947 0.28 0.5998 SNS*VI 1 0.77398896 0.77398896 4.37 0.0368 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.49324571 0.49324571 2.79 0.0954 MEM 2 17.11581117 8.55790558 48.33 0.0001 RECALPOS*MEM 2 0.19720194 0.09860097 0.56 0.5732 SNS*MEM 2 0.15048859 0.07524429 0.42 0.6539 RECALPOS*SNS*MEM 2 0.33097453 0.16548726 0.93 0.3931 VI*MEM 2 1.13046536 0.56523268 3.19 0.0415 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 2 0.08562898 0.04281449 0.24 0.7853 SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.18350542 0.09175271 0.52 0.5958 RECALP0S*SNS*VI*MEM 2 0.16412270 0.08206135 0.46 0.6292 FEEDBACK 2 9.27374653 4.63687326 26.19 0.0001 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 2 3.62099492 1.81049746 10.22 0.0001 SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.36674194 0.18337097 1.04 0.3554 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.15640134 0.07820067 0.44 0.6431 VI*FEEDBACK 2 1.14930889 0.57465444 3.25 0.0393 RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.89073445 0.44536722 2.52 0.0813 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.05251111 0.02625555 0.15 0.8622 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 2 0.13648775 0.06824387 0.39 0.6803 MEM*FEEDBACK 4 4.09900113 1.02475028 5.79 0.0001 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.47201470 0.11800367 0.67 0.6154 SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.29592095 0.07398024 0.42 0.7959 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 4 0.22801240 0.05700310 0.32 0.8634 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 0.64191899 0.16047975 0.91 0.4595 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 4 0.46349297 0.11587324 0.65 0.6239 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 4 2.49284218 0.62321054 3.52 0.0073 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 4 0.41829535 0.10457384 0.59 0.6695 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F mem linear 1 16.21491936 16.21491936 91.57 0.0001 mem quadratic 1 0.88852939 0.88852939 5.02 0.0253 feedback linear 1 9.24854862 9.24854862 52.23 0.0001 feedback quadratic 1 0.13954434 0.13954434 0.79 0.3749 General Linear Models Procedure Level of -CHANGE- -FEEDID- RECALPOS Mean SD Mean SD 1 621 0.33977456 0.47401437 0.57971014 0.49400331 2 666 0.34684685 0.47632424 0.64864865 0.47775129 Level of -CHANGE- -FEEDID- SNS Mean SD Mean SD N 648 0.36111111 0.48069373 0.63117284 0.48285970 S 639 0.32550861 0.46893164 0.59937402 0.49040919 Level of Level of ...... CHAIJGE...... -FEEDID- RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD Mean SD 1 N 315 0.35873016 0.48039094 0.58412698 0.49365604 1 S 306 0.32026144 0.46734120 0.57516340 0.49512787 2 N 333 0.36336336 0.48169203 0.67567568 0.46882631 2 S 333 0.33033033 0.47103981 0.62162162 0.48571251 Level of ...... CHANGE...... FEEDID- VI N Mean SD Mean SD B 720 0.34861111 0.47686186 0.63194444 0.48261181 N 567 0.33686067 0.47305415 0.59435626 0.49144976 Level of Level of ■...... CHAIJGE...... -FEEDID- RECALPOS VI N Mean SD Mean SD 1 B 324 0.35185185 0.47828670 0.59567901 0.49151926 1 N 297 0.32659933 0.46976081 0.56228956 0.49694215 2 B 396 0.34595960 0.47628184 0.66161616 0.47375838 2 N 270 0.34814815 0.47726791 0.62962963 0.48380064 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... -FEEDID- SNS VI N Mean SD Mean SD NB 351 0.38746439 0.48786662 0.66666667 0.47207748 N N 297 0.32996633 0.47099413 0.58922559 0.49280472 S B 369 0.31165312 0.46379780 0.59891599 0.49078344 SN 270 0.34444444 0.47606920 0.60000000 0.49080769 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD 1 N B 162 0.41358025 0.49400206 1 N N 153 0.30065359 0.46004816 1 S B 162 0.29012346 0.45522636 1 S N 144 0.35416667 0.47992934 2 N B 189 0.36507937 0.48273117 2 N N 144 0.36111111 0.48199920 2 S B 207 0.32850242 0.47080718 2 S N 126 0.33333333 0.47328638 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD 1 N B 162 0.60493827 0.49037981 1 N N 153 0.56209150 0.49775900 1 S B 162 0.58641975 0.49400206 1 S N 144 0.56250000 0.49780989 2 N B 189 0.71957672 0.45039915 2 N N 144 0.61805556 0.48755889 2 S B 207 0.60869565 0.48922540 2 S N 126 0.64285714 0.48107024 422 Level of ...... CHANGE- ...... FEEDID- MEHN Mean SD Mean SD hig 429 0.18181818 0.38614492 0.59207459 0.49202294 low 429 0.38461538 0.48707227 0.60139860 0.49018202 uns 429 0.46386946 0.49927512 0.65268065 0.47667417 Level of Level of -...... •CHANGE...... FEEl> ID...... RECALPOS MEM N Mean SD Mean SD 1 hig 207 0.17874396 0.38406660 0.54106280 0.49951902 1 low 207 0.36714976 0.48319637 0.56521739 0.49693021 1 uns 207 0.47342995 0.50050394 0.63285024 0.48319637 2 hig 222 0.18468468 0.38891849 0.63963964 0.48118994 2 low 222 0.40090090 0.49118851 0.63513514 0.48248014 2 uns 222 0.45495495 0.49909216 0.67117117 0.47084931 Level of Level of -CHANGE- -FEEDID- SNS MEM N Mean SO Mean SD hig 216 0.19444444 0.39669175 0.59722222 0.49159604 low 216 0.41203704 0.49334503 0.62962963 0.48402561 uns 216 0.47685185 0.50062407 0.66666667 0.47249954 hig 213 0.16901408 0.37564720 0.58685446 0.49355847 low 213 0.35680751 0.48018584 0.57276995 0.49584151 uns 213 0.45070423 0.49873611 0.63849765 0.48156741 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS MEM N Mean SD N hig 105 0.17142857 0.37869063 N low 105 0.41904762 0.49576965 N uns 105 0.48571429 0.50219299 S hig 102 0.18627451 0.39125065 S low 102 0.31372549 0.46629766 S uns 102 0.46078431 0.50092130 2 N hig 111 0.21621622 0.41353037 2 N low 111 0.40540541 0.49319696 2 N uns 111 0.46846847 0.50126784 2 S hig 111 0.15315315 0.36176834 2 S low 111 0.39639640 0.49136691 2 S uns 111 0.44144144 0.49881104 Level of Level of Level of RECALPOS SNS MEMN Mean SD N hig 105 0.53333333 0.50128041 N low 105 0.60000000 0.49224759 N uns 105 0.61904762 0.48795004 S hig 102 0.54901961 0.50004853 S low 102 0.52941176 0.50159907 S uns 102 0.64705882 0.48024455 N hig 111 0.65765766 0.47664539 N low 111 0.65765766 0.47664539 N uns 111 0.71171171 0.45502023 S hig 111 0.62162162 0.48718214 S low 111 0.61261261 0.48936269 S uns 111 0.63063063 0.48482289 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... FEEl >ID...... VI MEM N Mean SD Mean SD B hig 240 0.15000000 0.35781765 0.61666667 0.48721449 B low 240 0.40416667 0.49175560 0.60000000 0.49092177 B uns 240 0.49166667 0.50097534 0.67916667 0.46777240 N hig 189 0.22222222 0.41684393 0.56084656 0.49760204 N low 189 0.35978836 0.48121296 0.60317460 0.49053865 N uns 189 0.42857143 0.49618606 0.61904762 0.48691074 423 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE RECALPOS VI MEM N Mean SD 1 B hig 108 0.14814815 0.35690295 1 B low 108 0.40740741 0.49364252 1 B uns 108 0.50000000 0.50233101 1 N hig 99 0.21212121 0.41089070 1 N low 99 0.32323232 0.47009080 1 N uns 99 0.44444444 0.49943278 2 B hig 132 0.15151515 0.35991620 2 B low 132 0.40151515 0.49207224 2 B uns 132 0.48484848 0.50167427 2 N hig 90 0.23333333 0.42532209 2 N low 90 0.40000000 0.49264250 2 N uns 90 0.41111111 0.49479185 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS VI MEM N Mean SD 1 B hig 108 0.56481481 0.49809259 1 B low 108 0.52/777/8 0.50155521 1 B uns 108 0.69444444 0.46278986 1 N hig 99 0.51515152 0.50231376 1 N low 99 0.60606061 0.49110832 1 N uns 99 0.56565657 0.49819298 2 B hig 132 0.65909091 0.47582063 2 B low 132 0.65909091 0.47582063 2 B uns 132 0.66666667 0.47320035 2 N hig 90 0.61111111 0.49022912 2 N low 90 0.60000000 0.49264250 2 N uns 90 0.67777778 0.46994568 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE SNS VI MEM N Mean SD NB hig 117 0.19658120 0.39912223 N B low 117 0.43589744 0.49800664 N B uns 117 0.52991453 0.50125101 NN hig 99 0.19191919 0.39581401 N N low 99 0.38383838 0.48879424 N N uns 99 0.41414141 0.49507989 SB hig 123 0.10569106 0.30869923 S B low 123 0.37398374 0.48583837 S B uns 123 0.45528455 0.50003332 S N hig 90 0.25555556 0.43861660 S N low 90 0.33333333 0.47404546 S N uns 90 0.44444444 0.49968779 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID SNS VI MEM N Mean SD NB hig 117 0.61538462 0.48859676 N B low 117 0.65811966 0.47637990 N B uns 117 0.72649573 0.44767467 NN hig 99 0.57575758 0.49674264 N N low 99 0.59595960 0.49320261 N N uns 99 0.59595960 0.49320261 SB hig 123 0.61788618 0.48789150 S B low 123 0.54471545 0.50003332 S B uns 123 0.63414634 0.48363875 SN hig 90 0.54444444 0.50081083 S N low 90 0.61111111 0.49022912 S N uns 90 0.64444444 0.48136303 of Leve of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE..... RECALPOS SNS VI MEM N Mean SD 1 N B hig 54 0.18518519 0.39209520 1 N B low 54 0.50000000 0.50469494 1 N B uns 54 0.55555556 0.50156986 1 N N hig 51 0.15686275 0.36729002 1 N N low 51 0.33333333 0.47609523 1 N N uns 51 0.41176471 0.49705012 424 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOSSNS VI MEMN Mean SD 1 S B hig 54 0.11111111 0.31722063 1 S B low 54 0.31481481 0.46880314 1 S B uns 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 1 S N hig 48 0.27083333 0.44909286 1 SN low 48 0.31250000 0.46841744 1 S N uns 48 0.47916667 0.50485234 2 N B hig 63 0.20634921 0.40793462 2 N B low 63 0.38095238 0.48952154 2 N B uns 63 0.50793651 0.50395263 2 N N hig 48 0.22916667 0.42474440 2 N N low 48 0.43750000 0.50132802 2 N N uns 48 0.41666667 0.49822380 2 S B hig 69 0.10144928 0.30413462 2 S B low 69 0.42028986 0.49722161 2 S B uns 69 0.46376812 0.50233895 2 s N hig 42 0.23809524 0.43108054 2 s N low 42 0.35714286 0.48496560 2 s N uns 42 0.40476190 0.49679577 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... RECALPOS SNS VI MEMN Mean SD 1 N B hig 54 0.53703704 0.50330841 1 N B low 54 0.59259259 0.49596555 1 N B uns 54 0.68518519 0.46880314 1 N N hig 51 0.52941176 0.50410083 1 N N low 51 0.60784314 0.49308950 1 N N uns 51 0.54901961 0.50254256 1 S B hig 54 0.59259259 0.49596555 1 S B low 54 0.46296296 0.50330841 1 S B uns 54 0.70370370 0.46091090 1 S N hig 48 0.50000000 0.50529115 i S N low 48 0.60416667 0.49420399 1 SN uns 48 0.58333333 0.49822380 2 N B hig 63 0.68253968 0.46922712 2 N B low 63 0.71428571 0.45538256 2 N B uns 63 0.76190476 0.42933879 2 N N hig 48 0.62500000 0.48924605 2 N N low 48 0.58333333 0.49822380 2 N N uns 48 0.64583333 0.48332111 2 S B hig 69 0.63768116 0.48419170 2 S B low 69 0.60869565 0.49161772 2 S B uns 69 0.57971014 0.49722161 2 SN hig 42 0.59523810 0.49679577 2 S N low 42 0.61904762 0.49150743 2 S N uns 42 0.71428571 0.45722996 Level of CHANGE--...... FEEDID...... FEEDBACK N Mean SD Mean SD 1 429 0.24941725 0.43318089 0.59440559 0.49157998 2 429 0.34032634 0.47437207 0.42424242 0.49480450 3 429 0.44055944 0.49703388 0.82750583 0.37825050 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... FEEDID...... RECALPOS FEEDBACK N Mean SD Mean SD 1 1 207 0.29951691 0.45915684 0.57971014 0.49480202 1 2 207 0.35265700 0.47895537 0.39130435 0.48922540 1 3 207 0.36714976 0.48319637 0.76811594 0.42305847 2 1 222 0.20270270 0.40292134 0.60810811 0.48927597 2 2 222 0.32882883 0.47084931 0.45495495 0.49909216 2 3 222 0.50900901 0.50104859 0.88288288 0.32228648 Level of L6V611 Al/A 1 OT ...... FEEDID...... SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD Mean SD N 1 216 0.27777778 0.44894364 0.60648148 0.48966493 N 2 216 0.33333333 0.47249954 0.46296296 0.49978462 N 3 216 0.47222222 0.50038745 0.82407407 0.38164159 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE ..... FEEDID...... SNS FEEDBACKN Mean SD Mean SD S 1 213 0.22065728 0.41566671 0.58215962 0.49436545 S 2 213 0.34741784 0.47727153 0.38497653 0.48773603 S 3 213 0.40845070 0.49270522 0.83098592 0.37564720 Level of Leve of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N 1 105 0.33333333 0.47366547 1 N 2 105 0.33333333 0.47366547 1 N 3 105 0.40952381 0.49410444 1 S 1 102 0.26470588 0.44335513 1 S 2 102 0.37254902 0.48587104 1 S 3 102 0.32352941 0.47013301 2 N 1 111 0.22522523 0.41962504 2 N 2 111 0.33333333 0.47354242 2 N 3 111 0.53153153 0.50126784 2 S 1 111 0.18018018 0.38608050 2 S 2 111 0.32432432 0.47024485 2 S 3 111 0.48648649 0.50208411 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N 1 105 0.60000000 0.49224759 1 N 2 105 0.39047619 0.49019694 1 N 3 105 0.76190476 0.42796049 1 S 1 102 0.55882353 0.49897974 1 S 2 102 0.39215686 0.49064239 1 S 3 102 0.77450980 0.41996847 2 N 1 111 0.61261261 0.48936269 2 N 2 111 0.53153153 0.50126784 2 N 3 111 0.88288288 0.32301812 2 S 1 111 0.60360360 0.49136691 2 S 2 111 0.37837838 0.48718214 2 S 3 111 0.88288288 0.32301812 1 A% f A= 1 Ua XI1 Ak = 1 UIa X VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD Mean SD B 1 240 0.28333333 0. 45155859 0.60833333 0.48914293 B 2 240 0.34583333 0.47663321 0.43750000 0.49711511 B 3 240 0.41666667 0.49403697 0.85000000 0.35781765 N 1 189 0.20634921 0.40575895 0.57671958 0.49539135 N 2 189 0.33333333 0.47265659 0.40740741 0.49265687 N 3 189 0.47089947 0.50047821 0.79894180 0.40185599 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 B 1 108 0.32407407 0.47020981 1 B 2 108 0.39814815 0.49179843 1 B 3 108 0.33333333 0.47360222 1 N 1 99 0.27272727 0.44762826 1 N 2 99 0.30303030 0.46190699 1 N 3 99 0.40404040 0.49320261 2 B 1 132 0.25000000 0.43466228 2 B 2 132 0.30303030 0.46131895 2 B 3 132 0.48484848 0.50167427 2 N 1 90 0.13333333 0.34183904 2 N 2 90 0.36666667 0.48459412 2 N 3 90 0.54444444 0.50081083 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 B 1 108 0.56481481 0.49809259 1 B 2 108 0.45370370 0.50017304 1 B 3 108 0.76851852 0.42374568 1 N 1 99 0.59595960 0.49320261 1 N 2 99 0.32323232 0.47009080 426 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N 3 99 0.76767677 0.42446323 2 B 1 132 0.64393939 0.48065756 2 B 2 132 0.42424242 0.49611025 2 B 3 132 0.91666667 0.27743830 2 N 1 90 0.55555556 0.49968779 2 N 2 90 0.50000000 0.50280114 2 N 3 90 0.83333333 0.37476584 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD NB 1 117 0.33333333 0.47343208 N B 2 117 0.36752137 0.48420377 N B 3 117 0.46153846 0.50066269 NN 1 99 0.21212121 0.41089070 N N 2 99 0.29292929 0.45742235 N N 3 99 0.48484848 0.50231376 S B 1 123 0.23577236 0.42621669 S B 2 123 0.32520325 0.47036670 S B 3 123 0.37398374 0.48583837 SN 1 90 0.20000000 0.40224091 S N 2 90 0.37777778 0.48754781 S N 3 90 0.45555556 0.50081083 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID SNS VI FEEDBACKN Mean SD N B 1 117 0.65811966 0.47637990 N B 2 117 0.49572650 0.50213221 N B 3 117 0.84615385 0.36235305 N N 1 99 0.54545455 0.50046361 N N 2 99 0.42424242 0.49674264 N N 3 99 0.79797980 0.40355052 S B 1 123 0.56097561 0.49829778 S B 2 123 0.38211382 0.48789150 SB 3 123 0.85365854 0.35489382 SN 1 90 0.61111111 0.49022912 S N 2 90 0.38888889 0.49022912 S N 3 90 0.80000000 0.40224091 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B 1 54 0.38888889 0.49207557 N B 2 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 NB 3 54 0.40740741 0.49596555 N N 1 51 0.27450980 0.45070750 N N 2 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 N N 3 51 0.41176471 0.49705012 S B 1 54 0.25925926 0.44234304 S B 2 54 0.35185185 0.48203215 S B 3 54 0.25925926 0.44234304 S N 1 48 0.27083333 0.44909286 S N 2 48 0.39583333 0.49420399 S N 3 48 0.39583333 0.49420399 N B 1 63 0.28571429 0.45538256 NB 2 63 0.30158730 0.46263344 N B 3 63 0.50793651 0.50395263 N N 1 48 0.14583333 0.35667396 N N 2 48 0.37500000 0.48924605 N N 3 48 0.56250000 0.50132802 S B 1 69 0.21739130 0.41549281 SB 2 69 0.30434783 0.46350163 S B 3 69 0.46376812 0.50233895 S N 1 42 0.11904762 0.32777007 S N 2 42 0.35714286 0.48496560 S N 3 42 0.52380952 0.50548674 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID..... RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N B 1 54 0.62962963 0.48743829 1 NB 2 54 0.44444444 0.50156986 1 NB 3 54 0.74074074 0.44234304 1 N N 1 51 0.56862745 0.50019604 1 NN 2 51 0.33333333 0.47609523 1 NN 3 51 0.78431373 0.41539020 1 SB 1 54 0.50000000 0.50469494 1 SB 2 54 0.46296296 0.50330841 1 SB 3 54 0.79629630 0.40653295 1 S N 1 48 0.62500000 0.48924605 1 S N 2 48 0.31250000 0.46841744 1 S N 3 48 0.75000000 0.43759497 2 N B 1 63 0.68253968 0.46922712 2 NB 2 63 0.53968254 0.50242627 2 N B 3 63 0.93650794 0.24580453 2 N N 1 48 0.52083333 0.50485234 2 N N 2 48 0.52083333 0.50485234 2 N N 3 48 0.81250000 0.39444278 2 S B 1 69 0.60869565 0.49161772 2 S B 2 69 0.31884058 0.46944127 2 S B 3 69 0.89855072 0.30413462 2 S N 1 42 0.59523810 0.49679577 2 S N 2 42 0.47619048 0.50548674 2 S N 3 42 0.85714286 0.35416880 Level of Level of MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD Mean SD hig 1 143 0.15384615 0.36206941 0.59440559 0.49273257 hig 2 143 0.18181818 0.38705030 0.35664336 0.48069191 hig 3 143 0.20979021 0.40858993 0.82517483 0.38115254 low 1 143 0.32167832 0.46876221 0.57342657 0.49631757 low 2 143 0.37062937 0.48467096 0.41958042 0.49522491 low 3 143 0.46153846 0.50027078 0.81118881 0.39273417 uns 1 143 0.27272727 0.44692720 0.61538462 0.48821429 uns 2 143 0.46853147 0.50076274 0.49650350 0.50174521 uns 3 143 0.65034965 0.47853564 0.84615385 0.36206941 Level of Level of Level of ... CHANGE--- RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD hig 69 0.18840580 0.39390064 hig 69 0.17391304 0.38181154 hig 69 0.17391304 0.38181154 low 69 0.36231884 0.48419170 low 69 0.39130435 0.49161772 low 69 0.34782609 0.47976977 uns 69 0.34782609 0.47976977 uns 69 0.49275362 0.50361016 uns 69 0.57971014 0.49722161 hig 0.12162162 0.32907936 hig 0.18918919 0.39433230 hig 0.24324324 0.43196939 low 0.28378378 0.45391057 low 0.35135135 0.48065117 low 0.56756757 0.49879529 uns 0.20270270 0.40475698 uns 0.44594595 0.50046258 uns 0.71621622 0.45391057 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK Mean SD hig 69 0.57971014 0.49722161 hig 69 0.28985507 0.45701877 hig 69 0.75362319 0.43405737 low 69 0.59420290 0.49464309 low 69 0.34782609 0.47976977 low 69 0.75362319 0.43405737 uns 69 0.56521739 0.49936020 428 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- RECALPOSHEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 uns 2 69 0.53623188 0.50233895 1 uns 3 69 0.79710145 0.40510384 2 hig 1 74 0.60810811 0.49150503 2 hig 2 74 0.41891892 0.49674990 2 hig 3 74 0.89189189 0.31263649 2 lou 1 74 0.55405405 0.50046258 2 low 2 74 0.48648649 0.50322911 2 low 3 74 0.86486486 0.34420145 2 uns 1 74 0.66216216 0.47620149 2 uns 2 74 0.45945946 0.50175553 2 uns 3 74 0.89189189 0.31263649 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- SNSHEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 1 72 0.18055556 0.38734884 N hig 2 72 0.18055556 0.38734884 N hig 3 72 0.22222222 0.41865722 N low 1 72 0.36111111 0.48369341 N low 2 72 0.38888889 0.49091910 N low 3 72 0.48611111 0.50331452 N uns 1 72 0.29166667 0.45771939 N uns 2 72 0.43055556 0.49862879 N uns 3 72 0.70833333 0.45771939 S hig 1 71 0.12676056 0.33507259 S hig 2 71 0.18309859 0.38950001 S hig 3 71 0.19718310 0.40070361 S low 1 71 0.28169014 0.45302471 S low 2 71 0.35211268 0.48102841 S low 3 71 0.43661972 0.49949673 S uns 1 71 0.25352113 0.43812294 S uns 2 71 0.50704225 0.50350881 S uns 3 71 0.59154930 0.49504588 Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID SNS HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 1 72 0.62500000 0.48752031 N hig 2 72 0.36111111 0.48369341 N hig 3 72 0.80555556 0.39854980 N low 1 72 0.61111111 0.49091910 N low 2 72 0.43055556 0.49862879 N low 3 72 0.84722222 0.36229792 N uns 1 72 0.58333333 0.49646639 N uns 2 72 0.59722222 0.49389861 N uns 3 72 0.81944444 0.38734884 S hig 1 71 0.56338028 0.49949673 S hig 2 71 0.35211268 0.48102841 S hig 3 71 0.84507042 0.36441293 S low 1 71 0.53521127 0.50230855 S low 2 71 0.40845070 0.49504588 S low 3 71 0.77464789 0.42078780 S uns 1 71 0.64788732 0.48102841 S uns 2 71 0.39436620 0.49219257 S uns 3 71 0.87323944 0.33507259 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 1 35 0.20000000 0.40583972 N hig 2 35 0.14285714 0.35503580 N hig 3 35 0.17142857 0.38238526 N low 1 35 0.42857143 0.50209645 N low 2 35 0.40000000 0.49705012 N low 3 35 0.42857143 0.50209645 N uns 1 35 0.37142857 0.49024089 N uns 2 35 0.45714286 0.50543267 N uns 3 35 0.62857143 0.49024089 S hig 1 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 S hig 2 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 429 Level of Level of Level of CHANGE SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 S hig 3 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 1 S low 1 34 0.29411765 0.46249729 1 S low 2 34 0.38235294 0.49327022 1 s low 3 34 0.26470588 0.44781108 1 s uns 1 34 0.32352941 0.47485808 1 s uns 2 34 0.52941176 0.50664040 1 s uns 3 34 0.52941176 0.50664040 2 N hig 1 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 2 N hig 2 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 2 N hig 3 37 0.27027027 0.45022517 2 N low 1 37 0.29729730 0.46337319 2 N low 2 37 0.37837838 0.49167239 2 N low 3 37 0.54054054 0.50522792 2 N uns 1 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 2 N uns 2 37 0.40540541 0.49774265 2 N uns 3 37 0.78378378 0.41734180 2 S hig 1 37 0.08108108 0.27672473 2 S hig 2 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 2 S hig 3 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 2 S low 1 37 0.27027027 0.45022517 2 S low 2 37 0.32432432 0.47457900 2 S low 3 37 0.59459459 0.49774265 2 S uns 1 37 0.18918919 0.39706128 2 S uns 2 37 0.48648649 0.50671171 2 S uns 3 37 0.64864865 0.48397751 Li Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID Rl SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N hig 1 35 0.62857143 0.49024089 1 N hig 2 35 0.25714286 0.44343957 1 N hig 3 35 0.71428571 0.45834925 1 N low 1 35 0.65714286 0.48159399 1 N low 2 35 0.31428571 0.47100822 1 N low 3 35 0.82857143 0.38238526 1 N uns 1 35 0.51428571 0.50709255 1 N uns 2 35 0.60000000 0.49705012 1 N uns 3 35 0.74285714 0.44343957 1 S hig 1 34 0.52941176 0.50664040 1 S hig 2 34 0.32352941 0.47485808 1 S hig 3 34 0.79411765 0.41042563 1 S low 1 34 0.52941176 0.50664040 1 S low 2 34 0.38235294 0.49327022 1 S low 3 34 0.67647059 0.47485808 1 S uns 1 34 0.61764706 0.49327022 1 S uns 2 34 0.47058824 0.50664040 1 S uns 3 34 0.85294118 0.35949063 2 N hig 1 37 0.62162162 0.49167239 2 N hig 2 37 0.45945946 0.50522792 2 N hig 3 37 0.89189189 0.31480009 2 N low 1 37 0.56756757 0.50224720 2 N low 2 37 0.54054054 0.50522792 2 N low 3 37 0.86486486 0.34658350 2 N uns 1 37 0.64864865 0.48397751 2 N uns 2 37 0.59459459 0.49774265 2 N uns 3 37 0.89189189 0.31480009 2 S hig 1 37 0.59459459 0.49774265 2 S hig 2 37 0.37837838 0.49167239 2 S hig 3 37 0.89189189 0.31480009 2 S low 1 37 0.54054054 0.50522792 2 S low 2 37 0.43243243 0.50224720 2 S low 3 37 0.86486486 0.34658350 2 S uns 1 37 0.67567568 0.47457900 2 S uns 2 37 0.32432432 0.47457900 2 S uns 3 37 0.89189189 0.31480009 430 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 1 80 0.12500000 0.33280549 B hig 2 80 0.13750000 0.34654716 B hig 3 80 0.18750000 0.39277494 B low 1 80 0.37500000 0.48717735 B low 2 80 0.40000000 0.49298882 B low 3 80 0.43750000 0.49920823 B uns 1 80 0.35000000 0.47997890 B uns 2 80 0.50000000 0.50315461 B uns 3 80 0.62500000 0.48717735 N hig 1 63 0.19047619 0.39583081 N hig 2 63 0.23809524 0.42933879 N hig 3 63 0.23809524 0.42933879 N low 1 63 0.25396825 0.43877594 N low 