Age Effect 2 (Table 5) occurred between from ~350-450 ms in the 4 Hz to 5 Hz range (. This window included a significant condition effect, p < .001, age effect, p < .01 and Age × Condition interaction, p < .05. Similar to the ITC Condition Effect, post hoc comparisons indicated that the 10-12-year-old group did not have significantly different ITC across no win vs. win conditions, p = .920, whereas ITC was greater for no-win compared to win feedback in the 13-14-year-old group and the 15-17-year-old group, p = .011 and p = .020, respectively (see Figure 6C). Given the plot of means for ITC Age Effect 2 resembled the ITC Condition Effect (Figure 6C) we repeated the trend analysis. For the no win condition, the linear contrast was significant, t(106) = 2.012, p = .047, but the quadratic contrast was a better fit for the data, t(106) = 3.133, p = .002. For the win condition, neither the linear, t(106) = .644, p = .521, nor the quadratic contrasts, t(106) = 1.745, p = .084, were statistically reliable.
