Skip to main content

Table 1 Mean Performance (M) and Standard Deviation (SD) in Young and Older Adults Groups, as well as age-related differences, for all tasks used in this study

From: Measurement of individual differences in face-identity processing abilities in older adults

  YA OA Mean across both groups t-Test  
  M SD Min Max M SD Min Max M SD Min Max t(240) p
CFMT .76 .12 .47 .98 .64 .13 .32 1.0 .71 .13 .32 1.0 7.1 < .001
GFMT .82 .10 .42 1.0 .77 .11 .50 1.0 .80 .11 .42 1.0 3.7 < .001
HP_CC .89 .07 .56 1.0 .79 .11 .42 .97 .85 .10 .42 1.0
HP_IC .72 .10 .40 .92 .60 .12 .30 .95 .67 .12 .32 .95
HP-res .03 .07 − .26 .20 − .03 .11 − .37 .17 .0 .09 − .36 .20 5.1 < .001
HP-diff .16 .11 − .03 .57 .18 .15 − .17 .57 .17 .13 − .17 .57 − 1.14
SA_LO .94 .08 .06 1.0 .90 .14 .03 1.0 .93 .11 .03 1.0
SA_HI .89 .09 .09 1.0 .76 .13 0.0 1.0 .83 .13 0.0 1.0
SA_res − .01 − .06 − .37 .11 .03 .10 − .49 .24 .001 .08 − .49 .24 − 4.9 < .001
MR .75 .23 .08 1.0 .61 .19 .08 1.0 .69 .22 .08 1.0 4.7 < .001
FI .75 .11 .41 1.0 .43 .15 .05 .83 .62 .20 .05 1.0 17.9 < .001
Acuity .95* .36 .56 2     
  1. YA Younger Adults, OA Older adults, GFMT Glasgow Face Memory Test, CFTM Cambridge Face Matching Test, HP_CC/HP_IC Holistic Processing congruent/incongruent condition (raw data), HP-diff Holistic Processing (difference measure), HP_res Holistic processing (residuals), SA-LO/SA-HI Selective Attention low/ high opacity (raw data), SA_res Selective Attention (residuals), MR Mental Rotation, FI Fluid Intelligence. Performance is indicated as proportion of correct responses, except for HP_res and SA_res where residuals were used as difference scores (see Methods for more details). For the composite task, averages for differences score (HP-diff = CC-IC) are also provided since this index provides a more intuitive measure of the strength of holistic processing.
  2. *Because of missing values, N = 98 for acuity (See Participants for more details)