2 63 0.33333333 0.47519096 N low 3 63 0.49206349 0.50395263 N uns 1 63 0.17460317 0.38267659 N uns 2 63 0.42857143 0.49884660 N uns 3 63 0.68253968 0.46922712 Level of Level of Level of -FEEDID- VI MEH FEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 1 80 0.66250000 0.47584036 B hig 2 80 0.36250000 0.48375509 B hig 3 80 0.82500000 0.38236440 B low 1 80 0.57500000 0.49746191 B low 2 80 0.40000000 0.49298882 B low 3 80 0.82500000 0.38236440 B uns 1 80 0.58750000 0.49539014 B uns 2 80 0.55000000 0.50063251 B uns 3 80 0.90000000 0.30189276 N hig 1 63 0.50793651 0.50395263 N hig 2 63 0.34920635 0.48054842 N hig 3 63 0.82539683 0.38267659 N low 1 63 0.57142857 0.49884660 N low 2 63 0.44444444 0.50089526 N low 3 63 0.79365079 0.40793462 N uns 1 63 0.65079365 0.48054842 N uns 2 63 0.42857143 0.49884660 N uns 3 63 0.77777778 0.41907904 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD B hig 1 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B hig 2 36 0.13888889 0.35073619 B hig 3 36 0.16666667 0.37796447 B low 1 36 0.41666667 0.50000000 B low 2 36 0.47222222 0.50630940 B low 3 36 0.33333333 0.47809144 B uns 1 36 0.41666667 0.50000000 B uns 2 36 0.58333333 0.50000000 B uns 3 36 0.50000000 0.50709255 N hig 1 33 0.24242424 0.43519414 N hig 2 33 0.21212121 0.41514875 N hig 3 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 N low 1 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 N low 2 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 N low 3 33 0.36363636 0.48850421 N uns 1 33 0.27272727 0.45226702 N uns 2 33 0.39393939 0.49619766 N uns 3 33 0.66666667 0.47871355 B hig 1 44 0.11363636 0.32103822 B hig 2 44 0.13636364 0.34714176 B hig 3 44 0.20454545 0.40803246 B low 1 44 0.34090909 0.47949498 B low 2 44 0.34090909 0.47949498 B low 3 44 0.52272727 0.50525777 B uns 1 44 0.29545455 0.46152152 B uns 2 44 0.43181818 0.50105597 Level of Level of Level Level of CHANGE RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 B uns 3 44 0.72727273 0.45051063 2 N hig 1 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 2 N hig 2 30 0.26666667 0.44977645 2 N hig 3 30 0.30000000 0.46609160 2 N low 1 30 0.20000000 0.40683810 2 N low 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 2 N low 3 30 0.63333333 0.49013252 2 N uns 1 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 2 N uns 2 30 0.46666667 0.50741626 2 N uns 3 30 0.70000000 0.46609160 Level of Level of Level Level of RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 1 36 0.66666667 0.47809144 1 B hig 2 36 0.30555556 0.46717659 1 B hig 3 36 0.72222222 0.45425676 1 B low 1 36 0.50000000 0.50709255 1 B low 2 36 0.38888889 0.49441323 1 B low 3 36 0.69444444 0.46717659 1 B uns 1 36 0.527/77/8 0.50630940 1 B uns 2 36 0.66666667 0.47809144 1 B uns 3 36 0.88888889 0.31872763 1 N hig 1 33 0.48484848 0.50751922 1 N hig 2 33 0.27272727 0.45226702 1 N hig 3 33 0.78787879 0.41514875 1 N low 1 33 0.69696970 0.46669372 1 N low 2 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 1 N low 3 33 0.81818182 0.39167473 1 N uns 1 33 0.60606061 0.49619766 1 N uns 2 33 0.39393939 0.49619766 1 N uns 3 33 0.69696970 0.46669372 2 B hig 1 44 0.65909091 0.47949498 2 B hig 2 44 0.40909091 0.49735027 2 B hig 3 44 0.90909091 0.29080336 2 B low 1 44 0.63636364 0.48660710 2 B low 2 44 0.40909091 0.49735027 2 B low 3 44 0.93181818 0.25497171 2 B uns 1 44 0.63636364 0.48660710 2 B uns 2 44 0.45454545 0.50368620 2 B uns 3 44 0.90909091 0.29080336 2 N hig 1 30 0.53333333 0.50741626 2 N hig 2 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 2 N hig 3 30 0.86666667 0.34574590 2 N low 1 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 2 N low 2 30 0.60000000 0.49827288 2 N low 3 30 0.76666667 0.43018307 2 N uns 1 30 0.70000000 0.46609160 2 N uns 2 30 0.46666667 0.50741626 2 N uns 3 30 0.86666667 0.34574590 Level of Level of Level Level of SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 1 39 0.25641026 0.44235903 NB hig 2 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 N B hig 3 39 0.20512821 0.40907387 N B low 1 39 0.35897436 0.48597051 NB low 2 39 0.46153846 0.50503537 NB low 3 39 0.48717949 0.50636968 NB uns 1 39 0.38461538 0.49286406 N B uns 2 39 0.51282051 0.50636968 NB uns 3 39 0.69230769 0.46757190 NN hig 1 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 N N hig 2 33 0.24242424 0.43519414 N N hig 3 33 0.24242424 0.43519414 NN low 1 33 0.36363636 0.48850421 N N low 2 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 NN low 3 33 0.48484848 0.50751922 NN uns 1 33 0.18181818 0.39167473 432 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE' SNS VI MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD N N uns 2 33 0.33333333 0.47871355 N N uns 3 33 0.72727273 0.45226702 S B hig 1 41 0.00000000 0.00000000 S B hig 2 41 0.14634146 0.35783904 S B hig 3 41 0.17073171 0.38094875 SB low 1 41 0.39024390 0.49386480 S B low 2 41 0.34146341 0.48009145 SB low 3 41 0.39024390 0.49386480 S B uns 1 41 0.31707317 0.47111699 S B uns 2 41 0.48780488 0.50606083 S B uns 3 41 0.56097561 0.50243310 S N hig 1 30 0.30000000 0.46609160 SN hig 2 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 S N hig 3 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 S N low 1 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 s N low 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 s N low 3 30 0.50000000 0.50854763 s N uns 1 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 s N uns 2 30 0.53333333 0.50741626 s N uns 3 30 0.63333333 0.49013252 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID SNS VI MEMFEEDBACKN Mean SD NB hig 1 39 0.71794872 0.45588075 NB hig 2 39 0.38461538 0.49286406 NB hig 3 39 0.74358974 0.44235903 NB low 1 39 0.66666667 0.47756693 NB low 2 39 0.41025641 0.49831024 N B low 3 39 0.89743590 0.30735474 NB uns 1 39 0.58974359 0.49831024 NB uns 2 39 0.69230769 0.46757190 N B uns 3 39 0.89743590 0.30735474 NN hig 1 33 0.51515152 0.50751922 NN hig 2 33 0.33333333 0.47871355 N N hig 3 33 0.87878788 0.33143398 NN low 1 33 0.54545455 0.50564990 NN low 2 33 0.45454545 0.50564990 NN low 3 33 0.78787879 0.41514875 NN uns 1 33 0.57575758 0.50189037 N N uns 2 33 0.48484848 0.50751922 N N uns 3 33 0.72727273 0.45226702 S B hig 1 41 0.60975610 0.49386480 S B hig 2 41 0.34146341 0.48009145 SB hig 3 41 0.90243902 0.30040623 S B low 1 41 0.48780488 0.50606083 SB low 2 41 0.39024390 0.49386480 s B low 3 41 0.75609756 0.43476935 s B uns 1 41 0.58536585 0.49877900 s B uns 2 41 0.41463415 0.49877900 s B uns 3 41 0.90243902 0.30040623 s N hig 1 30 0.50000000 0.50854763 s N hig 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 s N hig 3 30 0.76666667 0.43018307 s N low 1 30 0.60000000 0.49827288 s N low 2 30 0.43333333 0.50400693 s N low 3 30 0.80000000 0.40683810 s N uns 1 30 0.73333333 0.44977645 s N uns 2 30 0.36666667 0.49013252 s N uns 3 30 0.83333333 0.37904902 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 1 18 0.277/7/78 0.46088860 NB hig 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 N B hig 3 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 NB low 1 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 N B low 2 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 NB low 3 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 RECALPOS rurorv)r'jrororui\)rv>rororjruroror\)rurorjr>jnjr\)rorurui\jror\jr\jr\jr\>r>ji\jr\jrurv> of Level S S o 3 low B S N N S S N S n 3 1 uns 2 1 uns N low B low S B S B S hig S B S B S S B S S S S N o 3 low B N i 2 hig 2 1 B low low S N N N N N N i 3 hig N N S o 2 low B S o 3 low B S n 1 uns N N N N o 21 21 2 3 2 low 1 hig hig hig N B B B B B N N N N N B N N N S S S S S n 3 2 uns uns 3 B low 3 B hig S S S uns S B S B 2 N S S hig S N S N N N N N N N N S N N n 1 uns N B B B N N N SNS ee o ee o ee of Level of Level of Level N N N N N B N N N N N N N N VI n 1 uns B B N n 1 uns N N i 2 1 hig hig N 2 N 1 hig hig B B N N N B N N n 14 1 uns uns uns i 14 14 3 2 hig 23 hig hig uns 3 hig n 3 uns n 2 uns hig hig n 21 3 uns uns uns 2 uns i 16 3 hig E EDAKN FEEDBACK HEM i 17 17 3 1 hig hig uns 2 uns uns uns uns o 14 3 2 low low o 1 low 3 low low o 3 2 low low low o 17 2 low low low 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 14 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 ee of Level 1 1 1 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 14 14 21 0.14285714 21 21 21 0.47619048 21 21 14 14 16 16 0.62500000 16 16 16 16 16 60.37500000 16 16 600200 0.25000000 0.06250000 16 60.56250000 16 0.50000000 16 0.37500000 16 16 0.18750000 16 16 0.44444444 16 0.50000000 18 18 0.38888889 0.16666667 18 18 18 0.41176471 17 18 0.38888889 18 18 0.35294118 17 707583 0.46966822 0.43723732 0.70588235 18 0.23529412 17 17 0.17647059 17 0.55555556 18 70.29411765 17 0.66666667 0.44444444 18 18 ...... 0.64285714 0.50000000 0.64285714 0.07142857 0.35714286 0.07142857 0.42581531 0.21428571 .87490.46880723 0.42581531 0.28571429 0.21428571 0.65217391 0.47826087 0.47047197 0.56521739 0.30434783 0.39130435 0.17391304 0.13043478 0.75000000 0.26086957 0.00000000 0.51234754 0.43750000 0.37500000 0.31250000 0.31250000 0.06250000 0.31250000 .05310.40237391 0.80952381 0.38095238 0.28571429 0.23809524 0.23809524 0.18750000 .66670.38348249 0.16666667 .33330.48304589 0.38095238 0.33333333 0.62500000 .50000.44721360 0.25000000 0.25000000 0.37500000 0.38348249 0.16666667 0.23529412 0.17647059 0.11764706 0.38888889 0.00000000 0.00000000 Mean CHANGE 0.49724516 0.49724516 0.26726124 0.50686980 0.49901088 0.51887452 0.49724516 0.26726124 0.44721360 0.48698475 0.51075392 0.44897776 0.38755339 0.34435022 0.00000000 0.50000000 0.47871355 0.47871355 0.50000000 0.25000000 0.47871355 0.51176632 0.49761335 0.46291005 0.49761335 0.43643578 0.35856858 0.43643578 0.50000000 0.51234754 0.50000000 0.40311289 0.40311289 0.44721360 0.50000000 0.43723732 0.39295262 0.51130999 0.51449576 0.50163133 0.38348249 0.50729966 0.50163133 0.49259218 0.33210558 0.39295262 0.51130999 0.50163133 0.46966822 0.48507125 0.51130999 ...... SD 3 3 4 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID RECALPOS SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N B hig 1 18 0.777777/8 0.42779263 1 N B hig 2 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 1 N B hig 3 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 1 N B low 1 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 1 N B low 2 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 1 N B low 3 18 0.77777778 0.42779263 1 N B uns 1 18 0.50000000 0.51449576 1 N B uns 2 18 0.72222222 0.46088860 1 N B uns 3 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 1 N N hig 1 17 0.47058824 0.51449576 1 N N hig 2 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 1 N N hig 3 17 0.82352941 0.39295262 1 N N low 1 17 0.70588235 0.46966822 1 N N low 2 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 1 N N low 3 17 0.88235294 0.33210558 1 N N uns 1 17 0.52941176 0.51449576 1 N N uns 2 17 0.47058824 0.51449576 1 N N uns 3 17 0.64705882 0.49259218 1 S B hig 1 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 1 S B hig 2 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 1 S B hig 3 18 0.83333333 0.38348249 1 S B low 1 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 1 S B low 2 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 1 S B low 3 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 1 S B uns 1 18 0.55555556 0.51130999 1 S B uns 2 18 0.61111111 0.50163133 1 S B uns 3 18 0.94444444 0.23570226 1 S N hig 1 16 0.50000000 0.51639778 1 S N hig 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 1 S N hig 3 16 0.75000000 0.44721360 1 S N low 1 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 1 S N low 2 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 1 S N low 3 16 0.75000000 0.44721360 1 S N uns 1 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 1 S N uns 2 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 1 S N uns 3 16 0.75000000 0.44721360 435 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... FEEDID...... SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 1 21 0.66666667 0.48304589 2 N B hig 2 21 0.52380952 0.51176632 2 N B hig 3 21 0.85714286 0.35856858 2 N B low 1 21 0.71428571 0.46291005 2 N B low 2 21 0.42857143 0.50709255 2 N B low 3 21 1.00000000 0.00000000 2 N B uns 1 21 0.66666667 0.48304589 2 N B uns 2 21 0.66666667 0.48304589 2 N B uns 3 21 0.95238095 0.21821789 2 N N hig 1 16 0.56250000 0.51234754 2 NN hig 2 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 2 N N hig 3 16 0.93750000 0.25000000 2 N N low 1 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 2 N N low 2 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 2 N N low 3 16 0.68750000 0.47871355 2 N N uns 1 16 0.62500000 0.50000000 2 N N uns 2 16 0.50000000 0.51639778 2 N N uns 3 16 0.81250000 0.40311289 2 S B hig 1 23 0.65217391 0.48698475 2 S B hig 2 23 0.30434783 0.47047197 2 SB hig 3 23 0.95652174 0.20851441 2 S B low 1 23 0.56521739 0.50686980 2 S B low 2 23 0.39130435 0.49901088 2 s B low 3 23 0.86956522 0.34435022 2 s B uns 1 23 0.60869565 0.49901088 2 s B uns 2 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 2 s B uns 3 23 0.86956522 0.34435022 2 s N hig 1 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 s N hig 2 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 s N hig 3 14 0.78571429 0.42581531 2 s N low 1 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 s N low 2 14 0.50000000 0.51887452 2 s N low 3 14 0.85714286 0.36313652 2 s N uns 1 14 0.78571429 0.42581531 2 s N uns 2 14 0.42857143 0.51355259 2 s N uns 3 14 0.92857143 0.26726124 Analysis 29. The yielding analysis controlling for encoding failure. Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 189 16.76539503 0.08870579 1.32 0.0261 Error 213 14.36611861 0.06744657 Corrected Total 402 31.13151365 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.538535 307.8265 0.2597048 0.0843672 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STOR*RECA*SNS*VI) 126 9.56840519 0.07593972 1.13 0.2229 STORY 1 0.55596636 0.55596636 8.24 0.0045 RECALPOS 1 0.48602766 0.48602766 7.21 0.0078 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.74015136 0.74015136 10.97 0.0011 SNS 1 0.00019374 0.00019374 0.00 0.9573 STORY*SNS 1 0.20271248 0.20271248 3.01 0.0844 RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.02344693 0.02344693 0.35 0.5561 STORY*RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.26628851 0.26628851 3.95 0.0482 VI 1 1.86224123 1.86224123 27.61 0.0001 ST0RY*VI 1 0.31088653 0.31088653 4.61 0.0329 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.71412758 0.71412758 10.59 0.0013 STORY*RECALPOS*VI 1 0.12948073 0.12948073 1.92 0.1673 SNS*VI 1 0.03692359 0.03692359 0.55 0.4602 STORY*SNS*VI 1 0.01276238 0.01276238 0.19 0.6640 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.00520975 0.00520975 0.08 0.7813 STORY*RECALPO*SNS*VI 1 0.12929361 0.12929361 1.92 0.1676 MEM 1 1.09998829 1.09998829 16.31 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.22692944 0.22692944 3.36 0.0680 RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.09047960 0.09047960 1.34 0.2481 STORY*RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.29737990 0.29737990 4.41 0.0369 SNS*MEM 1 0.05904644 0.05904644 0.88 0.3505 ST0RY*SNS*MEM 1 0.05316450 0.05316450 0.79 0.3756 RECALPOS*SNS*MEM 1 0.06490417 0.06490417 0.96 0.3277 STORY*RECALP*SNS*MEM 1 0.05826595 0.05826595 0.86 0.3537 VI*MEM 1 0.32628343 0.32628343 4.84 0.0289 STORY*VI*MEM 1 0.22957818 0.22957818 3.40 0.0664 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 1 0.03466210 0.03466210 0.51 0.4742 STORY*RECALPO*VI*MEM 1 0.00246594 0.00246594 0.04 0.8485 SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.00086047 0.00086047 0.01 0.9102 STORY*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.05096860 0.05096860 0.76 0.3857 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.10173950 0.10173950 1.51 0.2207 STOR*RECA*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.00747321 0.00747321 0.11 0.7396 FEEDBACK 1 0.45636082 0.45636082 6.77 0.0099 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.07676913 0.07676913 1.14 0.2872 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 1 0.57987778 0.57987778 8.60 0.0037 STORY*RECALP*FEEDBAC 1 0.49234780 0.49234780 7.30 0.0075 SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.04553867 0.04553867 0.68 0.4122 STORY*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.30571700 0.30571700 4.53 0.0344 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.03773084 0.03773084 0.56 0.4553 STOR*RECAL*SNS*FEEDB 1 0.01213782 0.01213782 0.18 0.6718 VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.43614060 0.43614060 6.47 0.0117 STORY*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.00784728 0.00784728 0.12 0.7334 RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.02041709 0.02041709 0.30 0.5828 STORY*RECAL*VI*FEEDB 1 0.18799873 0.18799873 2.79 0.0965 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.30110069 0.30110069 4.46 0.0358 STORY*SNS*VI*FEEDBAC 1 0.01446986 0.01446986 0.21 0.6437 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 1 0.00021227 0.00021227 0.00 0.9553 STO*RECA*SNS*VI*FEED 1 0.22858735 0.22858735 3.39 0.0670 MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.07464866 0.07464866 1.11 0.2940 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.02138036 0.02138036 0.32 0.5740 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.27630463 0.27630463 4.10 0.0442 STOR*RECAL*MEM*FEEDB 1 0.06745762 0.06745762 1.00 0.3184 4 3 7 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.05161484 0.05161484 0.77 0.3827 STORY*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 1 0.20144165 0.20144165 2.99 0.0854 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 1 0.03854906 0.03854906 0.57 0.4505 STO*REC*SNS*MEM*FEED 1 0.00438193 0.00438193 0.06 0.7991 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.23407886 0.23407886 3.47 0.0638 ST0RY*VI*MEM*FEEDBAC 1 0.11521163 0.11521163 1.71 0.1926 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 1 0.04340793 0.04340793 0.64 0.4233 ST0*RECA*VI*MEM* FEED 1 0.04927513 0.04927513 0.73 0.3937 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.07495338 0.07495338 1.11 0.2930 ST0R*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 1 0.00949105 0.00949105 0.14 0.7079 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 1 0.01031473 0.01031473 0.15 0.6961 ST*RE*SNS*VI*MEM*FEE 1 0.13041289 0.13041289 1.93 0.1658 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... YIELD.... STORY N Mean SD A 203 0.11822660 0.32367446 B 200 0.05000000 0.21849186 Level of -YIELD- RECALPOS Mean SD 1 201 0 0.24656849 2 202 0 10396040 0.30596745 Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY RECALPOS N Mean SD A 1 110 0.07272727 0.26087682 A 2 93 0.17204301 0.37946346 B 1 91 0.05494505 0.22913545 B 2 109 0.04587156 0.21017282 Level of -YIELD- SNS N Mean SD N 194 0, 0.25943033 S 209 0, 0.29487713 Level of Level of -YIELD- STORYSNS N Mean SD A N 100 0.08000000 0.27265992 A S 103 0.15533981 0.36399961 B N 94 0.06382979 0.24576020 B S 106 0.03773585 0.19146196 Level of Level of -YIELD- RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD 1 N 95 0.05263158 0.22448149 1 S 106 0.07547170 0.26540582 2 N 99 0.09090909 0.28894280 2 S 103 0.11650485 0.32239821 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD A 1 N 57 0.03508772 0.18563715 A 1 S 53 0.11320755 0.31987842 A 2 N 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 A 2 S 50 0.20000000 0.40406102 B 1 N 38 0.07894737 0.27327631 B 1 S 53 0.03773585 0.19238025 B 2 N 56 0.05357143 0.22720778 B 2 S 53 0.03773585 0.19238025 4 3 8 Level of •...... YIELD..... VI N Mean SD B 223 0.04035874 0.19724192 N 180 0..13888889 0.34679521 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY VI N Mean SD A B 113 0.06194690 0.24213285 A N 90 0.18888889 0.39361318 B B 110 0.01818182 0.13422002 B N 90 0.08888889 0.28617762 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-' RECALPOS VI N Mean SD 1 B 106 0.04716981 0.21300908 1 N 95 0.08421053 0.27917652 2 B 117 0.03418803 0.18249345 2 N 85 0.20000000 0.40237391 Level of Level of Level. of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS VI N Mean SD A 1 B 57 0.05263158 0.22528178 A 1 N 53 0.09433962 0.29509783 A 2 B 56 0.07142857 0.25987010 A 2 N 37 0.32432432 0.47457900 B 1 B 49 0.04081633 0.19991495 B 1 N 42 0.07142857 0.26066118 B 2 B 61 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N 48 0.10416667 0.30870928 Level of Level of ...... YIELD-- SNS VI N Mean SD N B 102 0.01960784 0.13933308 N N 92 0.13043478 0.33862655 S B 121 0.05785124 0.23443267 S N 88 0.14772727 0.35686285 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY SNS VI N Mean SD ANB 51 0.01960784 0.14002801 ANN 49 0.14285714 0.35355339 A SB 62 0.09677419 0.29806355 A SN 41 0.24390244 0.43476935 B NB 51 0.01960784 0.14002801 B N N 43 0.11627907 0.32435301 BSB 59 0.01694915 0.13018891 BSN 47 0.06382979 0.24709225 Level of Level of Level of YIELD RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD 1 NB 47 0.02127660 0.14586499 1 N N 48 0.08333333 0.27931019 1 S B 59 0.06779661 0.25355451 1 S N 47 0.08510638 0.28205667 2 N B 55 0.01818182 0.13483997 2 N N 44 0.18181818 0.39015365 2 SB 62 0.04838710 0.21633454 2 S N 41 0.21951220 0.41905818 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORYRECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD A 1 N B 26 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N N 31 0.06451613 0.24973104 A 1 S B 31 0.09677419 0.30053715 A 1 S N 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 439 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD A 2 NB 25 0.04000000 0.20000000 A 2 NN 18 0.277/7778 0.46088860 A 2 S B 31 0.09677419 0.30053715 A 2 S N 19 0.36842105 0.49559463 B 1 NB 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 B 1 NN 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 B 1 S B 28 0.03571429 0.18898224 B 1 S N 25 0.04000000 0.20000000 B 2 NB 30 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N N 26 0.11538462 0.32581259 B 2 SB 31 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S N 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 Level of ---YIELD MEMN Mean SD hig 246 0.05691057 0.23214397 low 157 0.12738854 0.33447461 Level of Level of ■YIELD...... STORY MEM N Mean SD A hig 122 0.08196721 0.27544596 A low 81 0.17283951 0.38046430 B hig 124 0.03225806 0.17740147 B low 76 0.07894737 0.27144836 Level of Level of ...... YIELD RECALPOS MEM N Mean SD 1 hig 122 0.04098361 0.19906978 1 low 79 0.10126582 0.30360808 2 hig 124 0.07258065 0.26049943 2 low 78 0.15384615 0.36313652 Level of Level. of Level of YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS MEM N Mean SD A 1 hig 64 0.04687500 0.21304203 A 1 low 46 0.10869565 0.31469639 A 2 hig 58 0.12068966 0.32861144 A 2 low 35 0.25714286 0.44343957 B 1 hig 58 0.03448276 0.18405922 B 1 low 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 B 2 hig 66 0.03030303 0.17273341 B 2 low 43 0.06976744 0.25776963 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS MEM N Mean SD N hig 120 0.04166667 0.20066416 N low 74 0.12162162 0.32907936 S hig 126 0.07142857 0.25856748 S low 83 0.13253012 0.34112741 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY SNS MEMN Mean SD A N hig 61 0.04918033 0.21803895 A N low 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 AS hig 61 0.11475410 0.32137002 AS low 42 0.21428571 0.41529973 B N hig 59 0.03389831 0.18252082 B N low 35 0.11428571 0.32280285 BS hig 65 0.03076923 0.17403581 BS low 41 0.04878049 0.21808479 Level of Level of Level YIELD RECALPOS SNS HEM N Mean SD 1 N hig 60 0.01666667 0.12909944 1 N low 35 0.11428571 0.32280285 1 S hig 62 0.06451613 0.24767560 1 S low 44 0.09090909 0.29080336 2 N hig 60 0.06666667 0.25154887 2 N low 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 2 S hig 64 0.07812500 0.27048971 2 S low 39 0.17948718 0.38877641 of Level of Level of I of --YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS SNS HEM N Mean SD A 1 N hig 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N low 24 0.08333333 0.28232985 A 1 S hig 31 0.09677419 0.30053715 A 1 S low 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 A 2 N hig 28 0.10714286 0.31497039 A 2 N low 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 A 2 S hig 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 A 2 S low 20 0.30000000 0.47016235 B 1 N hig 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 B 1 N low 11 0.18181818 0.40451992 B 1 S hig 31 0.03225806 0.17960530 B 1 S low 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 B 2 N hig 32 0.03125000 0.17677670 B 2 N low 24 0.08333333 0.28232985 B 2 S hig 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 B 2 S low 19 0.05263158 0.22941573 Level of Level of --YIELD...... VI MEM N Mean SD B hig 139 0.02877698 0.16778377 B low 84 0.05952381 0.23802351 N hig 107 0.09345794 0.29244288 N low 73 0.20547945 0.40684778 Level of Level of Level of STORY VI MEM N Mean SD AB hig 68 0.04411765 0.20688331 A B low 45 0.08888889 0.28779903 AN hig 54 0.12962963 0.33904952 A N low 36 0.27777778 0.45425676 B B hig 71 0.01408451 0.11867817 BB low 39 0.02564103 0.16012815 BN hig 53 0.05660377 0.23329532 BN low 37 0.13513514 0.34658350 Level of Level of Level of RECALPOS VI MEM N Mean SD 1 B hig 66 0.04545455 0.20989508 1 B low 40 0.05000000 0.22072143 1 N hig 56 0.03571429 0.18725634 1 N low 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 2 B hig 73 0.01369863 0.11704115 2 B low 44 0.06818182 0.25497171 2 N hig 51 0.15686275 0.36729002 2 N low 34 0.26470588 0.44781108 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... 