The role of inhibition capacities in the Iowa gambling test performance in young tattooed women

BMC Psychology

Table 1 Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) on the GoNoGo task

GoNoGo	Adjusted mean (SD)		F	P
GoNoGo	Tattooed	Control	F	P
Overall
Group			2.23¹	.03*
Smoking			2.53¹	.01*
Education			1.02¹	.42
RT (part 1)
Group	392.45 (8.18)	57.86 (8.118)	7.89	.00*
Smoking			2.20	.14
Education			2.86	.09
SD of RT (part 1)
Group	75.14 (4.66)	72.22 (4.66)	.17	.67
Smoking			.14	.70
Education			.25	.61
Error of Omission (part 1)
Group	.49 (1.18)	.52 (1.18)	.00	.93
Smoking			.39	.52
Education			.88	.34
Error of Commission (part 1)
Group	.75 (.16)	1.14 (.16)	2.40	.12
Smoking			2.41	.12
Education			1.57	.21
RT (part 2)
Group	393.09 (8.47)	45.40 (8.47)	13.97	.00***
Smoking			8.47	.00**
Education			2.73	.10
SD of RT (part 2)
Group	83.28 (5.03)	66.14 (5.03)	5.12	.02*
Smoking			4.71	.03*
Education			.46	.49
Error of Omission (part 2)
Group	.44 (.16)	.39 (.16)	.03	.84
Smoking			.25	.61
Education			1.16	.28
Error of Commission (part 2)
Group	.97 (.019)	1.49 (.019)	3.08	.08
Smoking			4.03	.03*
Education		2.79		.09

Note. ¹ Wilks’ Lambda F. Group = tattooed vs. non-tattooed women. *p < .05. **p < .01. *** p < .001. The means were adjusted by education and smoking habit that were considered as covariates. It is of note that in our previous study (Kertzman et al., 2015) smoking was considered as between-subject factor in repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA)

ISSN: 2050-7283