Example stimuli employed in Experiment 2.

<p>Participants were required to detect target letters within digit distractors. SOA was either 30 msec, 60 msec, 90 msec or 120 msec. The location of T1 was jittered between serial positions 4, 5 and 6. Tfinal appeared at lag 3 or 8. Every trial contained at least two targets. A third target appeared on cued trials and was positioned directly before Tfinal. The term lag always described the number of positions between T1 and Tfinal. Targets are underlined in this table for ease of detection. Targets were not underlined in the actual task.</p

A typical AB paradigm with target letters and digit distractors.

<p>Stimuli replace one another in the centre of the monitor at a rate of 100 msec/item. In this figure, T2 accuracy would typically be low because T2 appears at lag 3 (3 items or 300 msec after T1). T1 accuracy is typically at or close to ceiling, regardless of lag.</p

Target detection accuracy for targets in serial position 1 (TTT or TdTT) and serial position 3 (TTT or TdTT).

<p>Data from the 30 msec SOA and 90 msec SOA conditions are shown. (a) represents unconditional Tfinal accuracy. (b) represents Tfinal accuracy conditionalised on T1 detection. Error bars represent standard errors.</p

Order-error ratios for lags 3 and 8, across four SOA conditions (30 msec, 60 msec, 90 msec, 120 msec).

<p>Asterisks indicate a significant difference between order-errors at lag 3 and lag 8. Error bars represent standard errors of the mean.</p

Target detection accuracy for Tfinal across every combination of lag and SOA.

<p>(a) displays Tfinal|T1 accuracy across cued and uncued trials. Asterisks indicate a significant difference between cued and uncued trials. Tfinal accuracy was significantly improved on cued trials for all comparisons except 30 msec/lag3 and 120 msec/lag8. (b) displays Tfinal cueing efficacy scores. These scores were conditionalised on T1 and the cue being correctly detected (Tfinal|TĺTcue) or on T1 being identified but Tcue being incorrectly detected (Tfinal|T1∼Tcue). A positive difference score indicates a benefit for cued trials over uncued trials. A negative difference score indicates a benefit for uncued trials over cued trials. Asterisks indicate a significant deviation from 0, where 0 represents equivalent accuracy across cued and uncued trials. Error bars show standard errors of the mean.</p

T1 accuracy across every combination of lag and SOA.

<p>T1 accuracy did not differ between cued and uncued trials. Error bars show standard errors of the mean.</p

Example stimuli employed in Experiment 1.

<p>Participants were required to detect target letters within digit distractors. SOA was either 30 msec or 90 msec. The location of T1 was jittered between serial positions 4, 5 and 6. T2 appeared at lag 1, 2 or 6. Every trial contained at least two targets. If a third target appeared, it was positioned directly after T2. Targets are underlined in this table for ease of detection. Targets were not underlined in the actual task.</p

Target detection accuracy for T1 and T2.

<p>Accuracies are shown for lags 3 and 8 across four SOA conditions: 30 msec (a), 60 msec (b), 90 msec (c) and 120 msec (d). Asterisks indicate a significant difference between T1 and T2 detection accuracy. Error bars represent standard errors of the mean.</p

Performance score distributions.

<p>Distributions of (A) standardized reading performance scores and (B) standardized math performance scores.</p

The Relationship between academic performance and math anxiety.

<p> (A) Density scatter plot showing probability of each standardized math performance score at each scaled MA level. (B) Density scatter plot showing probability of each standardized reading performance score at each scaled MA level. (C) Conditional probability of standardized math performance being equal to or above the specified threshold at each scaled MA level. (D) Conditional probability of standardized reading performance being at or above the specified threshold at each scaled MA level.</p