1riELD...... STORYRECALPOS VI HEM N Mean SD A 1 B hig 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 A 1 B low 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 A 1 N hig 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 A 1 N low 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 A 2 B hig 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 A 2 B low 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 441 Level of Level of Level of Level of YIELD STORY RECALPOS VI HEM N Mean SD A 2 N hig 24 0.25000000 0.44232587 A 2 N low 13 0.46153846 0.51887452 B 1 B hig 32 0.03125000 0.17677670 B 1 B low 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 B 1 N hig 26 0.03846154 0.19611614 B 1 N low 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 2 B hig 39 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B low 22 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 B 2 N low 21 0.14285714 0.35856858 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD--- SNS VI MEM N Mean SD N B hig 64 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B low 38 0.05263158 0.22629429 N N hig 56 0.08928571 0.28773635 N N low 36 0.19444444 0.40138649. S B hig 75 0.05333333 0.22621046 S B low 46 0.06521739 0.24963742 S N hig 51 0.09803922 0.30032662 S N low 37 0.21621622 0.41734180 Level of Level of Level of Level of --YIELD...... STORY SNS VI MEM N Mean SD ANB hig 31 0.00000000 0.00000000 ANB low 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 A NN hig 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 ANN low 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 A S B hig 37 0.08108108 0.27672473 ASB low 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 ASN hig 24 0.16666667 0.38069349 ASN low 17 0.35294118 0.49259218 BNB hig 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 BNB low 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 B NN hig 26 0.07692308 0.27174649 B NN low 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 BSB hig 38 0.02631579 0.16222142 BSB low 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 BSN hig 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 B SN low 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 Level of Level of Level of Level RECALPOS SNS VI MEM N Mean SD 1 N B hig 31 0.00000000 0.00000000 1 N B low 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 1 N N hig 29 0.03448276 0.18569534 1 NN low 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 1 S B hig 35 0.08571429 0.28402864 1 S B low 24 0.04166667 0.20412415 1 S N hig 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 1 S N low 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 2 N B hig 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N B low 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 2 NN hig 27 0.14814815 0.36201399 2 NN low 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 2 S B hig 40 0.02500000 0.15811388 2 s B low 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 2 s N hig 24 0.16666667 0.38069349 2 s N low 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 Level of Level of Level of Level of & 1 A# ------v i cl n------STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM N Mean SD A 1 N B hig 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 NN hig 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 NN low 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level -YIELD- STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM Hean SD A 1 S B hig 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A 1 S B low 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 A 1 S N hig 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 A 1 S N low 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 A 2 N B hig 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 10 0.10000000 0.31622777 A 2 N N hig 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 A 2 N N I OH 5 0.40000000 0.54772256 A 2 S B hig 19 0.05263158 0.22941573 A 2 S B low 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 A 2 S N hig 11 0.27272727 0.46709937 A 2 S N low 8 0.50000000 0.53452248 B 1 N B hig 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 6 0.16666667 0.40824829 B 1 N N hig 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 B 1 N N low 5 0.20000000 0.44721360 B 1 S B hig 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 B 1 S B low 11 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 B 2 N B hig 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 2 N N low 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 B 2 S B hig 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 B 2 S N low 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 Level of -YIELD- FEEDBACK Mean SD 194 0.04639175 0.21087622 209 0.11961722 0.32529254 Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY FEEDBACKN Mean SD 99 0.08080808 0.27392713 104 0.15384615 0.36254844 95 0.01052632 0.10259784 105 0.08571429 0.28128434 Level of Level of -YIELD- RECALPOS FEEDBACK N Mean SD 94 0.06382979 0.24576020 107 0.06542056 0.24843009 100 0.03000000 0.17144661 102 0.17647059 0.38310262 Level of Level of Level of -YIELD- STORY RECALPOS FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 2 53 0.09433962 0.29509783 A 1 3 57 0.05263158 0.22528178 A 2 2 46 0.06521739 0.24963742 A 2 3 47 0.27659574 0.45215079 B 1 2 41 0.02439024 0.15617376 B 1 3 50 0.08000000 0.27404752 B 2 2 54 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 3 55 0.09090909 0.29012943 Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 2 93 0.03225806 0.17764234 N 3 101 0.10891089 0.31308114 S 2 101 0.05940594 0.23756187 s 3 108 0.12962963 0.33746146 4 4 3 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD AN 2 50 0.04000000 0.19794866 A N 3 50 0.12000000 0.32826072 A S 2 49 0.12244898 0.33120066 A S 3 54 0.18518519 0.39209520 B N 2 43 0.02325581 0.15249857 B N 3 51 0.09803922 0.30032662 BS 2 52 0.00000000 0.00000000 BS 3 54 0.07407407 0.26435053 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N 2 43 0.04651163 0.21308263 1 N 3 52 0.05769231 0.23543548 1 S 2 51 0.07843137 0.27152438 1 S 3 55 0.07272727 0.26208180 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACKN Mean SD 2 N 2 50 0.02000000 0.14142136 2 N 3 49 0.16326531 0.37343779 2 S 2 50 0.04000000 0.19794866 2 S 3 53 0.18867925 0.39499775 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 N 2 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 A 1 N 3 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 A 1 S 2 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 A 1 s 3 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 A 2 N 2 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 A 2 N 3 20 0.25000000 0.44426166 A 2 S 2 23 0.08695652 0.28810407 A 2 S 3 27 0.29629630 0.46532163 B 1 N 2 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B 1 N 3 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 B 1 S 2 25 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S 3 28 0.07142857 0.26226526 B 2 N 2 27 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N 3 29 0.10344828 0.30993405 B 2 S 2 27 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S 3 26 0.07692308 0.27174649 Level of Level of ...... YIELD..... VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 2 113 0.02654867 0.16147628 B 3 110 0.05454545 0.22813016 N 2 81 0.07407407 0.26352314 N 3 99 0..19191919 0.39581401 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY VI FEEDBACKN Mean SD A B 2 56 0.03571429 0.18725634 A B 3 57 0.08771930 0.28540083 A N 2 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 AN 3 47 0.23404255 0.42797633 B B 2 57 0.01754386 0.13245324 B B 3 53 0.01886792 0.13736056 B N 2 38 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N 3 52 0.15384615 0.36432131 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS VI FEEDBACKN Mean SD 1 B 2 51 0.05882353 0.23763541 1 B 3 55 0.03636364 0.18891860 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N 2 A3 0.06976744 0.25776963 1 N 3 52 0.09615385 0.29767830 2 B 2 62 0.00000000 0 .00000000 2 B 3 55 0.07272727 0 .26208180 2 N 2 38 0.07894737 0.27327631 2 N 3 47 0.29787234 0.46226727 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORYRECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 B 2 28 0.07142857 0.26226526 A 1 B 3 29 0.03448276 0.18569534 A 1 N 2 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 A 1 N 3 28 0.07142857 0.26226526 A 2 B 2 28 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 B 3 28 0.14285714 0.35634832 A 2 N 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A 2 N 3 19 0.47368421 0.51298918 B 1 B 2 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 B 1 B 3 26 0.03846154 0.19611614 B 1 N 2 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N 3 24 0.12500000 0.33783196 B 2 B 2 34 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B 3 27 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N 2 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N 3 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS VI FEEDBACKN Mean SD N B 2 51 0.01960784 0 14002801 N B 3 51 0.01960784 0 14002801 N N 2 42 0.04761905 0.21554027 N N 3 50 0.20000000 0.40406102 SB 2 62 0.03225806 0. 17812704 S B 3 59 0.08474576 0.28089362 S N 2 39 0. 10256410 0.30735474 S N 3 49 0.18367347 0.39123040 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A NB 2 25 0.00000000 0.00000000 AN B 3 26 0.03846154 0.19611614 A NN 2 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 A NN 3 24 0.20833333 0.41485112 A SB 2 31 0.06451613 0.24973104 A SB 3 31 0.12903226 0.34077710 AS N 2 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 AS N 3 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 B N B 2 26 0.03846154 0.19611614 B N B 3 25 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N N 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 B NN 3 26 0.19230769 0.40191848 BS B 2 31 0.00000000 0.00000000 BS B 3 28 0.03571429 0.18898224 BS N 2 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 BS N 3 26 0.11538462 0.32581259 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACKN Mean SD NB 2 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 NB 3 26 0.00000000 0.00000000 N N 2 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 N N 3 26 0.11538462 0.32581259 SB 2 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 S B 3 29 0.06896552 0.25788071 S N 2 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 S N 3 26 0.07692308 0.27174649 Level of Level of Level of Level of -..... YIELD----- RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 N B 2 30 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N B 3 25 0.04000000 0.20000000 2 N N 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 2 N N 3 24 0.29166667 0.46430562 2 S B 2 32 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 S B 3 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 2 S N 2 18 0. 11111111 0.32338083 2 S N 3 23 0.30434783 0.47047197 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 N B 2 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 NB 3 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N N 2 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 A 1 N N 3 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 A 1 SB 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 A 1 S B 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 A 1 S N 2 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 A 1 S N 3 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 A 2 N B 2 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 NB 3 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 A 2 NN 2 10 0.10000000 0.31622777 A 2 N N 3 8 0.50000000 0.53452248 A 2 S B 2 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 S B 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 A 2 SN 2 8 0.25000000 0.46291005 A 2 S N 3 11 0.45454545 0.52223297 B 1 N B 2 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 B 1 N B 3 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N N 2 7 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N N 3 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 B 1 S B 2 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S B 3 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 1 S N 2 11 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S N 3 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 2 N B 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N B 3 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N N 2 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N N 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 B 2 S B 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S B 3 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S N 2 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S N 3 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 Level of Level of --YIELD...... MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD hig 2 117 0 02564103 0.15874174 hig 3 129 0.08527132 0.28037385 low 2 77 0.07792208 0.26980664 low 3 80 0 17500000 0.38236440 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A hig 2 60 0.05000000 0.21978418 A hig 3 62 0.11290323 0.31905797 A low 2 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 A low 3 42 0.21428571 0.41529973 B hig 2 57 0.00000000 0.00000000 B hig 3 67 0.05970149 0.23872115 B low 2 38 0.02631579 0.16222142 B low 3 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 hig 2 60 0.03333333 0.18102033 1 hig 3 62 0.04838710 0.21633454 446 Level of Level of Level of YIELD RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 low 2 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 1 low 3 45 0.08888889 0.28779903 2 hig 2 57 0.01754386 0.13245324 2 hig 3 67 0.11940299 0.32670940 2 low 2 43 0.04651163 0.21308263 2 low 3 35 0.28571429 0.45834925 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD STORYRECALPOSMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 hig 2 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 A 1 hig 3 32 0.03125000 0.17677670 A 1 low 2 21 0.14285714 0.35856858 A 1 low 3 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 A 2 hig 2 28 0.03571429 0.18898224 A 2 hig 3 30 0.20000000 0.40683810 A 2 low 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 A 2 low 3 17 0.41176471 0.50729966 B 1 hig 2 28 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 hig 3 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 B 1 low 2 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 B 1 low 3 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 B 2 hig 2 29 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 hig 3 37 0.05405405 0.22924344 B 2 low 2 25 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 low 3 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNSMEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 2 55 0 .00000000 0.00000000 N hig 3 65 0 .07692308 0.26854308 N low 2 38 0 .07894737 0.27327631 N low 3 36 0 .16666667 0.37796447 S hig 2 62 0.04838710 0.21633454 S hig 3 64 0 .09375000 0.29378483 S low 2 39 0 .07692308 0.26995276 S low 3 44 0 .18181818 0.39015365 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD STORY SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N hig 2 30 0.00000000 0.00000000 AN hig 3 31 0.09677419 0.30053715 A N low 2 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 A N low 3 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 A S hig 2 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 AS hig 3 31 0.12903226 0.34077710 A S low 2 19 G.15789474 0.37463432 AS low 3 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 BN hig 2 25 0.00000000 0.00000000 BN hig 3 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 BN low 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 BN low 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 BS hig 2 32 0.00000000 0.00000000 BS hig 3 33 0.06060606 0.24230584 B S low 2 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S low 3 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD RECALPOS SNS MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD N hig 2 28 0.00000000 0.00000000 N hig 3 32 0.03125000 0.17677670 N low 2 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 N low 3 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 S hig 2 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 S hig 3 30 0.06666667 0.25370813 S low 2 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 S low 3 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 4 4 7 Level of Level of Level of Level of YIELD RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 N hig 2 27 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N hig 3 33 0 12121212 0.33143398 2 N low 2 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 2 N low 3 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 2 S hig 2 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 2 S hig 3 34 0. 11764706 0.32703497 2 S low 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 2 S low 3 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORYRECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 N hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N hig 3 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N low 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 A 1 N low 3 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 A 1 S hig 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 A 1 S hig 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 A 1 S low 2 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 A 1 S low 3 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 A 2 N hig 2 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 N hig 3 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 A 2 N low 2 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 A 2 N low 3 6 0.33333333 0.51639778 A 2 S hig 2 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 A 2 S hig 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 A 2 S low 2 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 A 2 S low 3 11 0.45454545 0.52223297 B 1 N hig 2 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N hig 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 B 1 N low 2 4 0.25000000 0.50000000 B 1 N low 3 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 B 1 S hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S hig 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 B 1 S low 2 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S low 3 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 B 2 N hig 2 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 3 19 0.05263158 0.22941573 B 2 N low 2 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N low 3 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 B 2 S hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S hig 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 B 2 S low 2 11 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 s low 3 8 0.12500000 0.35355339 Level of Level of Level of YIELD VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 2 68 0.01470588 0.12126781 B hig 3 71 0.04225352 0.20259881 B low 2 45 0.04444444 0.20840908 B low 3 39 0.07692308 0.26995276 N hig 2 49 0.04081633 0.19991495 N hig 3 58 0.13793103 0.34783924 N low 2 32 0.12500000 0.33601075 N low 3 41 0.26829268 0.44857498 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY VI MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD A B hig 2 34 0.02941176 0.17149859 AB hig 3 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 AB low 2 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 AB low 3 23 0.13043478 0.34435022 A N hig 2 26 0.07692308 0.27174649 AN hig 3 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 A N low 2 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 AN low 3 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 B B hig 2 34 0.00000000 0.00000000 BB hig 3 37 0.02702703 0.16439899 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- STORY VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B B low 2 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 BB low 3 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 2 23 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 3 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 B N low 2 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N low 3 22 0.22727273 0.42893203 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 B hig 2 33 0.03030303 0.17407766 1 B hig 3 33 0.06060606 0.24230584 1 B low 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 1 B low 3 22 