recorded from this site because of equipment limitations. However, the ERN has been reported previously at FZ (Hajcak, Moser, Yeung, & Simons, 2005; Hajcak & Simons, 2008) with similar properties as those observed in this study. Table S2 gives the means and standard deviations for these components. Relationships between IA, Behavioral Performance, ERPs, and Gender Because our sample was 56% women, correlations were computed between IA, behavioral performance measures, ERPs and gender. Only the ERN following correct lexical decisions was correlated with gender at a trend level, = .24, = .052. No significant r(65) p correlations were observed between gender, IA, behavioral measures, or any other ERPs, |rs| < .17, > .16. Additionally, correlations between IA, behavioral performance and ERPs did not ps significantly differ for men and women, |Fisher's Zs| < 1.43, > .15, showing a similar pattern ps to the sample as a whole. Participant Engagement As shown in Table S3, correlations were computed between participants' reported level of engagement in the task (from the post-task questionnaire), IA, behavioral measures, and ERPs; these correlations are given in Table S1. Participants' overall level of engagement was significantly related to LD accuracy and ERN following SS errors and was related to SS N1 at a trend level, indicating that participants who were more engaged in the task performed better overall and processed SS errors to a greater extent. How hard participants tried to respond word or non-word correctly was also significantly related to LD accuracy. Overall engagement and how hard participants tried to respond word or non-word correctly were only related to IA at a trend level. No measure of engagement was significantly related to FD, RT, SSD, or SSRT. Lexical Decision Stop Signal (LDSS) Task Characteristics
recorded from this site because of equipment limitations. However, the ERN has been reported previously at FZ (Hajcak, Moser, Yeung, & Simons, 2005; Hajcak & Simons, 2008) with similar properties as those observed in this study. Table S2 gives the means and standard deviations for these components. Relationships between IA, Behavioral Performance, ERPs, and Gender Because our sample was 56% women, correlations were computed between IA, behavioral performance measures, ERPs and gender. Only the ERN following correct lexical decisions was correlated with gender at a trend level, r(65) = .24, p = .052. No significant correlations were observed between gender, IA, behavioral measures, or any other ERPs, |rs| < .17, ps > .16. Additionally, correlations between IA, behavioral performance and ERPs did not significantly differ for men and women, |Fisher's Zs| < 1.43, ps > .15, showing a similar pattern to the sample as a whole. Participant Engagement As shown in Table S3, correlations were computed between participants' reported level of engagement in the task (from the post-task questionnaire), IA, behavioral measures, and ERPs; these correlations are given in Table S1. Participants' overall level of engagement was significantly related to LD accuracy and ERN following SS errors and was related to SS N1 at a trend level, indicating that participants who were more engaged in the task performed better overall and processed SS errors to a greater extent. How hard participants tried to respond word or non-word correctly was also significantly related to LD accuracy. Overall engagement and how hard participants tried to respond word or non-word correctly were only related to IA at a trend level. No measure of engagement was significantly related to FD, RT, SSD, or SSRT. Lexical Decision Stop Signal (LDSS) Task Characteristics
ABN-ABN3-Benning20110351-RR.docx