Table 1: Comparison of ERF fitting results between Passive and Active tasks.

From: Age-related delay in visual and auditory evoked responses is mediated by white- and grey-matter differences

 Slope: Passive – Active
rs
Slope: Active
β [CI] (R2)
Slope: Passive
β [CI] (R2)
N
Auditory constant0.02−0.03 (−0.07, 0.01) (0)−0.03 (−0.07, 0.01) (0)513
Auditory cumulative−0.13**0.30 (0.22, 0.37) (0.09***)0.22 (0.17, 0.27) (0.14***)513
Visual constant0.000.31 (0.1, 0.47) (0.03***)0.38 (0.28, 0.48) (0.10***)473
Visual cumulative0.020.00 (−0.11, 0.12) (0)0.00 (−0.09, 0.08) (0)473
  1. Statistical tests to compare the template fitting results from the active and passive sessions. The fitting parameters from the Active task were those obtained after applying Passive weights to the Active task data (Supplementary Fig. 1). To test whether the slope of the relationship between each delay parameter and age differed across the two tasks, we calculated the difference between Passive and Active tasks for each participant, and used a Spearman’s correlation to test whether these difference scores were related to age. The age-effect was only significantly different across tasks for the auditory cumulative delay parameter (with a higher age-effect in the Active task). Data were removed from both Passive and Active tasks if an outlier existed in any column for a given modality, so that Passive and Active data sets contained equal numbers of participants. *P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001