0.00000000 0.00000000 1 N hig 2 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 1 N hig 3 29 0.03448276 0.18569534 1 N low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 1 N low 3 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 2 B hig 2 35 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 B hig 3 38 0.02631579 0.16222142 2 B low 2 27 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 B low 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 2 N hig 2 22 0.04545455 0.21320072 2 N hig 3 29 0.24137931 0.43549417 2 N low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 2 N low 3 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... STORY RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 B hig 2 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A 1 B hig 3 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A 1 B low 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 A 1 B low 3 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N hig 2 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 A 1 N hig 3 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N low 2 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 A 1 N low 3 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 A 2 B hig 2 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 B hig 3 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A 2 B low 2 11 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 2 B low 3 11 0.27272727 0.46709937 A 2 N hig 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 A 2 N hig 3 13 0.38461538 0.50636968 A 2 N low 2 7 0.28571429 0.48795004 A 2 N low 3 6 0.66666667 0.51639778 B 1 B hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 B hig 3 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B 1 B low 2 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 B 1 B low 3 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N hig 2 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N hig 3 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 1 N low 2 6 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N low 3 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 B 2 B hig 2 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B hig 3 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B low 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B low 3 6 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 2 11 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 3 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 2 N low 2 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N low 3 12 0.25000000 0.45226702 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD- SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 2 31 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B hig 3 33 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B low 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 N B low 3 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... SNS VI MEH FEEDBACK N Mean SD N N hig 2 24 0.00000000 0.00000000 N N hig 3 32 0.15625000 0.36890203 N N low 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 N N low 3 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 S B hig 2 37 0.02702703 0.16439899 S B hig 3 38 0.07894737 0.27327631 S B low 2 25 0.04000000 0.20000000 S B low 3 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 S N hig 2 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 S N hig 3 26 0.11538462 0.32581259 S N low 2 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 S N low 3 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of -YIELD...... STORY SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N B hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N B hig 3 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N B low 2 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N B low 3 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 A N N hig 2 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 AN N hig 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 A N N low 2 11 0.18181818 0.40451992 A N N low 3 8 0.25000000 0.46291005 A S B hig 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A S B hig 3 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 A S B low 2 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 A S B low 3 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 A S N hig 2 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 A S N hig 3 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 A S N low 2 6 0.33333333 0.51639778 A S N low 3 11 0.36363636 0.50452498 B N B hig 2 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 BN B hig 3 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 BN B low 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 BN B low 3 7 0.00000000 0.00000000 BN N hig 2 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N N hig 3 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B N N low 2 7 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N N low 3 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 B S B hig 2 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S B hig 3 19 0.05263158 0.22941573 B SB low 2 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S B low 3 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S N hig 2 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S N hig 3 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B S N low 2 8 0.00000000 0.00000000 B S N low 3 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 2 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B hig 3 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B low 2 6 0.16666667 0.40824829 N B low 3 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 N N hig 2 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 NN hig 3 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 NN low 2 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 N N low 3 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 S B hig 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 S B hig 3 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 S B low 2 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 S B low 3 12 0.00000000 0.00000000 S N hig 2 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 S N hig 3 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 S N low 2 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 SN low 3 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 450 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... YIELD...... RECALPOS SNS VI HEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD 2 N B hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N B hig 3 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N B low 2 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N B low 3 8 0.12500000 0.35355339 2 N N hig 2 11 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N N hig 3 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 2 N N low 2 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 2 N N low 3 8 0.37500000 0.51754917 2 S B hig 2 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 S B hig 3 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 2 S B low 2 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 S B low 3 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 2 S N hig 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 2 S N hig 3 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 2 S N low 2 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 2 S N low 3 10 0.40000000 0.51639778 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --- YIELD— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean A 1 N B hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 1 N B hig 3 8 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 2 4 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 3 6 0.00000000 A 1 N N hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 1 N N hig 3 9 0.00000000 A 1 N N low 2 7 0.14285714 A 1 N N low 3 7 0.14285714 A 1 S B hig 2 9 0.11111111 A 1 S B hig 3 9 0.11111111 A 1 S B low 2 7 0.14285714 A 1 S B low 3 6 0.00000000 A 1 S N hig 2 7 0.14285714 A 1 S N hig 3 6 0.00000000 A 1 S N low 2 3 0.33333333 A 1 S N low 3 6 0.16666667 A 2 NB hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 2 N B hig 3 7 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 2 5 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 3 5 0.20000000 A 2 N N hig 2 6 0.00000000 A 2 N N hig 3 7 0.42857143 A 2 N N low 2 4 0.25000000 A 2 N N low 3 1 1.00000000 A 2 S B hig 2 9 0.00000000 A 2 S B hig 3 10 0.10000000 A 2 S B low 2 6 0.00000000 A 2 S B low 3 6 0.33333333 A 2 S N hig 2 5 0.20000000 A 2 S N hig 3 6 0.33333333 A 2 S N low 2 3 0.33333333 A 2 S N low 3 5 0.60000000 B 1 N B hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 N B hig 3 8 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 2 2 0.50000000 B 1 N B low 3 4 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 2 5 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 3 7 0.14285714 B 1 N N low 2 2 0.00000000 B 1 N N low 3 3 0.33333333 B 1 S B hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 S B hig 3 8 0.12500000 B 1 S B low 2 5 0.00000000 B 1 S B low 3 6 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 3 7 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 3 7 0.14285714 B 2 N B hig 2 8 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 3 10 0.00000000 451 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of — YIELD— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean B 2 N B low 2 9 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 3 3 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 2 5 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 3 9 0.11111111 B 2 N N low 2 5 0.00000000 B 2 N N low 3 7 0.28571429 B 2 S B hig 2 10 0.00000000 B 2 SB hig 3 11 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 2 7 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 3 3 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 2 6 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 3 7 0.14285714 B 2 S N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 2 S N low 3 5 0.20000000 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --- YIELD— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N SD A 1 NB hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 1 N B hig 3 8 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 2 4 0.00000000 A 1 N B low 3 6 0.00000000 A 1 NN hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 1 NN hig 3 9 0.00000000 A 1 N N low 2 7 0.37796447 A 1 N N low 3 7 0.37796447 A 1 SB hig 2 9 0.33333333 A 1 SB hig 3 9 0.33333333 A 1 S B low 2 7 0.37796447 A 1 S B low 3 6 0.00000000 A 1 SN hig 2 7 0.37796447 A 1 SN hig 3 6 0.00000000 A 1 S N low 2 3 0.57735027 A 1 S N low 3 6 0.40824829 A 2 N B hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 2 N B hig 3 7 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 2 5 0.00000000 A 2 N B low 3 5 0.44721360 A 2 NN hig 2 6 0.00000000 A 2 N N hig 3 7 0.53452248 A 2 N N low 2 4 0.50000000 A 2 N N low 3 1 A 2 SB hig 2 9 0.00000000 A 2 SB hig 3 10 0.31622777 A 2 S B low 2 6 0.00000000 A 2 S B low 3 6 0.51639778 A 2 S N hig 2 5 0.44721360 A 2 SN hig 3 6 0.51639778 A 2 S N low 2 3 0.57735027 A 2 S N low 3 5 0.54772256 B 1 N B hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 N B hig 3 8 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 2 2 0.70710678 B 1 N B low 3 4 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 2 5 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 3 7 0.37796447 B 1 N N low 2 2 0.00000000 B 1 NN low 3 3 0.57735027 B 1 S B hig 2 9 0.00000000 B 1 SB hig 3 8 0.35355339 B 1 S B low 2 5 0.00000000 B 1 S B low 3 6 0.00000000 B 1 SN hig 2 7 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 3 7 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 3 7 0.37796447 B 2 NB hig 2 8 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 3 10 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 2 9 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 3 3 0.00000000 452 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --- YIELD— STORYRECALPOS SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK N SD B 2 N N hig 2 5 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 3 9 0.33333333 B 2 N N low 2 5 0.00000000 B 2 N N low 3 7 0.48795004 B 2 S B hig 2 10 0.00000000 B 2 S B hig 3 11 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 2 7 0.00000000 B 2 S B low 3 3 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 2 6 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 3 7 0.37796447 B 2 S N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 2 S N low 3 5 0.44721360 453 Analysis 30. The yielding analysis controlling for failure to encode and source memory, Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: YIELD Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 190 17.12839199 0.09014943 1.36 0.0138 Error 212 14.00312166 0.06605246 Corrected Total 402 31.13151365 R-Square C.V. Root MSE YIELD Mean 0.550195 304.6286 0.2570067 0.0843672 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STOR*RECA*SNS*VI) 126 9.68065959 0.07683063 1.16 0.1665 FEED ID 1 0.36299695 0.36299695 5.50 0.0200 STORY 1 0.53086433 0.53086433 8.04 0.0050 RECALPOS 1 0.28696164 0.28696164 4.34 0.0383 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.65887688 0.65887688 9.98 0.0018 SNS 1 0.00018483 0.00018483 0.00 0.9579 STORY*SNS 1 0.24162882 0.24162882 3.66 0.0571 RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.04843503 0.04843503 0.73 0.3928 STORY*RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.23454696 0.23454696 3.55 0.0609 VI 1 1.83597933 1.83597933 27.80 0.0001 STORY*VI 1 0.29452395 0.29452395 4.46 0.0359 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.74257986 0.74257986 11.24 0.0009 STORY*RECALPOS*VI 1 0.10030944 0.10030944 1.52 0.2192 SNS*VI 1 0.01862150 0.01862150 0.28 0.5960 STORY*SNS*VI 1 0.01450238 0.01450238 0.22 0.6399 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.02597025 0.02597025 0.39 0.5313 STORY*RECALPO*SNS*VI 1 0.15175685 0.15175685 2.30 0.1311 MEM 1 1.07333430 1.07333430 16.25 0.0001 ST0RY*MEM 1 0.17133694 0.17133694 2.59 0.1088 RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.06679802 0.06679802 1.01 0.3157 STORY*RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.28921629 0.28921629 4.38 0.0376 SNS*MEM 1 0.06944675 0.06944675 1.05 0.3064 STORY*SNS*MEM 1 0.04755965 0.04755965 0.72 0.3971 RECALPOS*SNS*HEM 1 0.07092295 0.07092295 1.07 0.3013 STORY*RECALP*SNS*MEM 1 0.07647984 0.07647984 1.16 0.2831 VI*MEM 1 0.31462616 0.31462616 4.76 0.0302 STORY*VI*MEM 1 0.21514763 0.21514763 3.26 0.0725 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 1 0.03757688 0.03757688 0.57 0.4515 STORY*RECALPO*VI*MEM 1 0.00131829 0.00131829 0.02 0.8878 SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.00038302 0.00038302 0.01 0.9394 STORY*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.05773282 0.05773282 0.87 0.3509 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.10013869 0.10013869 1.52 0.2196 STOR*RECA*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.00376870 0.00376870 0.06 0.8114 FEEDBACK 1 0.03954248 0.03954248 0.60 0.4400 STORY*FEEDBACK 1 0.12043268 0.12043268 1.82 0.1784 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 1 0.63375073 0.63375073 9.59 0.0022 STORY*RECALP*FEEDBAC 1 0.48739590 0.48739590 7.38 0.0071 SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.03516576 0.03516576 0.53 0.4664 STORY*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.26563727 0.26563727 4.02 0.0462 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 1 0.06903056 0.06903056 1.05 0.3078 STOR*RECAL*SNS*FEEDB 1 0.00074774 0.00074774 0.01 0.9154 VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.50599894 0.50599894 7.66 0.0061 STORY*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.00850654 0.00850654 0.13 0.7201 454 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.03741153 0.03741153 0.57 0.4525 STORY*RECAL*VI*FEEDB 1 0.21097871 0.21097871 3.19 0.0753 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 1 0.27926635 0.27926635 4.23 0.0410 STORY*SNS*VI*FEEDBAC 1 0.01044525 0.01044525 0.16 0.6913 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 1 0.00073395 0.00073395 0.01 0.9161 STO*RECA*SNS*VI*FEED 1 0.23389379 0.23389379 3.54 0.0612 MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.05287902 0.05287902 0.80 0.3719 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.01889035 0.01889035 0.29 0.5934 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.33746353 0.33746353 5.11 0.0248 STOR*RECAL*MEM*FEEDB 1 0.11630222 0.11630222 1.76 0.1860 SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.04063481 0.04063481 0.62 0.4337 STORY*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 1 0.17834415 0.17834415 2.70 0.1018 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 1 0.07134486 0.07134486 1.08 0.2999 STO*REC*SNS*MEM*FEED 1 0.00069723 0.00069723 0.01 0.9183 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 1 0.26431726 0.26431726 4.00 0.0467 STORY*VI*MEM*FEEDBAC 1 0.06873731 0.06873731 1.04 0.3088 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 1 0.03455063 0.03455063 0.52 0.4703 STO*RECA*VI*MEM*FEED 1 0.03880832 0.03880832 0.59 0.4442 SNS*VI*MEM* FEEDBACK 1 0.11585419 0.11585419 1.75 0.1868 STOR*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 1 0.00881894 0.00881894 0.13 0.7152 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 1 0.01631198 0.01631198 0.25 0.6197 ST*RE*SNS*VI*MEM*FEE 1 0.15119374 0.15119374 2.29 0.1318 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY YIELD LSMEAN 0.18217358 0.09226671 RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN 0.10321612 0.17122417 STORY RECALPOS YIELD LSMEAN 0.09797839 0.26636876 0.10845384 0.07607959 SNS YIELD LSMEAN 0.13812851 0.13631178 STORY SNS YIELD LSMEAN 0.15278762 0.21155953 0.12346939 0.06106403 RECALPOS SNS YIELD LSMEAN 0.11778255 0.08864968 0.15847446 0.18397388 455 STORY RECALPOS SNS YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N 0.05223760 A 1 S 0.14371918 A 2 N 0.25333763 A 2 S 0.27939989 B 1 N 0.18332750 B 1 S 0.03358018 B 2 N 0.06361129 B 2 S 0.08854788 VI YIELD LSMEAN B 0.05362363 N 0.22081666 STORY VI YIELD LSMEAN A B 0.06509682 A N 0.29925033 B B 0.04215045 B N 0.14238298 RECALPOS VI YIELD LSMEAN 0.07279388 0.13363835 0.03445338 0.30799496 STORY RECALPOS VI YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B 0.05365207 A 1 N 0.14230471 A 2 B 0.07654157 A 2 N 0.45619595 B 1 B 0.09193570 B 1 N 0.12497198 B 2 B -0.00763480 B 2 N 0.15979398 SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN N B 0.04602082 N N 0.23023619 S B 0.06122645 S N 0.21139712 STORY SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN ANB 0.01978515 ANN 0.28579008 A S B 0.11040848 AS N 0.31271058 B N B 0.07225648 B N N 0.17468231 BS B 0.01204442 BSN 0.11008365 RECALPOS SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN 1 N B 0.08891157 1 N N 0.14665353 1 S B 0.05667620 RECALPOS SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN 1 S N 0.12062316 2 N B 0.00313007 2 N N 0.31381886 2 S B 0.06577670 2 S N 0.30217107 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N B 0.02610553 A 1 N N 0.07836967 A 1 S B 0.08119860 A 1 S N 0.20623976 A 2 N B 0.01346478 A 2 N N 0.49321049 A 2 S B 0.13961836 A 2 S N 0.41918141 B 1 N B 0.15171760 B 1 N N 0.21493739 B 1 S B 0.03215380 B 1 S N 0.03500657 B 2 N B -0.00720464 B 2 N N 0.13442722 B 2 S B -0.00806497 B 2 S N 0.18516073 MEM YIELD LSMEAN hig 0.07493176 low 0.19950853 STORY MEM YIELD LSMEAN A hig 0.09487944 A low 0.26946771 B hig 0.05498409 B low 0.12954934 RECALPOS MEM YIELD LSMEAN 1 hig 0.05650051 1 low 0.14993172 2 hig 0.09336302 2 low 0.24908533 STORY RECALPOS MEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 hig 0.05858587 A 1 low 0.13737091 A 2 hig 0.13117300 A 2 low 0.40156452 B 1 hig 0.05441515 B 1 low 0.16249253 B 2 hig 0.05555303 B 2 low 0.09660614 SNS MEM YIELD LSMEAN N hig 0.05999021 N low 0.21626681 S hig 0.08987332 S low 0.18275025 STORY SNS MEM YIELD LSMEAN A N hig 0.06275521 A N low 0.24282003 A S hig 0.12700367 A S low 0.29611540 BN hig 0.05722521 BN low 0.18971358 BS hig 0.05274297 BS low 0.06938510 RECALPOS SNS MEM YIELD LSMEAN 1 N hig 0.03920600 1 N low 0.19635909 1 S hig 0.07379502 1 S low 0.10350435 2 N hig 0.08077441 2 N low 0.23617452 2 S hig 0.10595163 2 S low 0.26199614 STORYRECALPOS SNS MEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N hig 0.01074822 A 1 N low 0.09372698 A 1 S hig 0.10642353 A 1 S low 0.18101483 A 2 N hig 0.11476219 A 2 N low 0.39191307 A 2 S hig 0.14758381 A 2 S low 0.41121596 B 1 N hig 0.06766379 B 1 N low 0.29899121 B 1 S hig 0.04116651 B 1 S low 0.02599386 B 2 N hig 0.04678663 B 2 N low 0.08043596 B 2 S hig 0.06431944 B 2 S low 0.11277633 VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN hig 0.02505661 low 0.08219066 hig 0.12480692 low 0.31682639 STORY VI MEMYIELD LSMEAN A B hig 0.03941419 A B low 0.09077945 A N hig 0.15034469 A N low 0.44815598 B B hig 0.01069903 B B low 0.07360187 B N hig 0.09926915 B N tow 0.18549681 RECALPOS VI MEMYIELD LSMEAN 1 B hig 0.04814655 1 B low 0.09744122 1 N hig 0.06485447 1 N low 0.20242222 2 B hig 0.00196667 2 B low 0.06694010 458 RECALPOS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN 2 N hig 0.18475937 2 N low 0.43123056 STORY RECALPOS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B hig 0.06640099 A 1 B low 0.04090314 A 1 N hig 0.05077075 A 1 N low 0.23383868 A 2 B hig 0.01242738 A 2 B low 0.14065576 A 2 N hig 0.24991862 A 2 N low 0.66247328 B 1 B hig 0.02989211 B 1 B low 0.15397929 B 1 N hig 0.07893818 B 1 N low 0.17100577 B 2 B hig -0.00849405 B 2 B low -0.00677556 B 2 N hig 0.11960011 B 2 N low 0.19998784 SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN N B hig 0.00042732 N B low 0.09161432 N N hig 0.11955309 NN low 0.34091929 S B hig 0.04968590 S B low 0.07276700 s N hig 0.13006074 s N low 0.29273349 TY SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN A N B hig 0.00463490 ANB low 0.03493541 A N N hig 0.12087551 A N N low 0.45070465 A S B hig 0.07419348 A S B low 0.14662349 A S N hig 0.17981386 A SN low 0.44560730 BNB hig -0.00378026 BNB low 0.14829322 B N N hig 0.11823067 B H N low 0.23113394 B S B hig 0.02517832 B S B low -0.00108949 B S N hig 0.08030763 B S N low 0.13985968 RECALPOS SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN N B hig 0.01220501 N B low 0.16561812 N N hig 0.06620699 NN low 0.22710007 SB hig 0.08408809 SB low 0.02926431 SN hig 0.06350195 S N low 0.17774438 NB hig -0.01135037 N B low 0.01761051 NN hig 0.17289919 NN low 0.45473852 RECALPOS SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN 2 S B hig 0 01528371 2 S B low 0 11626969 2 S N hig 0 19661954 2 S N low 0.40772260 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N B hig 0.02731321 A 1 N B low 0.02489785 A 1 N N hig -0.00581678 A 1 N N low 0.16255611 A 1 S B hig 0.10548877 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM YIELD LSMEAN A 1 S B low 0.05690843 A 1 S N