4). A final set of analyses were run to examine the relations between performance on the VPC eye-tracking task and the ERP task for the CON and HII infants. The VPC measures included the proportion of time spent on the novel face at each comparison delay: Imm, 2 min, and Day 2. ERP measures included Nc and PSW amplitude. For the present analyses, Nc variables and PSW variables were each collapsed across condition, then an average Nc (Nc-all), and an average PSW (PSW-all) was calculated from the average

for frontocentral electrode sites and temporal electrode sites. Due to the main effect of region found for the PSW in both the frontocentral and the temporal analyses, responses were averaged from left frontocentral electrodes and left temporal electrodes to create a PSW-left variable that focused on the region Rapamycin ic50 of highest amplitude. Infants were included in a correlation if they had (1) met minimum criteria for the VPC familiarization, (2) met criteria for inclusion in the ERP analysis, and (3) met minimum criteria for at least one of the three VPC delay conditions (i.e., if an infant spent greater than 30% of the time on the Bcl-2 inhibitor images during Imm test, but not 2 min or Day 2, they would be included in the correlation only for Imm test). Table 6 details the number of infants contributing to each analysis, including the number of infants contributing

data to all five sets of analyses (CON = 9, HII = 3). For CON, correlations were performed examining novelty preference at each comparison delay with the three ERP variables (Nc-all, PSW-all, PSW-left). For the VPC Imm delay condition (13 CON) and the VPC 2-min delay condition

(13 CON), no significant relations were found with the ERP measures (ps > .37). When examining relations with the VPC Day 2 test (12 CON), a significant positive correlation between novelty preference and PSW-all was found (r(10) = .73, p = .007; see Figure 6) and a marginal correlation with PSW-left (r(10) = .51, p = .092). Correlations for HII infants were not conducted due to limited sample size (3, 4, and 6 infants for Imm, 2 min, and Day 2, respectively). However, we conducted a preliminary analysis to examine the influence of group on these cross-task relations. A univariate ANOVA was conducted for each VPC Decitabine chemical structure delay that included novelty preference as the dependent variable with group and PSW-all as potential explanatory variables. For novelty preference, the model showed no main effects or interactions when the dependent variable was VPC Imm (ps > .24) and VPC 2 min (ps > .84). In the model using Day 2 VPC novelty preference as the dependent variable, an interaction between group and PSW-all was found (F(1, 14) = 4.60, p = .05, ηp2 = .25), suggesting that the relation between PSW mean amplitude and Day 2 novelty preference is different for the two groups. Figure 6 shows the relation between Day 2 VPC novelty preference and PSW amplitude across all regions (PSW-all) for both HII and CON.