Experiencia profesional

Group 2.08 1.34 0.69 0.29 0.15 0.38 0.12

Group x valence 0.53 0.11 0.55 0.26 0.42 0.44 0.10

Group x SOA 1.20 1.80 2.45 0.01 1.51 0.02 0.90

Group x valence x SOA 0.23 0.48 1.80 0.02 2.91 3.40 4.61 * ** p < .01, * p < .05, (*) p < .10

Table 6.3

F-values for error rates to ‘target’ trials for each between-group variable. Significant F-values are

presented in bold.

Retro 1 Retro 2 Diary IES RRS BDI-II Extreme BDI-II

Group 0.20 0.60 0.05 0.88 0.16 0.03 0.01

Group x valence 0.38 0.77 3.78 (*) 0.84 0.49 0.11 0.06

Group x SOA 0.85 0.10 0.10 1.65 0.07 0.32 0.48

Group x valence x SOA 1.02 0.46 1.43 0.22 1.67 0.27 1.46 ** p < .01, * p < .05, (*) p < .10

RTs:The extreme BDI-II group x valence x SOA group interaction was significant, F

(1, 28) = 4.61, p = .04, partial η2 = .14. Post-hoc comparisons (Bonferroni corrected) revealed that the valence x SOA interaction was only present in the low extreme BDI- II group, F (1, 16) = 6.42, p = .02, partial η2 = .29, but not in the high extreme BDI-II group, F (1, 12) = 0.45, p > .05. Further breakdowns of the low extreme BDI-II group performance showed a significant difference between the SOAs for both the happy (t (17) = -3.32, p = .01) and sad (t (17) = -4.27, p = .01) stimuli.However, the difference was larger in the sad stimuli (difference = 106 ms) than in the happy stimuli (difference = 71 ms). These effects are displayed in Figure 6.4 below.

High extreme BDI-II group Low extreme BDI-II group

Figure 6.4. Mean RTs (with standard error bars) for ‘target’ trials, for the high and low extreme BDI-II groups respectively.

Error rates:The diary group x valence interaction approached significance, F (1, 40) = 3.78, p = .06, partial η2= .09. Pairwise comparisons (Bonferroni corrected) revealed this reflected a significant effect of valence in the high diary group, F (1, 17) = 14.42, p = .01, partial η2= .46, where more errors were made to sad stimuli than happy stimuli (mean sad = 3.68%, SD = .63, mean happy = 1.40%, SD = .40). There was no effect of valence in the low diary group, F (1, 23) = 0.95, p > .05, partial η2_{= .04} (mean happy = 1.76%, SD = .35, mean sad = 2.42%, SD = .54). This is displayed in Figure 6.5 below.

Figure 6.5. Mean error rates (with standard error bars) for happy and sad stimuli, split by high and low diary groups. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Happy Sad Er ror r ate (%) Valence High diary Low diary

ii) Non-target ‘(AY, BX, BY)’ trials:

There were five between-group comparisons on ‘non-target’ trials that were significant, and two that approached significance. F-values for all comparisons are presented in the Tables 6.4 and 6.5 below, for reaction time and error rates

respectively. Figures for the significant values are presented below the tables.

Table 6.4

F-values for reaction times to ‘non-target’ trials. Significant F-values are presented in bold.

Retro 1 Retro 2 Diary IES RRS BDI-II Extreme BDI-II

Group 1.10 1.48 0.36 0.01 0.01 0.38 0.17

Group x condition 1.99 0.16 1.22 3.83* 0.84 0.83 0.04

Group x valence 2.95 0.34 0.01 0.72 0.27 0.38 0.26

Group x SOA 0.02 0.06 1.36 0.52 2.07 0.01 1.65

Group x condition x valence 1.56 0.43 0.58 0.06 0.60 0.02 0.02

Group x condition x SOA 0.75 1.41 1.85 1.09 0.87 2.79 3.34* Group x valence x SOA 4.23* 1.87 2.14 0.45 0.41 0.48 0.04

Group x valence x SOA x condition 1.03 0.27 0.10 1.29 0.50 0.16 1.49 ** p < .01, * p < .05, (*) p < .10

Table 6.5

F-values for error rates to ‘non-target’ trials. Significant F-values are presented in bold.