hig 0.10735829 A 1 S N low 0.30512124 A 2 N B hig -0.01804341 A 2 N B low 0.04497297 A 2 N N hig 0.24756780 A 2 N N low 0.73885318 A 2 S B hig 0.04289818 A 2 S B low 0.23633855 A 2 S N hig 0.25226944 A 2 S N low 0.58609337 B 1 N B hig -0.00290319 B 1 N B low 0.30633839 B 1 N N hig 0.13823076 B 1 N N low 0.29164402 B 1 S B hig 0.06268741 B 1 S B low 0.00162019 B 1 S N hig 0.01964561 B 1 S N low 0.05036753 B 2 N B hig -0.00465733 B 2 N B low -0.00975195 B 2 N N hig 0.09823058 B 2 N N low 0.17062386 B 2 S B hig -0.01233077 B 2 S B low -0.00379916 B 2 S N hig 0.14096964 B 2 S N low 0.22935183 FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 0.12260418 0.15183611 STORY FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 0.14666305 0.21768411 0.09854531 0.08598812 RECALPOS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 2 0.13627354 1 3 0.07015869 2 2 0.10893482 2 3 0.23351353 STORY RECALPOS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 2 0.15187534 A 1 3 0.04408145 A 2 2 0.14145075 A 2 3 0.39128676 B 1 2 0.12067174 B 1 3 0.09623594 B 2 2 0.07641888 B 2 3 0.07574029 SNS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N 2 0.11229242 N 3 0.16396459 S 2 0.13291593 S 3 0.13970763 STORY SNS FEEDBACKYIELD LSMEAN A N 2 0.07519060 A N 3 0.23038463 A S 2 0.21813549 A S 3 0.20498358 B N 2 0.14939424 B N 3 0.09754455 B S 2 0.04769638 BS 3 0.07443169 RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 N 2 0.15543224 1 N 3 0.08013286 1 S 2 0.11711483 1 S 3 0.06018453 2 N 2 0.06915260 2 N 3 0.24779632 2 S 2 0.14871704 2 S 3 0.21923073 STORY RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N 2 0.07821055 A 1 N 3 0.02626465 A 1 S 2 0.22554012 A 1 S 3 0.06189824 A 2 N 2 0.07217066 A 2 N 3 0.43450461 A 2 S 2 0.21073085 A 2 S 3 0.34806892 B 1 N 2 0.23265394 B 1 N 3 0.13400106 B 1 S 2 0.00868954 B 1 S 3 0.05847083 B 2 N 2 0.06613455 B 2 N 3 0.06108804 B 2 S 2 0.08670322 B 2 S 3 0.09039255 VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN B 2 0.08169892 B 3 0.02554835 N 2 0.16350944 N 3 0.27812387 461 STORY VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A B 2 0.06676404 A B 3 0.06342959 A N 2 0.22656205 A N 3 0.37193862 B B 2 0.09663379 B B 3 -0.01233289 B N 2 0.10045683 B N 3 0.18430913 RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 B 2 0.13693851 1 B 3 0.00864926 1 N 2 0.13560857 1 N 3 0.13166813 2 B 2 0.02645933 2 B 3 0.04244744 2 N 2 0.19141031 2 N 3 0.42457962 STORY RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B 2 0.10563927 A 1 B 3 0.00166486 A 1 N 2 0.19811140 A 1 N 3 0.08649803 A 2 B 2 0.02788882 A 2 B 3 0.12519432 A 2 N 2 0.25501269 A 2 N 3 0.65737921 B 1 B 2 0.16823774 B 1 B 3 0.01563367 B 1 N 2 0.07310574 B 1 N 3 0.17683822 B 2 B 2 0.02502985 B 2 B 3 -0.04029945 B 2 N 2 0.12780792 B 2 N 3 0.19178004 SNS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N B 2 0.09448351 N B 3 -0.00244188 N N 2 0.13010133 N N 3 0.33037105 S B 2 0.06891433 S B 3 0.05353858 S N 2 0.19691754 S N 3 0.22587669 STORY SNS VI FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN ANB 2 0.01708561 AN B 3 0.02248470 AN N 2 0.13329560 A N N 3 0.43828456 A S B 2 0.11644248 AS B 3 0.10437448 AS N 2 0.31982849 A S N 3 0.30559268 BN B 2 0.17188142 BNB 3 -0.02736845 BNN 2 0.12690707 BNN 3 0.22245754 BS B 2 0.02138617 BSB 3 0.00270267 BSN 2 0.07400659 BSN 3 0.14616071 COaaa3Q)GDCaO3OOCOB3a)Q90OOG9(D>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EAPS N V FEBC YIELD FEEDBACK VI SNS RECALPOS EAPS N V FEEDBACK VI SNS RECALPOS E FEEDBACK MEM i 3 2 hig hig o 3 2low low S S S N N S 3 2 B 2 B N N N S S 3 2 N S N 3 N N N N S 2 B 2 S 2 B N N B 2 B S 3 S 2 N S B N B N N N N s 2 3 N 2 N B N B N N N 0.01171899 2 3 N B s S 2 B S SNS N N B N 2 2 N B B N N N VI B 0.81565055 B 3 N 3 0.24260309 2 3 3 0.22816087 0.22437024 3 0.17085618 0.07551135 0.07435218 -0.04358515 3 3 3 3 2 -0.01772315 3 3 3 2 FEEDBACK LSMEAN YIELD -0.00191232 -0.01305621 0.15123200 0.05483098 0.14021752 0.00817246 0.07672241 0.36173905 0.09001433 0.03035474 0.08299767 0.17332192 0.11998514 0.19087934 0.48742019 -0.03701375 -0.02642912 -0.00838927 0.14595123 0.15918983 0.02745522 0.10966461 0.06795118 0.00206196 0.04899048 0.28572526 0.49910786 0.02260448 0.01531713 0.14414952 0.32115835 0.33925495 0.19702998 0.17077044 0.05335867 0.11207749 0.30040203 0.08220675 0.06091858 0.09582076 0.06060033 0.15067821 LSMEAN LSMEAN YIELD LSMEAN YIELD 462 463 STORY MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A hig 2 0.08177464 A hig 3 0.10798423 A low 2 0.21155145 A low 3 0.32738398 B hig 2 0.06692971 B hig 3 0.04303847 B low 2 0.13016091 B low 3 0.12893777 RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 hig 2 0.06806072 1 hig 3 0.04494030 1 low 2 0.20448636 1 low 3 0.09537709 2 hig 2 0.08064364 2 hig 3 0.10608240 2 low 2 0.13722600 2 low 3 0.36094466 STORY RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 hig 2 0.07838656 A 1 hig 3 0.03878519 A 1 low 2 0.22536411 A 1 low 3 0.04937770 A 2 hig 2 0.08516273 A 2 hig 3 0.17718328 A 2 low 2 0.19773878 A 2 low 3 0.60539025 B 1 hig 2 0.05773488 B 1 hig 3 0.05109542 B 1 low 2 0.18360860 B 1 low 3 0.14137647 B 2 hig 2 0.07612455 B 2 hig 3 0.03498152 B 2 low 2 0.07671322 B 2 low 3 0.11649907 SNS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N hig 2 0.06047512 N hig 3 0.05950529 N low 2 0.16410972 N low 3 0.26842389 S hig 2 0.08822924 S hig 3 0.09151741 S low 2 0.17760263 S low 3 0.18789786 STORY SNS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A N hig 2 0.04558585 A N hig 3 0.07992456 A N low 2 0.10479535 A N low 3 0.38084471 A S hig 2 0.11796343 A S hig 3 0.13604391 A S low 2 0.31830754 A S low 3 0.27392325 B N hig 2 0.07536439 B N hig 3 0.03908603 BN low 2 0.22342410 B N low 3 0.15600307 B S hig 2 0.05849504 B S hig 3 0.04699091 B S low 2 0.03689772 B S low 3 0.10187247 RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 N hig 2 0.05126187 1 N hig 3 0.02715014 1 N low 2 0.25960262 1 N low 3 0.13311557 1 S hig 2 0.08485957 1 S hig 3 0.06273047 1 S low 2 0.14937010 1 S low 3 0.05763860 2 N hig 2 0.06968837 2 N hig 3 0.09186045 2 N low 2 0.06861683 2 N low 3 0.40373220 2 S hig 2 0.09159890 2 S hig 3 0.12030435 2 S low 2 0.20583517 2 S low 3 0.31815712 STORY RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N hig 2 0.02265437 A 1 N hig 3 “ -0.00115794 A 1 N low 2 0.13376672 A 1 N low 3 0.05368725 A 1 S hig 2 0.13411874 A 1 S hig 3 0.07872832 A 1 S low 2 0.31696151 A 1 S low 3 0.04506816 A 2 N hig 2 0.06851733 A 2 N hig 3 0.16100705 A 2 N low 2 0.07582398 A 2 N low 3 0.70800216 A 2 S hig 2 0.10180812 A 2 S hig 3 0.19335950 A 2 S low 2 0.31965358 A 2 S low 3 0.50277834 B 1 N hig 2 0.07986936 B 1 N hig 3 0.05545822 B 1 N low 2 0.38543852 B 1 N low 3 0.21254390 B 1 S hig 2 0.03560040 B 1 S hig 3 0.04673262 B 1 S low 2 -0.01822131 B 1 S low 3 0.07020903 B 2 N hig 2 0.07085941 B 2 N hig 3 0.02271384 B 2 N low 2 0.06140968 B 2 N low 3 0.09946224 B 2 S hig 2 0.08138968 B 2 S hig 3 0.04724920 B 2 S low 2 0.09201676 B 2 S low 3 0.13353590 VI MEMFEEDBACKYIELD LSMEAN B hig 2 0.03582371 B hig 3 0.01428951 B low 2 0.12757412 B low 3 0.03680719 N hig 2 0.11288064 N hig 3 0.13673319 N low 2 0.21413823 N low 3 0.41951455 465 STORY VI HEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A B hig 2 0.04822979 AB hig 3 0.03059859 A B low 2 0.08529830 A B low 3 0.09626060 AN hig 2 0.11531950 AN hig 3 0.18536988 A N low 2 0.33780459 A N low 3 0.55850736 BB hig 2 0.02341764 BB hig 3 -0.00201957 BB low 2 0.16984995 BB low 3 -0.02264621 B N hig 2 0.11044179 BN hig 3 0.08809651 B N low 2 0.09047187 BN low 3 0.28052174 RECALPOS VI HEMFEEDBACKYIELD LSMEAN 1 B hig 2 0.04812403 1 B hig 3 0.04816908 1 B low 2 0.22575298 1 B low 3 -0.03087055 1 N hig 2 0.08799741 1 N hig 3 0.04171153 1 N low 2 0.18321973 1 N low 3 0.22162472 2 B hig 2 0.02352340 2 B hig 3 -0.01959006 2 B low 2 0.02939526 2 B low 3 0.10448494 2 N hig 2 0.13776388 2 N hig 3 0.23175486 2 N low 2 0.24505674 2 N low 3 0.61740438 STORYRECALPOS VI HEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 B hig 2 0.06971405 A 1 B hig 3 0.06308793 A 1 B low 2 0.14156450 A 1 B low 3 -0.05975821 A 1 N hig 2 0.08705906 A 1 N hig 3 0.01448245 A 1 N low 2 0.30916373 A 1 N low 3 0.15851362 A 2 B hig 2 0.02674553 A 2 B hig 3 -0.00189076 A 2 B low 2 0.02903211 A 2 B low 3 0.25227941 A 2 N hig 2 0.14357993 A 2 N hig 3 0.35625731 A 2 N low 2 0.36644545 A 2 N low 3 0.95850110 B 1 B hig 2 0.02653400 B 1 B hig 3 0.03325022 B 1 B low 2 0.30994147 B 1 B low 3 -0.00198289 B 1 N hig 2 0.08893575 B 1 N hig 3 0.06894062 B 1 N low 2 0.05727573 B 1 N low 3 0.28473582 B 2 B hig 2 0.02030128 B 2 B hig 3 -0.03728937 B 2 B low 2 0.02975842 B 2 B low 3 -0.04330953 B 2 N hig 2 0.13194782 B 2 N hig 3 0.10725240 B 2 N low 2 0.12366802 B 2 N low 3 0.27630767 SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N B hig 2 0.02300733 N B hig 3 -0.02215269 N B low 2 0.16595970 NB low 3 0.01726894 N N hig 2 0.09794291 N N hig 3 0.14116327 N N low 2 0.16225975 N N low 3 0.51957884 S B hig 2 0.04864010 S B hig 3 0.05073170 S B low 2 0.08918855 S B low 3 0.05634545 S N hig 2 0.12781837 S N hig 3 0.13230312 S N low 2 0.26601671 S N low 3 0.31945027 STORY SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A N B hig 2 0.03196450 AN B hig 3 -0.02269470 A N B low 2 0.00220672 A N B low 3 0.06766410 AN N hig 2 0.05920721 AN N hig 3 0.18254382 A N N low 2 0.20738398 A N N low 3 0.69402531 A S B hig 2 0.06449508 A S B hig 3 0.08389187 A S B low 2 0.16838988 A S B low 3 0.12485709 AS N hig 2 0.17143179 A S N hig 3 0.18819594 A S N low 2 0.46822520 A S N low 3 0.42298941 B N B hig 2 0.01405016 BN B hig 3 -0.02161067 B N B low 2 0.32971267 BN B low 3 -0.03312623 BN N hig 2 0.13667861 BN N hig 3 0.09978273 B N N low 2 0.11713552 BN N Low 3 0.34513236 BS B hig 2 0.03278512 BS B hig 3 0.01757153 B S B low 2 0.00998722 B S B Low 3 -0.01216619 B S N hig 2 0.08420496 BS N hig 3 0.07641029 BS N low 2 0.06380822 B S N low 3 0.21591113 ECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN N B hig 2 0.01726610 N B hig 3 0.00714393 N B low 2 0.36449259 N B low 3 -0.03325634 N N hig 2 0.08525764 N N hig 3 0.04715635 N N low 2 0.15471265 N N low 3 0.29948749 S B hig 2 0.07898196 S B hig 3 0.08919423 s B low 2 0.08701338 s B low 3 -0.02848475 s N hig 2 0.09073718 s N hig 3 0.03626671 RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN 1 S N low 2 0.21172681 1 S N low 3 0.14376195 2 N B hig 2 0.02874856 2 N B hig 3 -0.05144930 2 N B low 2 -0.03257320 2 N B low 3 0.06779422 2 N N hig 2 0.11062819 2 N N hig 3 0.23517019 2 N N low 2 0.16980686 2 N N low 3 0.73967018 2 S B hig 2 0.01829824 2 S B hig 3 0.01226917 2 S B low 2 0.09136373 2 S B low 3 0.14117566 2 S N hig 2 0.16489957 2 S N hig 3 0.22833952 2 S N low 2 0.32030661 2 S N low 3 0.49513859 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN A 1 N B hig 2 0.03393933 A 1 N B hig 3 0.02068709 A 1 N B low 2 0.08726134 A 1 N B low 3 -0.03746564 A 1 N N hig 2 0.01136942 A 1 N N hig 3 -0.02300297 A 1 N N low 2 0.18027210 A 1 N N low 3 0.14484013 A 1 S B hig 2 0.10548877 A 1 S B hig 3 0.10548877 A 1 S B low 2 0.19586765 A 1 S B low 3 -0.08205079 A 1 S N hig 2 0.16274871 A 1 S N hig 3 0.05196786 A 1 S N low 2 0.43805536 A 1 S N low 3 0.17218711 A 2 N B hig 2 0.02998967 A 2 N B hig 3 -0.06607650 A 2 N B low 2 -0.08284790 A 2 N B low 3 0.17279384 A 2 N N hig 2 0.10704500 A 2 N N hig 3 0.38809060 A 2 N N low 2 0.23449587 A 2 N N low 3 1.24321049 A 2 S B hig 2 0.02350139 A 2 S B hig 3 0.06229497 A 2 S B low 2 0.14091211 A 2 S B low 3 0.33176498 A 2 S N hig 2 0.18011486 A 2 S N hig 3 0.32442402 A 2 S N low 2 0.49839504 A 2 S N low 3 0.67379171 B 1 N B hig 2 0.00059286 B 1 N B hig 3 -0.00639924 B 1 N B low 2 0.64172384 B 1 N B low 3 -0.02904705 B 1 N N hig 2 0.15914586 B 1 N N hig 3 0.11731567 B 1 N N low 2 0.12915319 B 1 N N low 3 0.45413485 B 1 S B hig 2 0.05247514 B 1 S B hig 3 0.07289968 B 1 S B low 2 -0.02184089 B 1 S B low 3 0.02508128 B 1 S N hig 2 0.01872565 B 1 S N hig 3 0.02056556 B 1 S N low 2 -0.01460174 B 1 S N low 3 0.11533679 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK YIELD LSMEAN B 2 N B hig 2 0.02750746 B 2 N B hig 3 -0.03682211 B 2 N B low 2 0.01770151 B 2 N B low 3 -0.03720540 B 2 N N hig 2 0.11421137 B 2 N N hig 3 0.08224978 B 2 N N low 2 0.10511785 B 2 N N low 3 0.23612987 B 2 S B hig 2 0.01309509 B 2 S B hig 3 -0.03775663 B 2 S B low 2 0.04181534 B 2 S B low 3 -0.04941367 B 2 S N hig 2 0.14968427 B 2 S N hig 3 0.13225502 B 2 S N low 2 0.14221818 B 2 S N low 3 0.31648547 Analysis 31. The change analysis controlling for failure to encode. Study 4. General Linear Models Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sun of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 222 38.57998535 0.17378372 1.36 0.0043 Error 389 49.71249831 0.12779563 Corrected Total 611 88.29248366 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.436957 204.4681 0.3574851 0.1748366 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(STOR*RECA*SNS*VI) 127 18.80135450 0.14804216 1.16 0.1461 STORY 1 1.85195729 1.85195729 14.49 0.0002 RECALPOS 1 0.01634845 0.01634845 0.13 0.7208 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.55925712 0.55925712 4.38 0.0371 SNS 1 0.05050107 0.05050107 0.40 0.5300 ST0RY*SNS 1 0.00074466 0.00074466 0.01 0.9392 RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.00009090 0.00009090 0.00 0.9787 STORY*RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.19285402 0.19285402 1.51 0.2200 VI 1 0.24885257 0.24885257 1.95 0.1637 ST0RY*VI 1 0.12194611 0.12194611 0.95 0.3293 RECALPOS*VI 1 0.21315319 0.21315319 1.67 0.1973 STORY*RECALPOS*VI 1 0.14053487 0.14053487 1.10 0.2950 SNS*VI 1 0.00383275 0.00383275 0.03 0.8626 STORY*SNS*VI 1 0.84610342 0.84610342 6.62 0.0104 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.04872989 0.04872989 0.38 0.5373 STORY*RECALPO*SNS*VI 1 0.34137176 0.34137176 2.67 0.1030 MEM 1 3.50508267 3.50508267 27.43 0.0001 STORY*MEM 1 0.25725432 0.25725432 2.01 0.1568 RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.04851308 0.04851308 0.38 0.5382 STORY*RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.31517711 0.31517711 2.47 0.1171 SNS*MEM 1 0.30254445 0.30254445 2.37 0.1247 STORY*SNS*MEM 1 0.00131168 0.00131168 0.01 0.9194 RECALPOS*SNS*MEM 1 0.13316977 0.13316977 1.04 0.3080 STORY*RECALP*SNS*MEM 1 0.00016420 0.00016420 0.00 0.9714 VI*MEM 1 0.07199814 0.07199814 0.56 0.4534 STORY*VI*MEM 1 0.02309363 0.02309363 0.18 0.6710 RECALP0S*VI*MEM 1 0.09926091 0.09926091 0.78 0.3787 STORY*RECALPO*VI*MEM 1 0.00910211 0.00910211 0.07 0.7897 SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.20837174 0.20837174 1.63 0.2024 STORY*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.00161731 0.00161731 0.01 0.9105 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.21871245 0.21871245 1.71 0.1916 STOR*RECA*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.19696803 0.19696803 1.54 0.2152 FEEDBACK 2 0.83108473 0.41554237 3.25 0.0398 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.31019955 0.15509978 1.21 0.2982 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 2 0.73270675 0.36635338 2.87 0.0581 STORY*RECALP*FEEDBAC 2 1.55039668 0.77519834 6.07 0.0025 SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.19289613 0.09644807 0.75 0.4708 STORY*SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.02826759 0.01413380 0.11 0.8953 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.11683643 0.05841821 0.46 0.6334 STOR*RECAL*SNS*FEEDB 2 0.05322999 0.02661499 0.21 0.8121 VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.98251146 0.49125573 3.84 0.0222 STORY*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.76510637 0.38255318 2.99 0.0513 RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.50947688 0.25473844 1.99 0.1376 STORY*RECAL*VI*FEEDB 2 0.14311358 0.07155679 0.56 0.5717 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.12310867 0.06155433 0.48 0.6181 STORY*SNS*VI*FEEDBAC 2 0.82186297 0.41093148 3.22 0.0412 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 2 0.08925361 0.04462681 0.35 0.7055 STO*RECA*SNS*VI*FEED 2 0.36499792 0.18249896 1.43 0.2410 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.04981386 0.02490693 0.19 0.8230 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.19626415 0.09813208 0.77 0.4647 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.15673035 0.07836518 0.61 0.5421 STOR*RECAL*MEM*FEEDB 2 0.36526646 0.18263323 1.43 0.2408 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.15833648 0.07916824 0.62 0.5387 STORY*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.04217122 0.02108561 0.16 0.8480 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.00382171 0.00191086 0.01 0.9852 STO*REC*SNS*MEM*FEED 2 0.08375328 0.04187664 0.33 0.7208 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 1.25681982 0.62840991 4.92 0.0078 STORY*VI*HEM*FEEDBAC 2 1.12893728 0.56446864 4.42 0.0127 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.03033866 0.01516933 0.12 0.8881 STO*RECA*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.76002192 0.38001096 2.97 0.0523 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.79356532 0.39678266 3.10 0.0459 STOR*SNS*VI*MEM* FEED 2 0.83737439 0.41868719 3.28 0.0388 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.09273400 0.04636700 0.36 0.6959 ST*RE*SNS*VI*MEM*FEE 2 0.00270288 0.00135144 0.01 0.9895 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 0.63635700 0.63635700 4.98 0.0262 feedback quadratic 1 0.21496122 0.21496122 1.68 0.1954 General Linear Models Procedure Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORYN Mean SD A 306 0.22222222 0.41642069 B 306 0.12745098 0.33402371 Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS N Mean SD 1 297 0.18518519 0.38910333 2 315 0.16507937 0.37184286 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- STORY RECALPOS N Mean SD A 1 157 0.20382166 0.40412700 A 2 149 0.24161074 0.42950328 B 1 140 0.16428571 0.37186511 B 2 166 0.09638554 0.29601220 Level of ..... CHANGE...... SNS Mean SD N 293 0.17406143 0.37981100 S 319 0.17554859 0.38103335 Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY SNS N Mean SD A N 148 0.22297297 0.41765373 AS 158 0.22151899 0.41658939 B N 145 0.12413793 0.33088179 B S 161 0.13043478 0.33783196 Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD 1 N 141 0.18439716 0.38919031 1 S 156 0.18589744 0.39027678 2 N 152 0.16447368 0.37193033 2 S 163 0.16564417 0.37290656 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- STORY RECALPOS SNS N Mean SD A 1 N 78 0.19230769 0.39666441 A 1 S 79 0.21518987 0.41357993 A 2 N 70 0.25714286 0.44021452 A 2 S 79 0.22784810 0.42212427 B 1 N 63 0.17460317 0.38267659 B 1 S 77 0.15584416 0.36508597 B 2 N 82 0.08536585 0.28114490 B 2 S 84 0.10714286 0.31115243 Level of CHANGE VI N Mean SD B 339 0.,15929204 0.36648914 N 273 0.,19413919 0.39626298 Level of Level of ------______ruAurc. LnANuC STORY VI N Mean SD A B 170 0.22352941 0.41784090 AN 136 0.22058824 0.41617618 B B 169 0.09467456 0.29363493 B N 137 0.16788321 0.37513415 Level of Level of ...... •^nANut...... ruAurc. RECALPOS VI N Mean SD 1 B 156 0.17307692 0.37953217 1 N 1A1 0.19858156 0.40035445 2 B 183 0.14754098 0.35561735 2 N 132 0.18939394 0.39331389 Level of Level of Level of -.... CHANGE----- STORY RECALPOS VI N Mean SD A 1 B 81 0.19753086 0.40061681 A 1 N 76 0.21052632 0.41039134 A 2 B 89 0.24719101 0.43382283 A 2 N 60 0.23333333 0.42652187 B 1 B 75 0.14666667 0.35615565 B 1 N 65 0.18461538 0.39100462 B 2 B 94 0.05319149 0.22561845 B 2 N 72 0.15277778 0.36229792 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- SNS VI N Mean SD N B 151 0.,16556291 0.37292472 NN 142 0..18309859 0.38811635 S B 188 0..15425532 0.36215779 S N 131 0..20610687 0.40606095 Level of Level. of Level, of ...... CHANGE...... STORY SNS VI N Mean SD A N B 74 0.27027027 0.44713080 A N N 74 0.17567568 0.38314160 A S B 96 0.18750000 0.39236127 A S N 62 0.27419355 0.44974874 B N B 77 0.06493506 0.24802708 BN N 68 0.19117647 0.39615137 BSB 92 0.11956522 0.32623026 BSN 69 0.14492754 0.35460675 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD 1 N B 68 0.17647059 0.38405443 1 N N 73 0.19178082 0.39642620 1 S B 88 0.17045455 0.37818657 1 S N 68 0.20588235 0.40735124 2 N B 83 0.15662651 0.36565770 2 N N 69 0.17391304 0.38181154 2 S B 100 0.14000000 0.34873509 2 S N 63 0.20634921 0.40793462 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- STORY RECALPOS SNS VI N Mean SD A 1 N B 34 0.23529412 0.43056155 A 1 N N 44 0.15909091 0.36998943 A 1 S B 47 0.17021277 0.37988264 A 1 S N 32 0.28125000 0.45680341 STORY 03 03 03030a030303^^>>^ of Level A B B B A A A B STORY low S S N A A A A S B N N B B B STORY ee of Level N MEM SNS ee o Lvl of Level of Level i 181 hig A A low hig Level of 2 2 RECALPOS B low Level of Level B i 178 hig 1 1 STORY ee of Level 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 RECALPOS 1 1 of Level 1 EAPS MEM RECALPOS hig MEN ee of Level low S N SNS ee of Level hig hig low MEM low fLvlof Level of i 188 hig MEM N N ee of Level o 119 low S S S S N N S S N low N SNS ee of Level hig hig hig hig 369 low low 243 low low hig i 91 hig MEM i 91 90 hig hig ee of Level low low low of 132 187 111 182 124 191 118 125 N N B B N B N B B N N B VI ee of Level N N N 0.11111111 0.27160494 Mean 101 64 97 54 68 57 65 53 87 91 59 90 66 N N 0.25757576 0.11764706 0.28828829 0.10439560 0.30252101 0.10674157 0.24193548 0.11518325 0.07978723 0.33600000 0.20338983 0.14364641 Mean Mean Mean ...... 