A Number Of Methods To Simplify PD-0332991

026), especially in the medium and the fast playing conditions (M = 0.045). Using both effectors in a coordinated fashion (tongue + fingers) stabilized the timing error (M = 0.013), but showed a significant tempo reduction in the fast tempo condition (M = 0.058). We observed a learning effect in the recording of the second trial for GSK2118436 the same task [F(1, 17) = 6.55, p error for combined tongue-finger actions at medium and fast tempi was significantly reduced in the second trial. This indicates that professional players already improved their tongue-finger coordination after the first 6 repetitions and were able to perform the second trial with reduced timing error. Figure 6 Timing error (A) and coefficient of variation (B), grouped by effectors used to produce tone onsets. Error bars show the standard error of the mean. Table 1 Timing error for both trials of sequences performed with different effectors in three tempo conditions. A Two-Way repeated measures ANOVA on temporal precision (CV) by effector combination and tempo, showed a significant effect of tempo [F(2, 34) = 5.76, p at the CV values plotted in Figure ?Figure6B6B (dotted line), we see that timing precision for PD-332991 the finger-only Megestrol Acetate condition was lower in the slow tempo condition than in the fast tempo condition. A similar pattern appeared for the tongue-finger condition. Contrary, tones played only by tonguing (solid line) showed almost a constant irregularity over all three tempo conditions. This was confirmed by three separate One-Way repeated measures ANOVAs on the CV by tempo condition. The results showed a significant main effect of tempo for both conditions where fingers were involved [fingers only: F(2, 34) = 13.25, p