Retro 1 Retro 2 Diary IES RRS BDI-II Extreme BDI-II

Group 0.39 0.27 0.12 0.07 0.10 0.60 0.76

Group x condition 0.14 0.98 0.01 0.12 0.01 1.65 0.93

Group x valence 0.15 0.25 0.01 0.23 1.17 0.12 1.57

Group x SOA 0.36 0.07 0.30 0.19 2.09 0.07 0.22

Group x condition x valence 1.03 0.98 0.26 3.06(*) 0.95 0.24 0.64

Group x condition x SOA 2.97 (*) 3.74 * 0.71 1.08 1.76 1.79 1.04

Group x valence x SOA 1.87 2.42 5.68 * 0.65 0.03 0.01 0.12

Group x valence x SOA x condition 1.18 1.08 10.28 ** 0.22 0.07 0.14 0.08 ** p < .01, * p < .05, (*) p < .10

RTs: The retro1 group x valence x SOA interaction was marginally significant, F (1, 2

showed that the valence x SOA interaction was significant in the low retrospective group, F (1, 23) = 11.02, p = .01, partial η2 = .32, but not in the high retro 1 group, F

(1, 17) = .04, p > .05. Further breakdowns of the low retro 1 group performance showed that the effect of SOA was significant in the happy stimuli, F (1, 23) = 15.61, p = .01, partial η2 = .40 (mean short: 697 ms, SD = 42.5, mean long: 788 ms, SD = 42.7), but not significant in the sad stimuli, F (1, 23) = 0.21, p > .05, partial η2 _{= .01} (mean short = 754 ms, SD = 47.3, mean long = 745 ms, SD = 36.7). These effects are displayed in Figure 6.6 below.

High retro 1 group Low retro 1 group

Figure 6.6. Mean RTs (with standard error bars) for ‘non-target’ trials, for high and low retrospective memory groups respectively.

The IES group x condition interaction was significant, F (1, 40) = 3.83, p =.03, partial

η2 = .09.In the high IES group there was a significant difference between AY (mean = 825 ms, 37.4) and both BX (mean = 705 ms, SD = 47.7) and BY trials (mean = 641 ms, SD = 37.6), both Fs > 11.27, both ps < .01. Importantly, there was also a

significant difference between BX and BY trials, F (1, 20) = 8.79, p = .01, partial η2 = .31. In the low IES group, there was a significant difference between AY (mean = 858

ms, SD = 50.6) and both BX (mean = 645 ms, SD = 34.9) and BY (mean =657 ms, SD = 37.9) trials, Fs > 53.9, ps < .01,both partial η2 > .73,but no significant difference between BX and BY trials, F (1, 20)= 0.57, p > .05. These effects are displayed in Figure 6.7 below.

Figure 6.7. Mean RTs (with standard error bars) for ‘non-target’ trials, split by high and low IES groups.

The extreme BDI-II x SOA x condition interaction was significant, F (2, 56) = 3.34, p = .04, partial η2= .11.Post-hoc comparisons revealed thatthe SOA x condition

interaction was significant in the high extreme BDI-II group, F (2, 24) = 5.39, p = .01, partial η2_{= .31,but not in the low extreme BDI-II group, F (2, 32) = 0.21, p > .05.} Further pairwise comparisons showed that for the high extreme BDI-II group, the difference between the SOAs was significant for AY trials, F (1, 12) = 19.97, p =.01, difference = 89 ms), but that the difference between SOAs was not significantly different for BX, F (1, 12) = 0.10, p > .05, difference = 12 ms, or BY trials, F (1, 12) = 0.48, p > .05, difference = 19 ms. These effects are displayed in Figure 6.8.