39 39 33 43 36 41 51 29 34 30 49 30 40 -CHANGE- .85000.39339790 0.18750000 0.09278351 .22220.41964345 0.24954170 0.47130104 0.35350925 0.22222222 0.48148684 0.06593407 0.35186578 0.32352941 0.14444444 0.35087719 0.14285714 0.13846154 0.06930693 0.28301887 0.09195402 0.35593220 0.16666667 0.12087912 0.31818182 enSD Mean Mean -CHANGE- -CHANGE- -CHANGE- 0.15151515 0.15384615 0.02325581 0.13888889 0.17073171 0.24137931 0.11764706 0.26666667 0.20408163 0.20000000 0.07843137 0.30000000 0.44570528 0.31469639 Mean -CHANGE- SD CHANGE' 0.32305468 0.43896499 0.45502023 0.30661657 0.42999277 0.32008197 0.46129188 0.30965545 0.40423658 0.47423963 0.35170374 0.27168706 -CHANGE- SD SD SD 0.29163598 0.34807161 0.25524207 0.45477630 0.29063619 0.48290471 0.37476584 0.46933966 0.32779278 SD 0.36410954 0.27152438 0.36551777 0.15249857 0.35073619 0.38094875 0.43549417 0.32703497 0.40720551 0.40683810 0.44977645 0.46409548 SD 472 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE RECALPOS SNS MEM N Mean SD 1 N hig 89 0.07865169 0.27071954 1 N low 52 0.36538462 0.48623589 1 S hig 89 0.13483146 0.34347857 1 S low 67 0.25373134 0.43842983 2 N hig 93 0.12903226 0.33705265 2 N low 59 0.22033898 0.41803302 2 S hig 98 0.10204082 0.30425830 2 S low 65 0.26153846 0.44289259 Level of Level of Level of Level. of ...... CHANGE...... STORYRECALPOS SNS MEM N Mean SD A 1 N hig 47 0.08510638 0.28205667 A 1 N low 31 0.35483871 0.48637346 A 1 S hig 44 0.15909091 0.36998943 A 1 S low 35 0.28571429 0.45834925 A 2 N hig 44 0.20454545 0.40803246 A 2 N low 26 0.34615385 0.48516452 A 2 S hig 46 0.13043478 0.34050261 A 2 S low 33 0.36363636 0.48850421 B 1 N hig 42 0.07142857 0.26066118 B 1 N low 21 0.38095238 0.49761335 B 1 S hig 45 0.11111111 0.31782086 B 1 S low 32 0.21875000 0.42001344 B 2 N hig 49 0.06122449 0.24222607 B 2 N low 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 B 2 S hig 52 0.07692308 0.26906912 B 2 S low 32 0.15625000 0.36890203 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE.... VI MEM N Mean SD B hig 209 0.08612440 0.28122124 B low 130 0..27692308 0.44920920 N hig 160 0,.14375000 0.35193758 N low 113 0.26548673 0.44355905 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- STORY VI MEM N Mean SD A B hig 101 0.12871287 0.33655212 AB low 69 0.36231884 0.48419170 A N hig 80 0.16250000 0.37123639 A N low 56 0.30357143 0.46396093 B B hig 108 0.04629630 0.21110565 BB low 61 0.18032787 0.38765090 B N hig 80 0.12500000 0.33280549 BN low 57 0.22807018 0.42331784 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE- RECALPOS VI MEMN Mean SD 1 B hig 96 0.09375000 0.29301069 1 B low 60 0.30000000 0.46212479 1 N hig 82 0.12195122 0.32924320 1 N low 59 0.30508475 0.46439569 2 B hig 113 0.07964602 0.27195039 2 B low 70 0.25714286 0.44021452 2 N hig 78 0.16666667 0.37509018 2 N low 54 0.22222222 0.41964345 Level. of Level of Level, of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORYRECALPOS VI MEM N Mean SD A 1 B hig 48 0.10416667 0.30870928 A 1 B low 33 0.33333333 0.47871355 A 1 N hig 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 A 1 N low 33 0.30303030 0.46669372 A 2 B hig 53 0.15094340 0.36141955 A 2 B low 36 0.38888889 0.49441323 A 2 N hig 37 0.18918919 0.39706128 A 2 N low 23 0.30434783 0.47047197 4 7 4 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY RECALPOS VI HEH N Mean SD B 1 B hig 48 0.08333333 0.27931019 B 1 B low 27 0.25925926 0.44657608 B 1 N hig 39 0.10256410 0.30735474 B 1 N low 26 0.30769231 0.47067872 B 2 B hig 60 0.01666667 0.12909944 B 2 B low 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 B 2 N hig 41 0.14634146 0.35783904 B 2 N low 31 0.16129032 0.37387825 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE SNS VI MEN N Mean SD NB hig 95 0. 09473684 0.29440471 N B low 56 0.28571429 0.45584231 N N hig 87 0. 11494253 0.32080159 N N low 55 0.29090909 0.45836777 S B hig 114 0.07894737 0.27084714 S B low 74 0.27027027 0.44713080 S N hig 73 0. 17808219 0.38522958 S N low 58 0.24137931 0.43165714 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY SNS VI MEMN Mean SD ANB hig 45 0.17777778 0.38664577 A N B low 29 0.41379310 0.50123001 AN N hig 46 0.10869565 0.31469639 AN N low 28 0.28571429 0.46004371 A S B hig 56 0.08928571 0.28773635 A S B low 40 0.32500000 0.47434165 AS N hig 34 0.23529412 0.43056155 AS N low 28 0.32142857 0.47559487 BNB hig 50 0.02000000 0.14142136 B N B low 27 0.14814815 0.36201399 BN N hig 41 0.12195122 0.33129458 B NN low 27 0.29629630 0.46532163 BS B hig 58 0.06896552 0.25560859 BS B low 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 BSN hig 39 0.12820513 0.33868843 BSN low 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS VI MEMN Mean SD 1 N B hig 44 0.06818182 0.25497171 1 N B low 24 0.37500000 0.49453536 1 N N hig 45 0.08888889 0.28779903 1 N N low 28 0.35714286 0.48795004 1 S B hig 52 0.11538462 0.32260254 1 S B low 36 0.25000000 0.43915503 1 S N hig 37 0.16216216 0.37368388 1 S N low 31 0.25806452 0.44480272 2 N B hig 51 0.11764706 0.32539569 2 N B low 32 0.21875000 0.42001344 2 N N hig 42 0.14285714 0.35416880 2 N N low 27 0.22222222 0.42365927 2 S B hig 62 0.04838710 0.21633454 2 S B low 38 0.28947368 0.45960587 2 S N hig 36 0.19444444 0.40138649 2 S N low 27 0.22222222 0.42365927 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CHANGE...... STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM N Mean SD A 1 N B hig 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 A 1 N B low 13 0.46153846 0.51887452 A 1 N N hig 26 0.07692308 0.27174649 A 1 N N low 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 A 1 S B hig 27 0.11111111 0.32025631 A 1 S B low 20 0.25000000 0.44426166 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY RECALPOS SNS VI HEM N Mean SD A 1 S N hig 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 A 1 S N low 15 0.33333333 0.48795004 A 2 N B hig 24 0.25000000 0.44232587 A 2 N B low 16 0.37500000 0.50000000 A 2 N N hig 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 A 2 N N low 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 A 2 S B hig 29 0.06896552 0.25788071 A 2 S B low 20 0.40000000 0.50262469 A 2 S N hig 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 A 2 S N low 13 0.30769231 0.48038446 B 1 NB hig 23 0.04347826 0.20851441 B 1 N B low 11 0.27272727 0.46709937 B 1 NN hig 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B 1 N N low 10 0.50000000 0.52704628 B 1 S B hig 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 B 1 S B low 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 B 1 S N hig 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 B 1 S N low 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 B 2 NB hig 27 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B 2 N N hig 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 B 2 N N low 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 B 2 S B hig 33 0.03030303 0.17407766 B 2 S B low 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 B 2 S N hig 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 B 2 S N low 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 Level of ...... CHANGE-- FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 209 0 .16267943 0.36995906 2 194 0 .14432990 0.35233318 3 209 0.21531100 0.41202481 Level of Level of --CHANGE...... STORY FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 103 0.23300971 0.42481561 A 2 99 0.17171717 0.37905371 A 3 104 0.25961538 0.44054671 B 1 106 0.09433962 0.29368924 B 2 95 0.11578947 0.32166978 B 3 105 0.17142857 0.37869063 Level of Level of --CHANGE...... RECALPOSFEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 1 96 0.19791667 0.40052049 1 2 94 0.18085106 0.38695853 1 3 107 0.17757009 0.38394880 2 1 113 0.13274336 0.34080851 2 2 100 0.11000000 0.31446604 2 3 102 0.25490196 0.43795824 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY RECALPOS FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 1 47 0.29787234 0.46226727 A 1 2 53 0.16981132 0.37906002 A 1 3 57 0.15789474 0.36788360 A 2 1 56 0.17857143 0.38645912 A 2 2 46 0.17391304 0.38322305 A 2 3 47 0.38297872 0.49136861 B 1 1 49 0.10204082 0.30583887 B 1 2 41 0.19512195 0.40121766 B 1 3 50 0.20000000 0.40406102 B 2 1 57 0.08771930 0.28540083 B 2 2 54 0.05555556 0.23121228 B 2 3 55 0.14545455 0.35580799 476 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE' SNS FEEDBACKN Mean SD N 1 99 0.18181818 0.38765744 N 2 93 0.12903226 0.33705265 N 3 101 0.20792079 0.40784388 S 1 110 0.14545455 0.35417208 S 2 101 0.15841584 0.36695158 S 3 108 0.22222222 0.41767790 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N 1 48 0.27083333 0.44909286 A N 2 50 0.16000000 0.37032804 A N 3 50 0.24000000 0.43141911 AS 1 55 0.20000000 0.40368671 AS 2 49 0.18367347 0.39123040 A S 3 54 0.27777778 0.45210896 B N 1 51 0.09803922 0.30032662 B N 2 43 0.09302326 0.29390260 B N 3 51 0.17647059 0.38501337 B S 1 55 0.09090909 0.29012943 BS 2 52 0.13461538 0.34464225 B S 3 54 0.16666667 0.37617740 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N 1 46 0.23913043 0.43126597 1 N 2 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 1 N 3 52 0.17307692 0.38200471 1 S 1 50 0.16000000 0.37032804 1 S 2 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 1 S 3 55 0.18181818 0.38924947 2 N 1 53 0.13207547 0.34181281 2 N 2 50 0.12000000 0.32826072 2 N 3 49 0.24489796 0.43448304 2 S 1 60 0.13333333 0.34280333 2 S 2 50 0.10000000 0.30304576 2 S 3 53 0.26415094 0.44509910 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK N Mean SD N 1 21 0.33333333 0.48304589 N 2 27 0.14814815 0.36201399 N 3 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 S 1 26 0.26923077 0.45234432 S 2 26 0.19230769 0.40191848 S 3 27 0.18518519 0.39584739 N 1 27 0.22222222 0.42365927 N 2 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 N 3 20 0.40000000 0.50262469 S 1 29 0.13793103 0.35093120 S 2 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 S 3 27 0.37037037 0.49210288 N 1 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 N 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 N 3 22 0.22727273 0.42893203 S 1 24 0.04166667 0.20412415 S 2 25 0.24000000 0.43588989 S 3 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 N 1 26 0.03846154 0.19611614 N 2 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 N 3 29 0.13793103 0.35093120 S 1 31 0.12903226 0.34077710 S 2 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 S 3 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 Level of Level of ...... CHANGE VI FEEDBACKN Mean SD B 1 116 0.15517241 0.36363977 B 2 113 0.15929204 0.36757826 B 3 110 0. 16363636 0.37163839 N 1 93 0. 17204301 0.37946346 N 2 81 0.12345679 0.33101042 N 3 99 0.27272727 0.44762826 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A B 1 57 0.26315789 0.44426166 A B 2 56 0.17857143 0.38645912 A B 3 57 0.22807018 0.42331784 A N 1 46 0.19565217 0.40108548 A N 2 43 0.16279070 0.37354368 A N 3 47 0.29787234 0.46226727 B B 1 59 0.05084746 0.22157188 B B 2 57 0.14035088 0.35043832 B B 3 53 0.09433962 0.29509783 B N 1 47 0.14893617 0.35987458 B N 2 38 0.07894737 0.27327631 B N 3 52 0.25000000 0.43723732 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 1 50 0.16000000 0.37032804 B 2 51 0.21568627 0.41539020 B 3 55 0.14545455 0.35580799 N 1 46 0.23913043 0.43126597 N 2 43 0.13953488 0.35060460 N 3 52 0.21153846 0.41238372 2 B 1 66 0.15151515 0.36129784 2 B 2 62 0.11290323 0.31905797 2 B 3 55 0.18181818 0.38924947 2 N 1 47 0.10638298 0.31166053 2 N 2 38 0.10526316 0.31101175 2 N 3 47 0.34042553 0.47897516 Level of Level of Level of Level of CHANGE STORY RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 B 1 24 0.29166667 0.46430562 A 1 B 2 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 A 1 B 3 29 0.13793103 0.35093120 A 1 N 1 23 0.30434783 0.47047197 A 1 N 2 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 A 1 N 3 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 A 2 B 1 33 0.24242424 0.43519414 A 2 B 2 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 A 2 B 3 28 0.32142857 0.47559487 A 2 N 1 23 0.08695652 0.28810407 A 2 N 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 A 2 N 3 19 0.47368421 0.51298918 B 1 B 1 26 0.03846154 0.19611614 B 1 B 2 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 B 1 B 3 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 B 1 N 1 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 B 1 N 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B 1 N 3 24 0.25000000 0.44232587 B 2 B 1 33 0.06060606 0.24230584 B 2 B 2 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 B 2 B 3 27 0.03703704 0.19245009 B 2 N 1 24 0.12500000 0.33783196 B 2 N 2 20 0.05000000 0.22360680 B 2 N 3 28 0.25000000 0.44095855 4 7 8 Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B 1 49 0.18367347 0.39123040 N B 2 51 0.15686275 0.36729002 N B 3 51 0.15686275 0.36729002 N N 1 50 0.18000000 0.38808793 N N 2 42 0.09523810 0.29710176 N N 3 50 0.26000000 0.44308750 S B 1 67 0.13432836 0.34357842 S B 2 62 0.16129032 0.37080101 S B 3 59 0.16949153 0.37840602 S N 1 43 0.16279070 0.37354368 S N 2 39 0.15384615 0.36551777 S N 3 49 0.28571429 0.45643546 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N B 1 23 0.39130435 0.49901088 A N B 2 25 0.20000000 0.40824829 AN B 3 26 0.23076923 0.42966892 ANN 1 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 A N N 2 25 0.12000000 0.33166248 A N N 3 24 0.25000000 0.44232587 A S B 1 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 A S B 2 31 0.16129032 0.37387825 A S B 3 31 0.22580645 0.42502372 A S N 1 21 0.23809524 0.43643578 A S N 2 18 0.22222222 0.42779263 A S N 3 23 0.34782609 0.48698475 B N B 1 26 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N B 2 26 0.11538462 0.32581259 B N B 3 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 BN N 1 25 0.20000000 0.40824829 B N N 2 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 BNN 3 26 0.26923077 0.45234432 B S B 1 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 BSB 2 31 0.16129032 0.37387825 B S B 3 28 0.10714286 0.31497039 B S N 1 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 B S N 2 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 B S N 3 26 0.23076923 0.42966892 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N B 1 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 1 N B 2 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 1 N B 3 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 1 N N 1 25 0.28000000 0.45825757 1 N N 2 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 1 N N 3 26 0.19230769 0.40191848 1 S B 1 29 0.13793103 0.35093120 1 S B 2 30 0.23333333 0.43018307 1 S B 3 29 0.13793103 0.35093120 1 S N 1 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 1 S N 2 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 1 S N 3 26 0.23076923 0.42966892 2 N B 1 28 0.17857143 0.39002103 2 N B 2 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 2 N B 3 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 2 N N 1 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 2 N N 2 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 2 N N 3 24 0.33333333 0.48154341 2 S B 1 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 2 S B 2 32 0.09375000 0.29614458 2 S B 3 30 0.20000000 0.40683810 2 S N 1 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 2 S N 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 2 S N 3 23 0.34782609 0.48698475 03 09 Q0 00 00QaQ9(OCB00 00 0900B>090003 00 09 00 G 0 Q 0 a 3 03 SD > > > > > > > Mean > > > N > FEEDBACK > > > > > > VI > > > > > SNS of Level > RECALPOS of > Level of Level of Level STORY of level YMEM RY l fLvl fLvlof Level of Level of el 2 2 12 3 N N S S 2 2 N 2 2 2 2 1 B S 2 2 2 1 B N 2 S 2 2 2 N N 2 0.50000000 15 8 2 3 B N S N 2 N 2 2 2 2 2 N N 2 2 1 N N S S 1 1 N 2 2 N N 1 1 3 B S 1 1 B N S N 1 1 N 1 1 1 N N 1 1 40.14285714 14 3 B N 1 20.25000000 12 3 2 N N S S S 1 1 1 1 1 S 1 20.16666667 12 2 B N N 1 1 1 1 1 E FEEDBACK MEM i 3 hig i 2 1 hig hig Level o 1 low o 3 low low hig i 901243 0.36263211 0.15254237 59 1 hig hig f ee of Level of o 403000 0.47949498 0.34090909 44 1 low 40.07142857 14 3 B S 13 17 1 2 N B N N 17 2 3 B N S N S 40.21428571 14 3 N S 00.10000000 10 2 B N S N 10.45454545 11 1 3 S B N N S 10.09090909 11 1 N S 16 3 B S 60.18750000 16 2 1 B B S S 50.13333333 0.23076923 15 13 0.50000000 8 2 1 1 N N B N N N 70.23376623 0 77 2 3 000666 0.25154887 0.06666667 60 2 EDAKNMean N FEEDBACK 30.00000000 13 3 B N N 20.08333333 12 N 1 N B 20.16666667 12 3 B B 0.23076923 0.33333333 13 15 2 1 B B 20.33333333 12 3 B N 501333 0.35106578 0.13333333 15 3 B 601500 0.34156503 0.12500000 16 3 N 2 .15503876 0 0.08547009 129 117 2 0.08943089 123 00.31250000 0.26744186 80 86 enSD Mean N 202974 0.41040151 0.20967742 62 00.00000000 10 2 10.18181818 11 2 003000 0.48304589 0.30000000 10 3 2 14 2 2 10.18181818 11 1 1 1 1 ...... 00.10000000 20 10.00000000 11 602000 0.44721360 0.25000000 16 30.00000000 13 001000 0.31622777 0.10000000 10 0.14285714 14 0.16666667 18 30.07692308 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 13 20.33333333 12 00.20000000 10 16 004000 0.51639778 0.40000000 10 CHANGE 0.25000000 8 0.00000000 7 0.22222222 9 ------CHANGE 0.07692308 .58330.24253563 0.05882353 0.25000000 .58330.24253563 0.05882353 0.28571429 .15000.47871355 0.31250000 0.13333333 0.18750000 ...... 0.36335271 0.46643680 0.42600049 0.28078245 0.28653184 0.44522086 .... CHANGE SD 0.26726124 0.27735010 0.00000000 0.00000000 0.30779351 0.40451992 0.45226702 0.00000000 0.00000000 0.42581531 0.40451992 0.36313652 0.46880723 0.46291005 0.27735010 0.00000000 0.52223297 0.38924947 0.49236596 0.30151134 0.38348249 0.53452248 0.31622777 0.28867513 0.35186578 0.49236596 0.42163702 0.45226702 0.48795004 0.44095855 0.40311289 0.40311289 0.36313652 0.43852901 0.35186578 0.43852901 0.38924947 0.53452248 --- STORY Cna)a3Q0CBa3G90aC9CDO3Q0>>>>>>>>>>>> level S S S S S S N N N N N N SNS ee o ee o ee of Level of Level of Level f ee f ee f ee of Level of low Level of Level of 2 2 2 2 o 46 1 low 2 2 MEM RECALPOS A low 1 low B B low B B A low low 1 1 1 of Level of Level low of Level B B 1 1 STORY ee o ee of Level of Level low low low hig hig 2 2 2 2 2 2 hig hig 2 low low low hig 2 hig 2 2 2 2 low low hig hig 1 1 1 1 hig 2 MEM RECALPOS low hig 1 1 low 1 low low hig hig 1 1 1 1 1 hig hig 1 i 64 62 3 2 hig hig i 65 55 1 62 3 hig 2 1 hig hig hig MEM o 39 2 1 low low low o 36 38 37 3 2 1 low low low i 57 2 1 hig hig i 67 3 62 hig 3 hig hig 57 hig 64 2 1 hig hig hig MEM o 43 2 low o 38 2 low low 3 EDAKN FEEDBACK 35 3 45 3 34 60 2 2 3 67 3 3 40 1 N FEEDBACK 39 2 56 1 42 1 of Level EDAKN FEEDBACK 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 1 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 FEEDBACK 1 44 49 61 67 38 42 7 .01810.31480009 0.10810811 0.05714286 0.30512858 37 35 0.10000000 30 5 .80000.27688746 0.35125009 0.18569534 0.08000000 0.13636364 25 0.03448276 22 29 0 .50000.44426166 0.35000000 0.00000000 0.25000000 20 0.17857143 20 0.00000000 0.46609160 28 29 0.30000000 0.12500000 30 32 8 .22220.42779263 0.22222222 18 4 .50000.44232587 0.26226526 0.25000000 0.40824829 0.07142857 24 0.33601075 0.20000000 28 0.33333333 25 0.12500000 21 0.06250000 32 32 3 .37930.43852901 0.23076923 0.51449576 13 0.52941176 17 0.39584739 0.45000000 20 0.18518519 27 8 .33330.48507125 0.33333333 18 Ma SD Mean N .37930.42683279 0.31818182 0.23076923 0.22448980 .52000.36596253 0.31905797 0.15625000 0.11290323 0.47457900 0.08196721 0.36360905 0.30555556 0.22918388 0.32432432 0.15384615 0.05454545 .38210.43085148 0.23684211 0.29806355 0.09677419 .96270.40108548 0.37142857 0.22528178 0.18604651 0.19565217 0.44721360 0.46249729 0.05263158 0.08955224 0.26666667 0.29411765 .16670.32373177 0.28773635 0.35000000 0.11290323 0.11666667 0.08928571 0.28947368 0.19402985 .94690.39743662 0.13157895 0.19047619 0.10447761 0.10526316 0.03125000 0.33333333 0.33333333 enSD Mean enSD Mean enSD Mean --- ---- LnnNlsC unnnuc 0.47115530 0.42156979 0.27659127 0.46717659 0.49024089 0.28769424 0.48304589 0.31905797 0.39374962 0.39843656 0.45960587 0.34256999 0.30818768 0.30962019 0.17536809 0.47711872 0.47756693 ------0.23550411 0.48936048 0.39002103 0.33601075 0.48304589 0.51041779 0.24593469 480 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE..... STORY SNS HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N hig 1 30 0.20000000 0.40683810 A N hig 2 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 A N hig 3 31 0.19354839 0.40160966 AN I OH 1 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 A N low 2 20 0.35000000 0.48936048 A N low 3 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 A S hig 1 29 0.10344828 0.30993405 A S hig 2 30 0.10000000 0.30512858 A S hig 3 31 0.22580645 0.42502372 AS low 1 26 0.30769231 0.47067872 A S low 2 19 0.31578947 0.47756693 A S low 3 23 0.34782609 0.48698475 BN hig 1 32 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N hig 2 25 0.08000000 0.27688746 B N hig 3 34 0.11764706 0.32703497 BN low 1 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 BN low 2 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 BN low 3 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 BS hig 1 32 0.06250000 0.24593469 B S hig 2 32 0.12500000 0.33601075 B S hig 3 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 B S low 1 23 0.13043478 0.34435022 B S low 2 20 0.15000000 0.36634755 B S low 3 21 0.28571429 0.46291005 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N hig 1 29 0.10344828 0.30993405 1 N hig 2 28 0.03571429 0.18898224 1 N hig 3 32 0.09375000 0.29614458 1 N low 1 17 0.47058824 0.51449576 1 N low 2 15 0.33333333 0.48795004 1 N low 3 20 0.30000000 0.47016235 1 S hig 1 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 1 S hig 2 32 0.18750000 0.39655777 1 S hig 3 30 0.13333333 0.34574590 1 S low 1 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 1 S low 2 19 0.26315789 0.45241393 1 S low 3 25 0.24000000 0.43588989 2 N hig 1 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 2 N hig 2 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 2 N hig 3 33 0.21212121 0.41514875 2 N low 1 20 0.20000000 0.41039134 2 N low 2 23 0.17391304 0.38755339 2 N low 3 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 2 S hig 1 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 2 S hig 2 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 2 S hig 3 34 0.17647059 0.38695299 2 S low 1 26 0.19230769 0.40191848 2 S low 2 20 0.20000000 0.41039134 2 S low 3 19 0.42105263 0.50725727 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACKN Mean SD A 1 N hig 1 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 A 1 N hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 A 1 N hig 3 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A 1 N low 1 7 0.57142857 0.53452248 A 1 N low 2 11 0.36363636 0.50452498 A 1 N low 3 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 A 1 S hig 1 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 A 1 S hig 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 A 1 S hig 3 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 A 1 S low 1 13 0.38461538 0.50636968 A 1 S low 2 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 A 1 S low 3 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 A 2 N hig 1 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 A 2 N hig 2 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 2 N hig 3 14 0.35714286 0.49724516 A 2 N low 1 11 0.27272727 0.46709937 A 2 N low 2 9 0.33333333 0.50000000 A 2 N low 3 6 0.50000000 0.54772256 A 2 S hig 1 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 A 2 S hig 2 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 A 2 S hig 3 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 A 2 S low 1 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 A 2 S low 2 9 0.33333333 0.50000000 A 2 S low 3 11 0.54545455 0.52223297 B 1 N hig 1 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N hig 2 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 B 1 N hig 3 15 0.13333333 0.35186578 B 1 N low 1 10 0.40000000 0.51639778 B 1 N low 2 4 0.25000000 0.50000000 B 1 N low 3 7 0.42857143 0.53452248 B 1 S hig 1 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 S hig 2 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 B 1 S hig 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 B 1 S low 1 10 0.10000000 0.31622777 B 1 S low 2 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 B 1 S low 3 13 0.30769231 0.48038446 B 2 N hig 1 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 2 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 B 2 N hig 3 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B 2 N low 1 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 B 2 N low 2 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B 2 N low 3 