The model was extended to test the effects of each of age, sex, and handedness on memory performance. Post hoc, paired t-tests were used to explore bivariate contrasts. SPSS 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for the statistical analysis of performance data. Results Study subjects were 39 males and 51 females. Mean age was 37.27 (SD = 13.55). There were 70 right-handed and 20 left-handed subjects. Mean performance rates for each linguistic relationship within each phase

and condition Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical are given in Table 1. Mean accuracy rates for each relationship separated by condition are shown in Figure 1 and separated by phase are in Figure 2. Figure 1 Accuracy performance trends during encoding and recognition phase for each linguistic relationship separated by read (A) and generate (B) condition. Accuracy during the encoding phase (i.e., buy LY2157299 word-pairs task) represents the proportion of words that were … Figure 2 Accuracy performance for Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical read and generate conditions by each linguistic relationship separated by encoding (A) and recognition (B) phase. Accuracy during the encoding phase (i.e., word-pairs task) represents the proportion of words that were correctly … Table Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical 1 Mean accuracy

performance for each linguistic relationship by phase and condition The general linear model showed significant differences between the read and generate conditions, between encoding and recognition, and a significant interaction between the two (all P < 0.001). There were no significant effects of sex (P = 0.178), handedness (P = 0.543), or age (P = 0.178). In the full-factorial model including age, the main effect comparing accuracy between the encoding and recognition phases was diminished, although it

Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical remained marginally significant Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical (P = 0.077). The change in the significance of effect suggests that the difference between the encoding and recognition conditions may in part be due to age. Post hoc t-tests suggested that during encoding, read accuracy was significantly higher than generate accuracy for all relationships (P < 0.001). Conversely, during recognition, TCL the accuracy of recalling words that were self-generated was higher than the accuracy of recalling words that were read for the synonym (P = 0.003), opposite (P < 0.001), association (P = 0.011), and category relationships (P = 0.022). Accuracy during recognition was not different between the read and generate conditions when using the rhyme relationship (P = 0.243). The Holm–Bonferroni approach was applied to control the familywise error rate. All comparisons remained significant with the exception of accuracy during recognition using the rhyme relationship. Discussion and Conclusion Our finding that during encoding, words that were read were more accurately vocalized than words that were self-generated is expected.