In addition, while no significant changes were found for the arousal ratings [ t (25)=0.31, p=0.757, d = 0.049, BF +0 =0.26], the drug effect approached significance for confidence ratings [ t (25)=2.05, p=0.051, d = 0.51, BF +0 =2.40] and was significant for pleasantness ratings [ t (25)=2.70, p=0.012, d = 0.64, BF +0 =7.93], where scores for remembered words at 24 hr where higher under levodopa than under risperidone (as compared to placebo; see Figure 1B ).
For the pleasantness ratings, however, the difference was close to significance [ t (23)=2.02, p=0.055, d = 0.40, BF +0 =2.32].
We have added more information about this participant in the Results section: “Importantly, this participant obtained the highest (more anhedonic) score on the PAS (score of 24, more than 2 standard deviations above the mean score of 11.62 of the group).” The PAS showed a trend for a correlation with the learning and memory scores during the placebo session as shown in the previous answer to point 2 and in Figure 2—figure supplement 1.
When dividing the participants into two groups according to their PAS scores (H+, H-), a significant Group x Intervention interaction was found for the total number of remembered words on Day 2 [ F (2,50)=7.825, p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.262, BF Inclusion = 25.747], while for the percentage of words learned on Day 1 [ F (2,50)=2.786, p=0.073, partial η2 = 0.112, BF Inclusion = 1.204] and the recognition rate on Day 2 [ F (2,50)=2.615, p=0.084, partial η2 = 0.106, BF Inclusion = 1.047] the interaction was marginally significant (see Figure 1—figure supplement 1B ).