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 B 2 S hig 1 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B 2 S hig 2 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 S hig 3 18 0.11111111 0.32338083 B 2 S low 1 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 B 2 S low 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 B 2 S low 3 8 0.25000000 0.46291005 Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE.... VI MEMFEEDBACK N Mean SD B hig 1 70 0.05714286 0.23379133 B hig 2 68 0.07352941 0.26294409 B hig 3 71 0.12676056 0.33507259 B low 1 46 0.30434783 0.46521513 B low 2 45 0.28888889 0.45836777 B low 3 39 0.23076923 0.42683279 N hig 1 53 0.13207547 0.34181281 N hig 2 49 0.10204082 0.30583887 N hig 3 58 0.18965517 0.39545206 N low 1 40 0.22500000 0.42290206 N low 2 32 0.15625000 0.36890203 N low 3 41 0.39024390 0.49386480 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE STORY VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A B hig 1 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 A B hig 2 34 0.05882353 0.23883257 AB hig 3 34 0.20588235 0.41042563 A B low 1 24 0.45833333 0.50897738 A B low 2 22 0.36363636 0.49236596 A B low 3 23 0.26086957 0.44897776 A N hig 1 26 0.19230769 0.40191848 A N hig 2 26 0.07692308 0.27174649 AN hig 3 28 0.21428571 0.41785545 A N low 1 20 0.20000000 0.41039134 A N low 2 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 A N low 3 19 0.42105263 0.50725727 B B hig 1 37 0.00000000 0.00000000 B B hig 2 34 0.08823529 0.28790224 B B hig 3 37 0.05405405 0.22924344 B B low 1 22 0.13636364 0.35125009 4 8 3 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- STORY VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B B low 2 23 0.21739130 0.42174117 B B low 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 B N hig 1 27 0.07407407 0.26688026 B N hig 2 23 0.13043478 0.34435022 B N hig 3 30 0.16666667 0.37904902 B N low 1 20 0.25000000 0.44426166 B N low 2 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N low 3 22 0.36363636 0.49236596 Level of Level of Level of Level of -CHANGE- RECALPOS VI MEMFEEDBACK N Hean SD B hig 1 30 0.03333333 0.18257419 B hig 2 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 B hig 3 33 0.12121212 0.33143398 B low 1 20 0.35000000 0.48936048 B low 2 18 0.38888889 0.50163133 B low 3 22 0.18181818 0.39477102 N hig 1 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 N hig 2 27 0.11111111 0.32025631 N hig 3 29 0.10344828 0.30993405 N low 1 20 0.35000000 0.48936048 N low 2 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 N low 3 23 0.34782609 0.48698475 2 B hig 1 40 0.07500000 0.26674678 2 B hig 2 35 0.02857143 0.16903085 2 B hig 3 38 0.13157895 0.34256999 2 B low 1 26 0.26923077 0.45234432 2 B low 2 27 0.22222222 0.42365927 2 B low 3 17 0.29411765 0.46966822 2 N hig 1 27 0.11111111 0.32025631 2 N hig 2 22 0.09090909 0.29424494 2 N hig 3 29 0.27586207 0.45485883 2 N low 1 20 0.10000000 0.30779351 2 N low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 2 N low 3 18 0.44444444 0.51130999 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ■CHANGE- STORY RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A 1 B hig 1 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 A 1 B hig 2 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A 1 B hig 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 A 1 B low 1 10 0.60000000 0.51639778 A 1 B low 2 11 0.36363636 0.50452498 A 1 B low 3 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 A 1 N hig 1 13 0.30769231 0.48038446 A 1 N hig 2 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 A 1 N hig 3 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 A 1 N low 1 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 A 1 N low 2 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 A 1 N low 3 13 0.30769231 0.48038446 A 2 B hig 1 19 0.15789474 0.37463432 A 2 B hig 2 17 0.05882353 0.24253563 A 2 B hig 3 17 0.23529412 0.43723732 A 2 B low 1 14 0.35714286 0.49724516 A 2 B low 2 11 0.36363636 0.50452498 A 2 B low 3 11 0.45454545 0.52223297 A 2 N hig 1 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 A 2 N hig 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 A 2 N hig 3 13 0.38461538 0.50636968 A 2 N low 1 10 0.10000000 0.31622777 A 2 N low 2 7 0.28571429 0.48795004 A 2 N low 3 6 0.66666667 0.51639778 B B hig 1 16 0.00000000 0.00000000 B B hig 2 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 B B hig 3 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 B B low 1 10 0.10000000 0.31622777 B B low 2 7 0.42857143 0.53452248 B B low 3 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD B 1 N hig 1 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N hig 2 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 B 1 N hig 3 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 B 1 N low 1 10 0.40000000 0.51639778 B 1 N low 2 6 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 1 N low 3 10 0.40000000 0.51639778 B 2 B hig 1 21 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B hig 2 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 B hig 3 21 0.04761905 0.21821789 B 2 B low 1 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 B 2 B low 2 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 B 2 B low 3 6 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N hig 1 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 B 2 N hig 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 B 2 N hig 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 B 2 N low 1 10 0.10000000 0.31622777 B 2 N low 2 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 B 2 N low 3 12 0.33333333 0.49236596 Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD N B hig 1 31 0.12903226 0.34077710 N B hig 2 31 0.06451613 0.24973104 N B hig 3 33 0.09090909 0.29193710 N B low 1 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 N B low 2 20 0.30000000 0.47016235 N B low 3 18 0.27777778 0.46088860 N N hig 1 31 0.06451613 0.24973104 N N hig 2 24 0.04166667 0.20412415 N N hig 3 32 0.21875000 0.42001344 N N low 1 19 0.36842105 0.49559463 N N low 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 N N low 3 18 0.33333333 0.48507125 SB hig 1 39 0.00000000 0.00000000 SB hig 2 37 0.08108108 0.27672473 S B hig 3 38 0.15789474 0.36953702 S B low 1 28 0.32142857 0.47559487 S B low 2 25 0.28000000 0.45825757 S B low 3 21 0.19047619 0.40237391 S N hig 1 22 0.22727273 0.42893203 S N hig 2 25 0.16000000 0.37416574 S N hig 3 26 0.15384615 0.36794648 S N low 1 21 0.09523810 0.30079260 S N low 2 14 0.14285714 0.36313652 S N low 3 23 0.43478261 0.50686980 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... STORY SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD A N B hig 1 14 0.28571429 0.46880723 A N B hig 2 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 A N B hig 3 15 0.20000000 0.41403934 ANB low 1 9 0.55555556 0.52704628 ANB low 2 9 0.44444444 0.52704628 A N B low 3 11 0.27272727 0.46709937 ANN hig 1 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 A N N hig 2 14 0.00000000 0.00000000 A N N hig 3 16 0.18750000 0.40311289 A N N low 1 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 ANN low 2 11 0.27272727 0.46709937 A N N low 3 8 0.37500000 0.51754917 ASB hig 1 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 ASB hig 2 18 0.05555556 0.23570226 A S B hig 3 19 0.21052632 0.41885391 A S B low 1 15 0.40000000 0.50709255 A S B low 2 13 0.30769231 0.48038446 A s B low 3 12 0.25000000 0.45226702 A s N hig 1 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 A s N hig 2 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 4 8 5 Level of Level of Level of Level of ------CHANGE SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD S N hig 3 12 0.25000000 0.45226702 SN low 1 11 0.18181818 0.40451992 S N low 2 6 0.33333333 0.51639778 SN low 3 11 0.45454545 0.52223297 N B hig 1 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 NB hig 2 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 N B hig 3 18 0.00000000 0.00000000 N B low 1 9 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N B low 2 11 0.18181818 0.40451992 B N B low 3 7 0.28571429 0.48795004 B N N hig 1 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N N hig 2 10 0.10000000 0.31622777 B N N hig 3 16 0.25000000 0.44721360 B N N low 1 10 0.50000000 0.52704628 B NN low 2 7 0.00000000 0.00000000 B N N low 3 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 B S B hig 1 20 0.00000000 0.00000000 B SB hig 2 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B S B hig 3 19 0.10526316 0.31530177 B SB low 1 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 B S B low 2 12 0.25000000 0.45226702 B S B low 3 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 B SN hig 1 12 0.16666667 0.38924947 B s N hig 2 13 0.15384615 0.37553381 B s N hig 3 14 0.07142857 0.26726124 B s N low 1 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 B s N low 2 8 0.00000000 0.00000000 B s N low 3 12 0.41666667 0.51492865 Li Level of Level of Level of Level of ...... CHANGE...... Rl SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 1 N B hig 1 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 1 N B hig 2 15 0.06666667 0.25819889 1 N B hig 3 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 1 N B low 1 8 0.37500000 0.51754917 1 N B low 2 6 0.50000000 0.54772256 1 N B low 3 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 1 N N hig 1 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 1 NN hig 2 13 0.00000000 0.00000000 1 N N hig 3 16 0.12500000 0.34156503 1 N N low 1 9 0.55555556 0.52704628 1 N N low 2 9 0.22222222 0.44095855 1 N N low 3 10 0.30000000 0.48304589 1 SB hig 1 17 0.00000000 0.00000000 1 S B hig 2 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 1 S B hig 3 17 0.17647059 0.39295262 1 S B low 1 12 0.33333333 0.49236596 1 SB low 2 12 0.33333333 0.49236596 1 S B low 3 12 0.08333333 0.28867513 1 S N hig 1 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 1 S N hig 2 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 1 s N hig 3 13 0.07692308 0.27735010 1 s N low 1 11 0.18181818 0.40451992 1 s N low 2 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 1 s N low 3 13 0.38461538 0.50636968 2 N B hig 1 18 0.16666667 0.38348249 2 N B hig 2 16 0.06250000 0.25000000 2 N B hig 3 17 0.11764706 0.33210558 2 N B low 1 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 2 N B low 2 14 0.21428571 0.42581531 2 N B low 3 8 0.25000000 0.46291005 2 N N hig 1 15 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 N N hig 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 2 N N hig 3 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 2 N N low 1 10 0.20000000 0.42163702 2 N N low 2 9 0.11111111 0.33333333 2 N N low 3 8 0.37500000 0.51754917 2 S B hig 1 22 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 S B hig 2 19 0.00000000 0.00000000 486 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ■...... CHANGE...... RECALPOS SNS VI HEM FEEDBACK N Mean SD 2 S B hig 3 210.14285714 0.35856858 2 S B low 1 16 0.31250000 0.47871355 2 S B low 2 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 2 S B low 3 9 0.33333333 0.50000000 2 S N hig 1 12 0.25000000 0.45226702 2 S N hig 2 11 0.09090909 0.30151134 2 S N hig 3 13 0.23076923 0.43852901 2 S N low 1 10 0.00000000 0.00000000 2 S N low 2 7 0.14285714 0.37796447 2 S N low 3 10 0.50000000 0.52704628 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of ---CHANGE— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean A 1 N B hig 1 5 0.20000000 A 1 N B hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 1 N B hig 3 8 0.12500000 A 1 N B low 1 3 1.00000000 A 1 N B low 2 4 0.50000000 A 1 N B low 3 6 0.16666667 A 1 N N hig 1 9 0.22222222 A 1 N N hig 2 8 0.00000000 A 1 N N hig 3 9 0.00000000 A 1 N N low 1 4 0.25000000 A 1 N N low 2 7 0.28571429 A 1 N N low 3 7 0.28571429 A 1 S B hig 1 9 0.00000000 A 1 S B hig 2 9 0.11111111 A 1 S B hig 3 9 0.22222222 A 1 SB low 1 7 0.42857143 A 1 S B low 2 7 0.28571429 A 1 S B low 3 6 0.00000000 A 1 S N hig 1 4 0.50000000 A 1 S N hig 2 7 0.14285714 A 1 S N hig 3 6 0.16666667 A 1 S N low 1 6 0.33333333 A 1 S N low 2 3 0.33333333 A 1 S N low 3 6 0.33333333 A 2 N B hig 1 9 0.33333333 A 2 N B hig 2 8 0.12500000 A 2 N B hig 3 7 0.28571429 A 2 N B low 1 6 0.33333333 A 2 N B low 2 5 0.40000000 A 2 N B low 3 5 0.40000000 A 2 N N hig 1 7 0.00000000 A 2 N N hig 2 6 0.00000000 A 2 N N hig 3 7 0.42857143 A 2 N N low 1 5 0.20000000 A 2 N N low 2 4 0.25000000 A 2 N N low 3 1 1.00000000 A 2 S B hig 1 10 0.00000000 A 2 S B hig 2 9 0.00000000 A 2 S B hig 3 10 0.20000000 A 2 S B low 1 8 0.37500000 A 2 S B low 2 6 0.33333333 A 2 S B low 3 6 0.50000000 A 2 S N hig 1 6 0.16666667 A 2 S N hig 2 5 0.20000000 A 2 S N hig 3 6 0.33333333 A 2 S N low 1 5 0.00000000 A 2 S N low 2 3 0.33333333 A 2 S N low 3 5 0.60000000 B 1 N B hig 1 8 0.00000000 B 1 N B hig 2 7 0.14285714 B 1 N B hig 3 8 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 1 5 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 2 2 0.50000000 B 1 N B low 3 4 0.50000000 B 1 N N hig 1 7 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 2 5 0.00000000 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of --CHANGE--- STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK N Mean B 1 NN hig 3 7 0.28571429 B 1 N N low 1 5 0.80000000 B 1 N N low 2 2 0.00000000 B 1 NN low 3 3 0.33333333 B 1 S B hig 1 8 0.00000000 B 1 S B hig 2 9 0.22222222 B 1 S B hig 3 8 0.12500000 B 1 S B low 1 5 0.20000000 B 1 S B low 2 5 0.40000000 B 1 S B low 3 6 0.16666667 B 1 S N hig 1 6 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 2 7 0.28571429 B 1 S N hig 3 7 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 1 5 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 3 7 0.42857143 B 2 N B hig 1 9 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 2 8 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 3 10 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 1 A 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 2 9 0.11111111 B 2 N B low 3 3 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 1 8 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 2 5 0.20000000 B 2 N N hig 3 9 0.22222222 B 2 N N low 1 5 0.20000000 B 2 N N low 2 5 0.00000000 B 2 N N low 3 7 0.28571429 B 2 S B hig 1 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B hig 2 10 0.00000000 B 2 s B hig 3 11 0.09090909 B 2 s B low 1 8 0.25000000 B 2 s B low 2 7 0.14285714 B 2 s B low 3 3 0.00000000 B 2 s N hig 1 6 0.33333333 B 2 s N hig 2 6 0.00000000 B 2 s N hig 3 7 0.14285714 B 2 s N low 1 5 0.00000000 B 2 s N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 2 s N low 3 5 0.40000000 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level Level of --CHANGE— STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK SD A B hig 1 5 0.44721360 A B hig 2 8 0.00000000 A B hig 3 8 0.35355339 A B low 1 3 0.00000000 A B low 2 4 0.57735027 A B low 3 6 0.40824829 A N hig 1 9 0.44095855 A N hig 2 8 0.00000000 A N hig 3 9 0.00000000 A N low 1 4 0.50000000 A N low 2 7 0.48795004 A N low 3 7 0.48795004 A B hig 1 9 0.00000000 A B hig 2 9 0.33333333 A B hig 3 9 0.44095855 A B low 1 7 0.53452248 A B low 2 7 0.48795004 A B low 3 6 0.00000000 A N hig 1 4 0.57735027 A N hig 2 7 0.37796447 A N hig 3 6 0.40824829 A N low 1 6 0.51639778 A N low 2 3 0.57735027 A N low 3 6 0.51639778 A B hig 1 9 0.50000000 A B hig 2 8 0.35355339 4 8 8 Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of — CHANGE--- STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEN FEEDBACK N SD A 2 N B hig 3 7 0.48795004 A 2 N B low 1 6 0.51639778 A 2 N B low 2 5 0.54772256 A 2 N B low 3 5 0.54772256 A 2 N N hig 1 7 0.00000000 A 2 NN hig 2 6 0.00000000 A 2 N N hig 3 7 0.53452248 A 2 N N low 1 5 0.44721360 A 2 N N low 2 4 0.50000000 A 2 N N low 3 1 A 2 S B hig 1 10 0.00000000 A 2 S B hig 2 9 0.00000000 A 2 S B hig 3 10 0.42163702 A 2 S B low 1 8 0.51754917 A 2 S B low 2 6 0.51639778 A 2 S B low 3 6 0.54772256 A 2 S N hig 1 6 0.40824829 A 2 S N hig 2 5 0.44721360 A 2 S N hig 3 6 0.51639778 A 2 S N low 1 5 0.00000000 A 2 S N low 2 3 0.57735027 A 2 S N low 3 5 0.54772256 B 1 N B hig 1 8 0.00000000 B 1 N B hig 2 7 0.37796447 B 1 N B hig 3 8 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 1 5 0.00000000 B 1 N B low 2 2 0.70710678 B 1 N B low 3 4 0.57735027 B 1 N N hig 1 7 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 2 5 0.00000000 B 1 N N hig 3 7 0.48795004 B 1 N N low 1 5 0.44721360 B 1 N N low 2 2 0.00000000 B 1 N N low 3 3 0.57735027 B 1 S B hig 1 8 0.00000000 B 1 S B hig 2 9 0.44095855 B 1 S B hig 3 8 0.35355339 B 1 S B low 1 5 0.44721360 B 1 S B low 2 5 0.54772256 B 1 S B low 3 6 0.40824829 B 1 S N hig 1 6 0.00000000 B 1 S N hig 2 7 0.48795004 B 1 S N hig 3 7 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 1 5 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 1 S N low 3 7 0.53452248 B 2 N B hig 1 9 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 2 8 0.00000000 B 2 N B hig 3 10 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 1 4 0.00000000 B 2 N B low 2 9 0.33333333 B 2 N B low 3 3 0.00000000 B 2 N N hig 1 8 0.00000000 B 2 NN hig 2 5 0.44721360 B 2 N N hig 3 9 0.44095855 B 2 N N low 1 5 0.44721360 B 2 N N low 2 5 0.00000000 B 2 N N low 3 7 0.48795004 B 2 S B hig 1 12 0.00000000 B 2 S B hig 2 10 0.00000000 B 2 S B hig 3 11 0.30151134 B 2 S B low 1 8 0.46291005 B 2 S B low 2 7 0.37796447 B 2 S B low 3 3 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 1 6 0.51639778 B 2 S N hig 2 6 0.00000000 B 2 S N hig 3 7 0.37796447 B 2 S N low 1 5 0.00000000 B 2 S N low 2 4 0.00000000 B 2 S N low 3 5 0.54772256 489 Analysis 32. The change analysis controlling for failure to encode and source memory, Study 4. General Linear Hodels Procedure Dependent Variable: CHANGE Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Square F Value Pr > F Model 223 38.58236507 0.17301509 1.35 0.0051 Error 388 49.71011859 0.12811886 Corrected Total 611 88.29248366 R-Square C.V. Root MSE CHANGE Mean 0.436984 204.7266 0.3579370 0.1748366 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F SN(ST0R*RECA*SNS*VI) 127 18.80335595 0.14805792 1.16 0.1501 FEED ID 1 0.00237972 0.00237972 0.02 0.8917 STORY 1 1.85137381 1.85137381 14.45 0.0002 RECALPOS 1 0.01407386 0.01407386 0.11 0.7405 STORY*RECALPOS 1 0.56008164 0.56008164 4.37 0.0372 SNS 1 0.05154945 0.05154945 0.40 0.5262 STORY*SNS 1 0.00078520 0.00078520 0.01 0.9376 RECALP0S*SNS 1 0.00011475 0.00011475 0.00 0.9761 STORY*RECALPOS*SNS 1 0.19423559 0.19423559 1.52 0.2190 VI 1 0.24977972 0.24977972 1.95 0.1634 STORY*VI 1 0.12141900 0.12141900 0.95 0.3309 RECALP0S*VI 1 0.20896213 0.20896213 1.63 0.2023 ST0RY*RECALP0S*VI 1 0.13916109 0.13916109 1.09 0.2980 SNS*VI 1 0.00350555 0.00350555 0.03 0.8687 STORY*SNS*VI 1 0.84550316 0.84550316 6.60 0.0106 RECALPOS*SNS*VI 1 0.04698965 0.04698965 0.37 0.5451 ST0RY*RECALP0*SNS*VI 1 0.33681922 0.33681922 2.63 0.1057 MEM 1 3.50746211 3.50746211 27.38 0.0001 STORY*MEM 1 0.25870307 0.25870307 2.02 0.1561 RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.04749794 0.04749794 0.37 0.5430 STORY*RECALPOS*MEM 1 0.31558614 0.31558614 2.46 0.1174 SNS*MEM 1 0.30140723 0.30140723 2.35 0.1259 STORY*SNS*MEM 1 0.00118261 0.00118261 0.01 0.9235 RECALP0S*SNS*MEM 1 0.13281097 0.13281097 1.04 0.3092 STORY*RECALP*SNS*MEM 1 0.00023120 0.00023120 0.00 0.9661 VI*MEM 1 0.06891179 0.06891179 0.54 0.4638 STORY*VI*MEM 1 0.02281190 0.02281190 0.18 0.6733 RECALPOS*VI*MEM 1 0.09686893 0.09686893 0.76 0.3851 STORY*RECALPO*VI*MEM 1 0.00917892 0.00917892 0.07 0.7891 SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.20655309 0.20655309 1.61 0.2049 STORY*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.00164636 0.00164636 0.01 0.9098 RECALPOS*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.21826658 0.21826658 1.70 0.1926 ST0R*RECA*SNS*VI*MEM 1 0.19733457 0.19733457 1.54 0.2153 FEEDBACK 2 0.72971636 0.36485818 2.85 0.0592 STORY*FEEDBACK 2 0.30221516 0.15110758 1.18 0.3086 RECALPOS*FEEDBACK 2 0.73445939 0.36722970 2.87 0.0581 STORY*RECALP*FEEDBAC 2 1.53956896 0.76978448 6.01 0.0027 SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.19437628 0.09718814 0.76 0.4690 STORY*SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.02856014 0.01428007 0.11 0.8946 RECALPO*SNS*FEEDBACK 2 0.11891230 0.05945615 0.46 0.6291 STOR*RECAL*SNS*FEEDB 2 0.05031724 0.02515862 0.20 0.8218 VI‘FEEDBACK 2 0.97872292 0.48936146 3.82 0.0228 STORY*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.76538743 0.38269372 2.99 0.0516 490 Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F RECALPOS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.51080120 0.25540060 1.99 0.1376 STORY*RECAL*VI*FEEDB 2 0.14024020 0.07012010 0.55 0.5790 SNS*VI*FEEDBACK 2 0.12400299 0.06200149 0.48 0.6167 STORY*SNS*VI*FEEDBAC 2 0.82157869 0.41078935 3.21 0.0416 RECALP*SNS*VI*FEEDBA 2 0.08998375 0.04499188 0.35 0.7041 STO*RECA*SNS*VI*FEED 2 0.36308667 0.18154333 1.42 0.2437 MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.05009721 0.02504861 0.20 0.8225 STORY*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.19719015 0.09859507 0.77 0.4639 RECALPO*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.15736990 0.07868495 0.61 0.5416 STOR*RECAL*MEM* FEEDB 2 0.35858646 0.17929323 1.40 0.2480 SNS*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.15844312 0.07922156 0.62 0.5394 STORY*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.04266649 0.02133324 0.17 0.8467 RECAL*SNS*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.00338208 0.00169104 0.01 0.9869 STO*REC*SNS*MEM*FEED 2 0.08304105 0.04152052 0.32 0.7234 VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 1.23850707 0.61925354 4.83 0.0084 STORY*VI*MEM*FEEDBAC 2 1.12965285 0.56482643 4.41 0.0128 RECALP*VI*MEM*FEEDBA 2 0.03039592 0.01519796 0.12 0.8882 STO*RECA*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.76190289 0.38095145 2.97 0.0523 SNS*VI*MEM*FEEDBACK 2 0.79327447 0.39663724 3.10 0.0464 STOR*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.83324589 0.41662295 3.25 0.0398 RECA*SNS*VI*MEM*FEED 2 0.09326703 0.04663351 0.36 0.6951 ST*RE*SNS*VI*MEM*FEE 2 0.00279843 0.00139922 0.01 0.9891 Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F feedback linear 1 0.60603865 0.60603865 4.73 0.0302 feedback quadratic 1 0.20199577 0.20199577 1.58 0.2100 General Linear Models Procedure Least Squares Means STORY CHANGE LSMEAN 0.28138999 0.15513534 RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN 0.22383583 0.21268950 STORY RECALPOS CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 0.25206697 A 2 0.31071301 B 1 0.19560468 B 2 0.11466599 SNS CHANGE LSMEAN 0.22890528 0.20762005 STORY SNS CHANGE LSMEAN AN 0.29332951 A S 0.26945047 BN 0.16448105 B S 0.14578962 RECALPOS SNS CHANGE LSMEAN 1 N 0.23397893 1 S 0.21369272 2 N 0.22383163 2 S 0.20154737 491 STORY RECALPOS SNS CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 N 0.24286308 A 1 S 0.26127087 A 2 N 0.34379594 A 2 S 0.27763008 B 1 N 0.22509478 B 1 S 0.16611458 B 2 N 0.10386732 B 2 S 0.12546467 VI CHANGE LSMEAN 0.19501061 0.24151472 STORY VI CHANGE LSMEAN A 0.27431165 