Reading proficiency and adaptability in orthographic processing: an examination of the effect of type of orthography read on brain activity in regular and dyslexic readers.

PLoS One · 2014 · PMC3899085 · PMID 24465844

Europe PMC DOI

hedged sentences

0.0500

closest p · 1.0× alpha

0.0900

boldest claim

The sentences

marginally significantp≤.05actually significant

A main effect of form of script was marginally significant (F (1,46) = 4.02, p≤.05, η p 2 = .08), and the estimated marginal means suggested that the pointed script (mean = 346.40, SE = 2.95) elicited delayed amplitudes in comparison to the unpointed script (mean = 342.56, SE = 2.88).

also in 14,984 other papers

approaching significancep = .09so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

At the same time, in dyslexic readers there was an interaction approaching significance at PO7 between diacritics and stimulus (F (2,46) = 2.50, p = .09, η p 2 = .10).

also in 1,607 other papers

approached significancep = .09so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

The means suggested delayed latencies for pointed stimuli in comparison to unpointed stimuli only in the case of words (however, these only approached significance in a planned comparison, t (23) = 1.77, p = .09).

also in 5,256 other papers

failed to reach significanceno p-value reported

Although an interaction between form of script and group failed to reach significance, the data suggested that the mean amplitudes of pointed and unpointed words were very much alike at this latency in dyslexic readers.

also in 2,295 other papers

Quoted from the open-access full text in Europe PMC under the licence the publisher applied. The sentence is reproduced exactly as published; the emphasis is ours.