The prominent peak for the FP300‐complex condition that is visible in Figure 3B presumably contributed to the significant main effect for FP ( Fc (1, 23) = 5.41, p = 0.029, η p 2 = 0.19) and to an almost significant RC × FP interaction ( Fc (1, 23) = 3.17, p = 0.088, η p 2 = 0.12). 3.3 S‐Locked Surface Laplacian Waves Figure 4A shows S‐locked SLWs as a function of FP duration and hemisphere, collapsed across RC condition.
Consequently, the main effect for RC and its interaction with FP only approached significance ( Fc (1, 23) = 2.48 and 3.14, p = 0.129 and 0.090, η p 2 = 0.10 and 0.12, respectively).
The difference did not achieve significance in the simple condition (122 & 130 ms; t (23) = −1.062, p = 0.299, d = 0.217).
The FP × RC interaction failed to reach significance for either LRP‐R or N‐40‐to‐R, but the potential for Müller‐Gethmann and colleagues' hypothesis to reconcile discrepancies in the literature encourages further research. 4.3 Aperture Hypothesis The odd reversal between hemispheres for FP effects on the SLW‐R interval in the data of Tandonnet et al.