highly significantp <.001
time point 2) confirmed that both effects were highly significant (ratio: F (2, 110) = 59.58, partial η 2 = .52, p <.001; time: F (1, 55) = 27.74, partial η 2 = .33, p <.001).
time point 2) confirmed that both effects were highly significant (ratio: F (2, 110) = 59.58, partial η 2 = .52, p <.001; time: F (1, 55) = 27.74, partial η 2 = .33, p <.001).
Only the correlation with the counting list failed to reach significance when general cognitive factors were controlled for (time point 1: r (45) = .17, p = .24; time point 2: r (45) = .20, p = .17).