We found that the interaction between Bias and Experiment approached significance (β = − 0.56, p = 0.0719); however, this marginal effect would indicate less learning in the reward manipulation than the neutral manipulation.
Even when maximizing the power to detect an effect of Rewarded Talker on the Bias effect, there was no evidence that the value of the talker during exposure translated to changes in the magnitude of the phonetic recalibration effect at test. As part of Question 1, in a comparison between an experiment with reward (Experiment 1A) and one without (Experiment 2B), there was a marginally significant interaction suggesting that including any reward at all may have made the bias effect smaller .
Significance is indicated by asterisk number adhering to classic convention: p < 0.001 (***), p < 0.01 (**), p < 0.05 (*), p > 0.05 ( +), marginal significance (.) Question 2: Does the exposure task influence the sensitivity of phonetic recalibration to talker value?