A 0.28846834 B 0.11570958 B 0.19456110 RECALPOS VI CHANGE LSMEAN 0.22185278 0.22581887 0.16816844 0.25721056 STORY RECALPOS VI CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 B 0.24890627 A 1 N 0.25522768 A 2 B 0.29971703 A 2 N 0.32170899 B 1 B 0.19479929 B 1 N 0.19641007 B 2 B 0.03661986 B 2 N 0.19271213 SNS VI CHANGE LSMEAN N B 0.20833889 N N 0.24947168 S B 0.18168234 S N 0.23355776 STORY SNS VI CHANGE LSMEAN AN B 0.33166183 AN N 0.25499719 A SB 0.21696146 AS N 0.32193948 B N B 0.08501594 B N N 0.24394616 B S B 0.14640321 BS N 0.14517603 RECALPOS SNS VI CHANGE LSMEAN N B 0.24477688 N N 0.22318098 S B 0.19892868 S N 0.22845677 RECALPOS SNS VI CHANGE LSMEAN 2 N B 0.17190089 2 N N 0.27576238 2 S B 0.16443600 2 S N 0.23865874 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 N B 0.32220525 A 1 N N 0.16352091 A 1 S B 0.17560729 A 1 S N 0.34693444 A 2 N B 0.34111842 A 2 N N 0.34647347 A 2 S B 0.25831564 A 2 S N 0.29694452 B 1 N B 0.16734852 B 1 N N 0.28284104 B 1 S B 0.22225006 B 1 S N 0.10997910 B 2 N B 0.00268335 B 2 N N 0.20505129 B 2 S B 0.07055637 B 2 S N 0.18037297 MEM CHANGE LSMEAN hig 0.13196088 low 0.30456445 STORY MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 0.17164298 A low 0.39113700 B hig 0.09227878 B low 0.21799189 RECALPOS MEM CHANGE LSMEAN 1 hig 0.12748518 1 low 0.32018647 2 hig 0.13643658 2 low 0.28894243 STORY RECALPOS MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 hig 0.15814995 A 1 low 0.34598400 A 2 hig 0.18513602 A 2 low 0.43629001 B 1 hig 0.09682041 B 1 low 0.29438894 B 2 hig 0.08773714 B 2 low 0.14159485 SNS MEM CHANGE LSMEAN N hig 0.11730882 N low 0.34050174 S hig 0.14661294 S low 0.26862716 (DO)C8CDQ9a>a300>>>>>>>> TR SS MEM SNS STORY :CALPOS 1ECALPOS i 0.15598259 hig N N B > B > > I I I I > o 0.40316436 low B A i 0.14545894 hig B A A A B B B B S A STORY N A A A S N B B B B 2 RECALPOS 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 i 0.21172346 hig 1 S N 1 1 1 1 1 i 0.16735994 0.29345940 low 0.09656182 hig low N hig N B B VI o 0.25222935 0.13689285 low hig N N o 0.18375444 low B N N VI i 0.04766471 hig B N S N S N E CHANGE MEM S S N S S N N E CHANGE MEM SNS N o 0.33568384 low N VI N B B E CHANGE MEM hig i 0.20882878 N hig N S 0.10712691 hig S N SNS MEM CHANGE CHANGE MEM SNS i 0.16144326 hig 0.31081828 s S low 0.38114973 N low S N i 0.10615813 0.13841848 hig 0.06931616 low 0.22510224 hig S low N N S low hig hig hig hig o 0.18493673 0.25104706 low 0.35231759 low 0.42995642 low low E CHANGE 0.09898777 hig MEM i 0.09413588 hig hig i 0.13380069 0.13907247 hig 0.15942518 hig hig i 0.09554518 hig o 0.34471779 low low o 0.29565515 low o 0.26929406 0.30859080 low 0.26796026 low low o 0.37241268 low 0.31566950 i 0.08651392 hig i 0.10457643 hig o 0.39381690 low o 0.14477121 low 0.36367564 low o 0.47876311 low 0.37910965 0.19782703 LSMEAN 0.07791504 0.18658336 0.15670261 0.10664252 0.17873728 0.24220101 LSMEAN CHANGE LSMEAN LSMEAN LSMEAN LSMEAN STORY RECALPOS VI MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 B hig 0.11710268 A 1 B low 0.38070986 A 1 N hig 0.19919722 A 1 N low 0.31125814 A 2 B hig 0.17381520 A 2 B low 0.42561886 A 2 N hig 0.19645684 A 2 N low 0.44696115 B 1 B hig 0.08087286 B 1 B low 0.30872572 B 1 N hig 0.11276797 B 1 N low 0.28005217 B 2 B hig 0.01445656 B 2 B low 0.05878316 B 2 N hig 0.16101773 B 2 N low 0.22440653 SNS VI MEM CHANGE LSMEAN N B hig 0.10554411 N B low 0.31113366 N N hig 0.12907353 N N low 0.36986982 S B hig 0.08757953 S B low 0.27578515 S N hig 0.20564634 S N low 0.26146917 !Y SNS VI MEM CHANGE LSMEAN A NB hig 0.19500876 AN B low 0.46831491 AN N hig 0.11839646 ANN low 0.39159793 AS B hig 0.09590912 A SB low 0.33801381 A SN hig 0.27725760 ASN low 0.36662136 BNB hig 0.01607947 BNB low 0.15395241 BN N hig 0.13975061 BNN low 0.34814171 BS B hig 0.07924995 BSB low 0.21355648 B SN hig 0.13403509 BSN low 0.15631698 RECALPOS SNS VI MEM CHANGE LSMEAN N B hig 0.07925532 N B low 0.41029845 N N hig 0.11183503 NN low 0.33452692 S B hig 0.11872021 SB low 0.27913714 SN hig 0.20013016 SN low 0.25678338 NB hig 0.13183290 N B low 0.21196887 N N hig 0.14631204 NN low 0.40521272 S B hig 0.05643885 SB low 0.27243315 SN hig 0.21116253 SN low 0.26615496 03 03 03 03 00 09aara0303D3g3090a0900>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TR RCLO FEBC CHANGE FEEDBACK RECALPOS STORY EAPS FEEDBACK RECALPOS N S 2 i -0.00322630 hig B N 2 N N 2 2 i 0.18017683 FEEDBACK STORY hig N B B S S S S 2 2 2 2 N S S 2 2 2 2 2 2 EAPSSNS RECALPOS N N B N 2 2 N S 1 N B B N N N 1 1 1 1 B S 1 1 1 FEEDBACK N N N N i 0.14185862 hig N N N N S N N N N N B S B S S S N S N S 0.28000959 0.18619763 0.18858077 B B N B B B N B B VI N 0.15667795 0.21172350 0.09700455 0.34829568 0.21571732 0.28015698 CHANGE LSMEAN 0.32844977 0.16686443 0.14275430 0.23156940 0.20553084 0.23440724 i 0.12636048 hig i 0.03213942 hig i 0.03538524 0.24214823 hig hig 0.15076545 hig i 0.08789334 hig 0.13764260 hig E CHANGE MEM i 0.12312541 hig i 0.08073829 hig 0.26689210 0.31236697 hig 0.11107994 hig hig hig o 0.10897332 lou lou lou o 0.31813964 lou lou 0.42803948 0.29931180 lou lou lou lou o 0.52128509 lou o 0.43589299 0.54218149 lou lou 0.41534473 0.38150192 lou 0.24013464 lou lou o 0.24101437 lou CHANGE LSMEAN 0.11090274 0.50452940 0.22520740 0.20240223 0.19206196 0.20622723 0.35791174 CHANGE LSMEAN 0.35174081 0.13206485 0.18056911 0.26824395 0.00859301 0.08602746 LSMEAN LSMEAN STORY RECALPOS FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN B 1 2 0.20483444 B 1 3 0.27107685 B 2 1 0.08310637 B 2 2 0.10852146 B 2 3 0.15237015 SNS FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN N 1 0.21623205 N 2 0.16777065 N 3 0.30271314 S 1 0.16092949 S 2 0.20462462 S 3 0.25730604 1Y SNS FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A N 1 0.31396711 A N 2 0.18737478 A N 3 0.37864665 A S 1 0.24634686 AS 2 0.24405985 A S 3 0.31794470 B N 1 0.11849700 B N 2 0.14816652 B N 3 0.22677962 B S 1 0.07551211 BS 2 0.16518938 BS 3 0.19666738 RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 N 1 0.28293982 1 N 2 0.16998876 1 N 3 0.24900821 1 S 1 0.18587466 1 S 2 0.24107291 1 S 3 0.21413060 2 N 1 0.14952429 2 N 2 0.16555254 2 N 3 0.35641806 2 S 1 0.13598431 2 S 2 0.16817632 2 S 3 0.30048148 STORYRECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 N 1 0.39021511 A 1 N 2 0.15397126 A 1 N 3 0.18440287 A 1 S 1 0.32560836 A 1 S 2 0.25848320 A 1 S 3 0.19972104 A 2 N 1 0.23771910 A 2 N 2 0.22077830 A 2 N 3 0.57289043 A 2 S 1 0.16708537 A 2 S 2 0.22963650 A 2 s 3 0.43616837 B 1 N 1 0.17566454 B 1 N 2 0.18600626 B 1 N 3 0.31361355 B 1 S 1 0.04614095 B 1 S 2 0.22366262 B 1 S 3 0.22854016 B 2 N 1 0.06132947 497 STORY RECALPOS SNS FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN B 2 N 2 0.11032679 B 2 N 3 0.13994570 B 2 S 1 0.10488326 B 2 S 2 0.10671614 B 2 S 3 0.16479460 VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN B 1 0.19933353 B 2 0.19431003 B 3 0.19138828 N 1 0.17782801 N 2 0.17808524 N 3 0.36863090 STORY VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A B 1 0.36256253 A B 2 0.20262440 AB 3 0.25774803 AN 1 0.19775144 AN 2 0.22881024 AN 3 0.43884333 B B 1 0.03610454 B B 2 0.18599566 B B 3 0.12502853 B N 1 0.15790457 B N 2 0.12736025 B N 3 0.29841847 RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 B 1 0.22472556 1 B 2 0.23823673 1 B 3 0.20259605 1 N 1 0.24408892 1 N 2 0.17282494 1 N 3 0.26054276 2 B 1 0.17394150 2 B 2 0.15038332 2 B 3 0.18018051 2 N 1 0.11156710 2 N 2 0.18334555 2 N 3 0.47671904 STORY RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 B 1 0.41838958 A 1 B 2 0.17596087 A 1 B 3 0.15236836 A 1 N 1 0.29743389 A 1 N 2 0.23649359 A 1 N 3 0.23175555 A 2 B 1 0.30673547 A 2 B 2 0.22928792 A 2 B 3 0.36312769 A 2 N 1 0.09806900 A 2 N 2 0.22112688 A 2 N 3 0.64593110 B 1 B 1 0.03106154 B 1 B 2 0.30051260 B 1 B 3 0.25282373 B 1 N 1 0.19074395 B 1 N 2 0.10915628 B 1 N 3 0.28932997 B 2 B 1 0.04114754 STORY RECALPOS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN B 2 B 2 0.07147872 B 2 B 3 -0.00276667 B 2 N 1 0.12506520 B 2 N 2 0.14556421 B 2 N 3 0.30750697 SNS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN N B 1 0.23B99351 N B 2 0.19247164 N B 3 0.19355150 N N 1 0.19347060 NN 2 0.14306966 N N 3 0.41187477 S B 1 0.15967355 S B 2 0.19614841 S B 3 0.18922505 SN 1 0.16218542 S N 2 0.21310082 S N 3 0.32538703 STORY SNS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A N B 1 0.50507767 A N B 2 0.22662078 A N B 3 0.26328705 A N N 1 0.12285654 A N N 2 0.14812878 A N N 3 0.49400625 A S B 1 0.22004738 A S B 2 0.17862801 A S B 3 0.25220900 A S N 1 0.27264635 ASN 2 0.30949169 A S N 3 0.38368041 B N B 1 -0.02709065 B N B 2 0.15832250 B N B 3 0.12381596 B NN 1 0.26408466 B N N 2 0.13801054 B N N 3 0.32974329 B S B 1 0.09929973 B S B 2 0.21366881 B S B 3 0.12624111 B S N 1 0.05172449 B S N 2 0.11670996 B S N 3 0.26709365 RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 N B 1 0.29563869 1 N B 2 0.21186576 1 N B 3 0.22682621 1 N N 1 0.27024096 1 N N 2 0.12811176 1 N N 3 0.27119021 1 S B 1 0.15381243 1 S B 2 0.26460771 1 S B 3 0.17836589 1 S N 1 0.21793688 1 S N 2 0.21753811 1 S N 3 0.24989531 2 N B 1 0.18234833 2 N B 2 0.17307753 2 N B 3 0.16027680 2 N N 1 0.11670024 2 N N 2 0.15802756 RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 2 N N 3 0.55255933 2 S B 1 0.16553468 2 S B 2 0.12768911 2 S B 3 0.20008422 2 S N 1 0.10643395 2 S N 2 0.20866354 2 S N 3 0.40087875 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 NB 1 0.62348858 A 1 N B 2 0.15678360 A 1 N B 3 0.18634356 A 1 N N 1 0.15694164 A 1 N N 2 0.15115893 A 1 N N 3 0.18246218 A 1 S B 1 0.21329057 A 1 S B 2 0.19513814 A 1 S B 3 0.11839316 A 1 S N 1 0.43792615 A 1 S N 2 0.32182826 A 1 S N 3 0.28104893 A 2 N B 1 0.38666675 A 2 N B 2 0.29645797 A 2 N B 3 0.34023053 A 2 N N 1 0.08877145 A 2 N N 2 0.14509864 A 2 N N 3 0.80555032 A 2 S B 1 0.22680419 A 2 S B 2 0.16211787 A 2 S B 3 0.38602485 A 2 S N 1 0.10736654 A 2 S N 2 0.29715513 A 2 S N 3 0.48631189 B 1 N B 1 -0.03221121 B 1 N B 2 0.26694792 B 1 N B 3 0.26730885 B 1 N N 1 0.38354029 B 1 N N 2 0.10506459 B 1 N N 3 0.35991824 B 1 S B 1 0.09433429 B 1 S B 2 0.33407727 B 1 S B 3 0.23833862 B 1 S N 1 -0.00205238 B 1 S N 2 0.11324797 B 1 S N 3 0.21874170 B 2 N B 1 -0.02197009 B 2 N B 2 0.04969708 B 2 N B 3 -0.01967693 B 2 N N 1 0.14462903 B 2 N N 2 0.17095649 B 2 N N 3 0.29956834 B 2 S B 1 0.10426516 B 2 S B 2 0.09326035 B 2 S B 3 0.01414359 B 2 S N 1 0.10550136 B 2 S N 2 0.12017194 B 2 S N 3 0.31544561 MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN hig 1 0.11203575 hig 2 0.10445183 hig 3 0.17939506 low 1 0.26512579 low 2 0.26794344 low 3 0.38062412 500 STORY MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A hig 1 0.19771765 A hig 2 0.08085689 A hig 3 0.23635440 A low 1 0.36259632 A low 2 0.35057774 A low 3 0.46023695 B hig 1 0.02635385 B hig 2 0.12804677 B hig 3 0.12243572 B low 1 0.16765526 B low 2 0.18530914 B low 3 0.30101128 RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 hig 1 0.12240819 1 hig 2 0.12447699 1 hig 3 0.13557037 1 low 1 0.34640629 1 low 2 0.28658469 1 low 3 0.32756844 2 hig 1 0.10166331 2 hig 2 0.08442668 2 hig 3 0.22321975 2 low 1 0.18384529 2 low 2 0.24930219 2 low 3 0.43367980 STORY RECALPOS MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 hig 1 0.26109829 A 1 hig 2 0.06557260 A 1 hig 3 0.14777895 A 1 low 1 0.45472518 A 1 low 2 0.34688186 A 1 low 3 0.23634497 A 2 hig 1 0.13433701 A 2 hig 2 0.09614119 A 2 hig 3 0.32492986 A 2 low 1 0.27046746 A 2 low 2 0.35427362 A 2 low 3 0.68412894 B 1 hig 1 -0.01628192 B 1 hig 2 0.18338137 B 1 hig 3 0.12336179 B 1 low 1 0.23808741 B 1 low 2 0.22628751 B 1 low 3 0.41879191 B 2 hig 1 0.06898961 B 2 hig 2 0.07271217 B 2 hig 3 0.12150965 B 2 low 1 0.09722312 B 2 low 2 0.14433076 B 2 low 3 0.18323065 SNS MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN N hig 1 0.09023810 N hig 2 0.08112319 N hig 3 0.18056518 N low 1 0.34222601 N low 2 0.25441812 N low 3 0.42486109 S hig 1 0.13383340 S hig 2 0.12778048 S hig 3 0.17822494 S low 1 0.18802558 S low 2 0.28146876 S low 3 0.33638714 501 STORY SNS HEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A N hig 1 0.19239052 A N hig 2 0.04524459 A N hig 3 0.23247272 A N low 1 0.43554370 A N low 2 0.32950498 A N low 3 0.52482058 A S hig 1 0.20304479 A S hig 2 0.11646920 A S hig 3 0.24023608 A S low 1 0.28964894 AS low 2 0.37165050 A S low 3 0.39565332 B N hig 1 -0.01191431 BN hig 2 0.11700179 BN hig 3 0.12865764 B N low 1 0.24890832 B N low 2 0.17933126 B N low 3 0.32490161 BS hig 1 0.06462200 B S hig 2 0.13909175 B S hig 3 0.11621380 B S low 1 0.08640221 B S low 2 0.19128702 B S low 3 0.27712096 RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 N hig 1 0.10687505 1 N hig 2 0.06333043 1 N hig 3 0.11643005 1 N low 1 0.45900460 1 N low 2 0.27664709 1 N low 3 0.38158636 1 S hig 1 0.13794133 1 S hig 2 0.18562354 1 S hig 3 0.15471068 1 S low 1 0.23380799 1 S low 2 0.29652228 1 S low 3 0.27355051 2 N hig 1 0.07360115 2 N hig 2 0.09891594 2 N hig 3 0.24470031 2 N low 1 0.22544742 2 N low 2 0.23218914 2 N low 3 0.46813582 2 S hig 1 0.12972547 2 S hig 2 0.06993741 2 S hig 3 0.20173920 2 S low 1 0.14224316 2 S low 2 0.26641524 2 S low 3 0.39922377 STORY RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 N hig 1 0.22255580 A 1 N hig 2 0.00110435 A 1 N hig 3 0.09006915 A 1 N low 1 0.55787442 A 1 N low 2 0.30683817 A 1 N low 3 0.27873659 A 1 S hig 1 0.29964079 A 1 S hig 2 0.13004085 A 1 S hig 3 0.20548874 A 1 S low 1 0.35157594 A 1 S low 2 0.38692555 A 1 S low 3 0.19395334 A 2 N hig 1 0.16222523 A 2 N hig 2 0.08938482 STORY RECALPOS SNS MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 2 N hig 3 0.37487628 A 2 N low 1 0.31321297 A 2 N low 2 0.35217179 A 2 N low 3 0.77090457 A 2 S hig 1 0.10644879 A 2 S hig 2 0.10289755 A 2 S hig 3 0.27498343 A 2 S low 1 0.22772194 A 2 S low 2 0.35637545 A 2 S low 3 0.59735330 B 1 N hig 1 -0.00880570 B 1 N hig 2 0.12555650 B 1 N hig 3 0.14279095 B 1 N low 1 0.36013477 B 1 N low 2 0.24645602 B 1 N low 3 0.48443614 B 1 S hig 1 -0.02375814 B 1 S hig 2 0.24120624 B 1 S hig 3 0.10393263 B 1 S low 1 0.11604004 B 1 S low 2 0.20611901 B 1 S low 3 0.35314769 B 2 N hig 1 -0.01502293 B 2 N hig 2 0.10844707 B 2 N hig 3 0.11452433 B 2 N low 1 0.13768187 B 2 N low 2 0.11220650 B 2 N low 3 0.16536707 B 2 S hig 1 0.15300215 B 2 S hig 2 0.03697726 B 2 S hig 3 0.12849497 B 2 S low 1 0.05676438 B 2 S low 2 0.17645503 B 2 S low 3 0.20109423 VI HEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN B hig 1 0.06934283 B hig 2 0.06843932 B hig 3 0.15190332 B low 1 0.32932423 B low 2 0.32018073 B low 3 0.23087324 N hig 1 0.15472867 N hig 2 0.14046434 N hig 3 0.20688681 N low 1 0.20092735 N low 2 0.21570614 N low 3 0.53037499 STORY VI MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN AB hig 1 0.15163187 A B hig 2 0.05861154 A B hig 3 0.22613340 A B low 1 0.57349318 A B low 2 0.34663725 A B low 3 0.28936265 A N hig 1 0.24380344 A N hig 2 0.10310225 A N hig 3 0.24657540 AN low 1 0.15169945 A N low 2 0.35451823 A N low 3 0.63111126 B B hig 1 -0.01294620 BB hig 2 0.07826710 B B hig 3 0.07767323 BB low 1 0.08515528 BB low 2 0.29372421 STORY VI HEM FEEDBACKCHANGE LSMEAN BB low 3 0.17238384 B N hig 1 0.06565390 B N hig 2 0.17782643 BN hig 3 0.16719821 B N low 1 0.25015525 B N low 2 0.07689406 B N low 3 0.42963873 RECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 1 B hig 1 0.04749861 1 B hig 2 0.10726920 1 B hig 3 0.14219549 1 B low 1 0.40195251 1 B low 2 0.36920426 1 B low 3 0.26299661 1 N hig 1 0.19731777 1 N hig 2 0.14168477 1 N hig 3 0.12894525 1 N low 1 0.29086008 1 N low 2 0.20396511 1 N low 3 0.39214027 2 B hig 1 0.09118705 2 B hig 2 0.02960944 2 B hig 3 0.16161114 2 B low 1 0.25669595 2 B low 2 0.27115720 2 B low 3 0.19874988 2 N hig 1 0.11213957 2 N hig 2 0.13924392 2 N hig 3 0.28482836 2 N low 1 0.11099463 2 N low 2 0.22744718 2 N low 3 0.66860971 STORYRECALPOS VI MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 B hig 1 0.12074311 A 1 B hig 2 0.04220551 A 1 B hig 3 0.18835941 A 1 B low 1 0.71603605 A 1 B low 2 0.30971623 A 1 B low 3 0.11637731 A 1 N hig 1 0.40145348 A 1 N hig 2 0.08893968 A 1 N hig 3 0.10719849 A 1 N low 1 0.19341431 A 1 N low 2 0.38404750 A 1 N low 3 0.35631262 A 2 B hig 1 0.18252063 A 2 B hig 2 0.07501756 A 2 B hig 3 0.26390740 A 2 B low 1 0.43095032 A 2 B low 2 0.38355828 A 2 B low 3 0.46234798 A 2 N hig 1 0.08615339 A 2 N hig 2 0.11726481 A 2 N hig 3 0.38595231 A 2 N low 1 0.10998460 A 2 N low 2 0.32498895 A 2 N low 3 0.90590990 B 1 B hig 1 -0.02574589 B 1 B hig 2 0.17233289 B 1 B hig 3 0.09603157 B 1 B low 1 0.08786896 B 1 B low 2 0.42869230 B 1 B low 3 0.40961590 B 1 N hig 1 -0.00681795 B303Q30900Q9 09GD03 09 00 03G9 FEEDBACK 03 00 MEM 00QD VI RECALPOS STORY A A A A A A S hig A A low N B N A N N A N A A A low A N N N N A A A A N A N A N A TR N IMEM VI SNS STORY low B hig N B N N hig N N S N N S low N S S S S N VI SNS low low B B N N N hig B N N hig low B N S S N S low B S S S 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 s s s s s s low N N s B S hig N N low N N low N N hig N hig B B low N N N low N B B hig B low B low B B B hig N B N N hig N hig N low low B B B B B E FEEDBACK MEM hig hig hig hig hig low tow N N N N o 3 low 1 low B 2 hig B hig B 1 B tow N N N N N o 2 low N 3 hig B B i 3 hig N hig hig hig hig hig hig hig low low 3 26796999 9 9 6 9 7 6 .2 0 3 24199734 3 7 9 9 1 4 .2 0 3 3 3 17177627 2 6 7 7 1 7 .1 0 3 24734498 9 4 4 3 7 4 .2 0 2 . 3 9 8 6 7 4 2 0.3 2 0 3 3 1 9 1 .1 0 6 3 4 7 1 0 6 .0 0 2 3 2 2 58175220 2 2 5 7 1 8 .5 0 1 673 0.1840 2 3 2 17885667 6 6 5 8 8 7 .1 0 2 hig hig hig . 4 5 2 9 5 5 1 0.3 2 i 2 hig . 5 2 1 5 1 3 4 0.0 1 . 5 9 9 8 7 3 4 0.3 1 26630608 0 6 0 3 6 6 .2 0 1 050675 647 580 .0 0 1 13732496 9 4 2 3 7 3 .1 0 1 1 .03671 607 0.0013 1 31798640 4 6 8 9 7 1 .3 0 1 o 3 2 low low o 3 2 low low low . 4 3 4 7 7 5 1 0.2 3 22845296 9 2 5 4 8 2 .2 0 3 28864367 6 3 4 6 8 8 .2 0 3 5 9 5 5 9 3 5 0.7 3 . 3 8 7 9 6 4 6 0.2 3 30508282 8 2 8 0 5 0 .3 0 0 2 3 7 1 2 5 .0 0 2 2 3 6 1 8 0 90 0.2 7 4 2 9 4 6 3 .2 0 3 3 2 2 27081827 2 8 1 8 0 7 .2 0 9 2 9 3 4 5 2 .0 0 2 2 . 5 9 4 1 3 0 2 0.4 1 38630976 7 9 0 3 6 8 .3 0 1 0.01977981 1 8 8 9 4 0 5 6 .0 0 2 72667142 4 1 7 6 6 2 .7 0 1 1 2 9 3 8 4 3 1 8 .2 0 1 EDAK CHANGE FEEDBACK 3 2 1 1 1 47899778 7 7 9 9 8 7 .4 0 07670428 2 4 0 7 6 7 .0 0 19377650 5 6 7 7 3 9 .1 0 0.18467361 . 6 0 2 6 6 0 4 0.3 0.10207201 18076520 2 5 6 7 0 8 .1 0 38819169 6 1 9 1 8 8 .3 0 14441598 9 5 1 4 4 4 .1 0 .10129711 0 CHANGE LSMEAN 0. 2 2 8 4 8 4 6 .0 -0 0. 9 6 8 9 7 5 1 .0 2 -0 5 6 4 1 0 0 .0 -0 . 3 5 9 0 3 1 3 0.4 0.12990541 5 6 4 0 0 2 1 0.1 2 4 4 0 7 3 8 .1 0 2 0 3 2 2 1 6 .1 0 4 7 5 2 1 8 3 .1 0 0.15875612 9 5 1 4 4 2 8 .0 0 42796793 9 7 6 9 7 2 .4 0 05931489 8 4 1 3 9 5 .0 0 . 2 7 2 8 8 3 2 0.0 5 058 883 0.3 0.15069201 5 298 944 0.1 LSMEAN LSMEAN CHANGE 4 0 5 STORY SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A S N tow 1 0.15898293 A S N tow 2 0.43821818 ASN low 3 0.50266298 B N B hig 1 -0.00883401 B N B hig 2 0.05529884 B N B hig 3 0.00177357 B N B low 1 -0.04534730 BN B low 2 0.26134617 B N B low 3 0.24585835 B N N hig 1 -0.01499461 B N N hig 2 0.17870473 B N N hig 3 0.25554171 B N N low 1 0.54316393 BN N low 2 0.09731635 B N N tow 3 0.40394486 B S B hig 1 -0.01705840 B S B hig 2 0.10123537 B S B hig 3 0.15357288 B S B low 1 0.21565785 BS B low 2 0.32610225 BS B low 3 0.09890933 B S N hig 1 0.14630241 B S N hig 2 0.17694813 B S N hig 3 0.07885472 B S N low 1 -0.04285343 B S N low 2 0.05647178 B S N low 3 0.45533259 ECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN N B hig 1 0.11245299 N B hig 2 0.04906853 N B hig 3 0.07624444 N B low 1 0.47882438 N B low 2 0.37466299 N B low 3 0.37740797 N N hig 1 0.10129711 N N hig 2 0.07759232 N N hig 3 0.15661567 N N low 1 0.43918481 N N low 2 0.17863120 N N low 3 0.38576475 S B hig 1 -0.01745577 S B hig 2 0.16546987 S B hig 3 0.20814653 S B low 1 0.32508063 S B low 2 0.36374554 S B low 3 0.14858524 S N hig 1 0.29333842 S N hig 2 0.20577721 S N hig 3 0.10127483 S N low 1 0.14253535 S N low 2 0.22929902 S N low 3 0.39851579 N B hig 1 0.16219692 N B hig 2 0.07128018 N B hig 3 0.16202160 N B low 1 0.20249974 N B low 2 0.27487487 N B low 3 0.15853200 N N hig 1 -0.01499461 N N hig 2 0.12655171 N N hig 3 0.32737901 N N low 1 0.24839510 N N low 2 0.18950341 N N low 3 0.77773965 S B hig 1 0.02017718 S B hig 2 -0.01206131 S B hig 3 0.16120068 RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN 2 S B low 1 0.31089217 2 S B low 2 0.26743953 2 S B low 3 0.23896776 2 S N hig 1 0.23927375 2 S N hig 2 0.15193612 2 S N hig 3 0.24227772 2 S N low 1 -0.02640585 2 S N low 2 0.26539095 2 S N low 3 0.55947978 STORY RECALPOS SNS VI MEM FEEDBACK CHANGE LSMEAN A 1 N B hig 1 0.24236511 A 1 N B hig 2 -0.02709278 A 1 N B hig 3 0.15410389 A 1 N B low 1 1.00461206 A 1 N B low 2 0.34065998 A 1 N B low 3 0.21858323 A 1 NN hig 1 0.20274649 A 1 N N hig 2 0.02930148 A 1 N N hig 3 0.02603441 A 1 N N low 1 0.11113678 A 1 N N low 2 0.27301637 A 1 N N low 3 0.33888994 A 1 SB hig 1 -0.00087889 A 1 S B hig 2 0.11150381 A 1 S B hig 3 0.22261492 A 1 S B low 1 0.42746004 A 1 S B low 2 0.27877247 A 1 S B low 3 0.01417139 A 1 S N hig 1 0.60016047 A 1 S N hig 2 0.14857789 A 1 S N hig 3 0.18836256 A 1 S N low 1 0.27569183 A 1 S N low 2 0.49507862 A 1 S N low 3 0.37373529 A 2 N B hig 1 0.32460273 A 2 N B hig 2 0.15719253 A 2 N B hig 3 0.31888105 A 2 N B low 1 0.44873078 A 2 N B low 2 0.43572341 A 2 N B low 3 0.36158002 A 2 N N hig 1 -0.00015227 A 2 N N hig 2 0.02157711 A 2 N N hig 3 0.43087151 A 2 N N low 1 0.17769517 A 2 N N low 2 0.26862016 A 2 N N low 3 1.18022913 A 2 S B hig 1 0.04043852 A 2 S B hig 2 -0.00715741 A 2 s B hig 3 0.20893375 A 2 s B low 1 0.41316986 A 2 s B low 2 0.33139316 A 2 s B low 3 0.56311594 A 2 s N hig 1 0.17245905 A 2 s N hig 2 0.21295252 A 2 s N hig 3 0.34103311 A 2 s N low 1 0.04227403 A 2 s N low 2 0.38135774 A 2 s N low 3 0.63159066 B 1 N B hig 1 -0.01745913 B 1 N B hig 2 0.12522985 B 1 N B hig 3 -0.00161501 B 1 N B low 1 -0.04696330 B 1 N B low 2 0.40866600 B 1 N B low 3 0.53623271 B 1 N N hig 1 -0.00015227 B 1 N N hig 2 0.12588316 B 1 N N hig 3 0.28719692 LSMEAN 0.19367815 0.76723284 0.44871861 0.00937886 0.08424603 0.43263957 0.00516216 0.42329628 0.11402634 0.23152631 0.22388651 0.31909502 0.11038666 0.37525016 0.11346761 0.20861448 0.20348590 0.30608844 0.09091973 0.14352232 0.48736890 0.14942415 -0.03403265 -0.03648059 -0.00020889 -0.02983696 -0.01348363 -0.04373129 -0.04451602 -0.00008415 -0.01696521 -0.08518043 -0.09508572 FEEDBACKCHANGE1 11 0.22270122 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 OH low low low lowlow 2 tow 1 OH 1 OH 1 Low hig hig hig highig 1 hig 2 3 hig 2 VI MEM N BB B hig 2 0.21943594 N N BN low 3 0.28299909 N N B B hig 1 B N N B low 3 N NOH 1 1 B hig 3 B N hig 1 N NNN higN low 3 low 1 low 2 3 S S S S S BSSOH I S N 2 N hig hig 2 3 0.26297654 0.01418711 N N S N SNS S S S N I NB S s s s s s s s N s RECALPOS 2 N B hig 2 -0.01463217 2 S B hig 2 N 2 N 2 N B hig 3 2222 N 2 2 N2 N B N OH 1 N 3 N N N LouOH 1 2 3 2 22 S B hig 2 22 2 S B low 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 STORY CQCQCQCDCQCOCQCQCQCQCQCDCQCOCOGDCDCOCQCQCQCOGOCQCQCQCOCtiCOCDCQCOCQCOCOCOCOCQCQ