5.7.1 Name neutral condition
Across all observers and conditions there was a total of 3456 individual decision-time scores, this means that there were 864 individual decision-time scores for each condition. For each condition, FECDOs and ICDOs phenomenologically described by observers in the experiment 1 was assigned the numerical value of 1 and 0 respectively. For name neutral condition after omitting the incorrect responses – 19 FECDOs and 15 ICDOs there was a total of 830 individual decision-time scores remaining.
Because observers’ responses could be based on guessing or mouse errors, or misunderstanding of the task along with a host of factors including participant characteristics (e.g., complexity of stimuli, age, intelligence), coupled with the elusive nature of reaction time literature, with respect to the lower and upper limit decision time values, mock participants were used to establish cut off values in this condition as well as the other conditions (i.e. colour neutral, name Stroop and colour Stroop). In order to establish
79
the lower limit value mock participants were instructed to perform the task highlighted above for each condition with the correct responses highlighted by an arrow pointing towards the correct response. Overall, the average decision-time scores was never below 200ms. In order to establish a higher limit value, the same mock participants were used. However this time mock participants were forced to shift their attention to both colour names included in the orthographic representation and only then were they allowed to pick the correct response which was also highlighted by a appointed arrow. Overall no decision- time scores went above 2000 ms.
Furthermore after omitting decision-time scores less than 200ms or above 2000ms - 3 FECDOs and 2 ICDOs, there was a total of 825 individual decision-time scores remaining. For the FECDOs average decision-time score19 was .588 sec (588 ms) with SE of .025, while for the ICDOs average decision-time
score was .510 sec (510 ms) with SE of .039. While a two-way ANOVA on decision-time scores would had been appropriate if there was a need to control for an order effect, however in these experiments the presentations of objects were randomized in each condition as well as the condition presentation order (colour neutral, name Stroop and colour Stroop). Thus a within-subjects one-way ANOVA was performed in order to investigate if the difference between average decision-time scores were significant. The ANOVA revealed no significant difference between the decision-time scores with F1,23= 3.81, with p>0.05.
5.7.2 Colour neutral condition
For colour neutral condition after omitting the incorrect responses – 24 FECDOs and 18 ICDOs there was a total of 822 individual decision-time scores remaining. Decision-time scores less than 200ms or above 2000ms – 24 FECDOs and 10 ICDOs, was later omitted leaving a total of 788 individual decision-time scores remaining. FECDOs yielded an average decision-time score of .726 sec (726 ms) with SE of .039, while ICDOs yielded an average decision-time score of .623 sec (623 ms) with SE of .053. A within-subjects one- way ANOVA was performed revealed a significant difference between the decision-time scores with F1,23=
4.89, with p<0.05.
5.7.3 Name Stroop condition
For name Stroop condition the incorrect responses (72 FECDOs 80 ICDOs) were omitted leaving 712 individual decision-time scores. Next decision-time scores less than 200ms or above 2000ms (27 FECDOs 18 ICDOs) were omitted leaving 667 individual decision time scores. With respect to the average decision- time scores FECDOs yielded an average decision-time scores of .861 with an SE of .043, while the ICDOs yielded an average decision-time scores of .810 with an SE of .066. Following this a within-subjects one- way ANOVA was performed which revealed that the different between reaction time scores was not significant with F1,23= .864, with p>0.05.
19 By omitting decision-time scores, the ANOVA is mostly likely going to be effected by the unequal sample size for object type- FECDOs
and ICDOs. To control for this unequal sample size, the Type III method was used. As a result of this, instead of using the actual mean which takes into account the unequal sample size, the harmonic mean (or unweighted mean) was used in order to detect if there is in fact a mean effect of object type
80
5.7.4 Colour Stroop condition
For colour Stroop condition 311 decision times scores (169 FECDOs 142 ICDOs were omitted which left 553 individual decision-time scores. Following this, 67 decision-time scores (40 FECDOs 27 ICDOs) were omitted as they fell under 200ms or above 200ms. This left a total of 486 individual decision-time scores remaining. FECDOs yielded an average decision-time of .769 (769ms) with a SE of .065, while ICDOs yielded an average decision-time score of .682 (682ms) with a SE of .068.Finally a within-subjects one-way ANOVA was performed which revealed that the different between reaction time scores was not significant with
F1,23= .563, with p>0.05.
5.4: Evidence for the effect of correct-non prototypical colours on frequently experienced colour diagnostic objects. On the Y axis is the decision-time in sec with its associated standard error for each object type in each condition. On the X axis is each of the experimental conditions, while the yellow bars represent the frequently experienced colour diagnostic objects and the blue bars
represent the infrequent colour diagnostic objects.