So How Exactly Does AZ20 Perform?

36, SE = 48.74, t = -2.96, p and holistic distances were significant predictors of accuracy rates. When both distances were simultaneously entered in a regression, however, only the componential distance significantly predicted accuracy rates (R2 = 0.05), B = 0.02, SE = 0.01, t = 2.57, p 0.05. This suggests that componential processing played a more important role. For task 3, simple regressions for children revealed both componential and holistic IKK inhibitors library distances could significantly predict RTs, as listed in Table ?Table33. When both distances were simultaneously entered in a regression, only the effect of the componential distance remained significant (R2 = 0.14), B = -90.06, SE = 36.18, t = -2.49, p 0.05. As listed in Table ?Table33, the holistic distance could significantly predict accuracy rates for children. However, when both distances were simultaneously entered in a regression, neither the holistic distance nor the componential distance was a significant predictor, B= 0.15, SE = 0.10, t = 1.41, p > 0.05, and B = 0.01, SE = 0.02, t = 0.51, p > 0.05, respectively. In short, children mainly used componential processing, as revealed by the results of RTs. Table 3 Prediction of two types of distance in Task 3. For adults, as revealed by AZ20 simple regressions Ozagrel (Table ?Table33), both componential and holistic distances were significant predictors of RTs and accuracy rates. When both distances were simultaneously entered in a regression, only the componential distance significantly predicted RTs (R2 = 0.28), B= -75.21, SE = 11.84, t = -6.35 p > 0.05. Similarly, only the componential distance significantly predicted accuracy rates (R2 = 0.12), B = 0.04, SE = 0.01, t = 4.35, p 0.05. In sum, these results indicate componential processing by adults. In addition, in order to compare the performance of children and adults in task 1 and 2, ANOVAs on RTs and accuracy rates for each fraction with groups (children and adults) and tasks (1 and 2) as between-subject variables were conducted. The RTs and accuracy of each fraction in tasks 1 and 2 are listed in Table ?Table44 and Table ?Table55, respectively. Results on RTs and accuracy showed significant effects of groups in all fractions, Fs > 24.68, ps