Using Z-scores based on our control group (adjusted for age and education based on our NAC), the Group difference in average Z-score across all domains reached significance (F (3, 110) = 5.263, p < .025, partial eta2 = 4.6), and multivariate analysis of variance of domain scores revealed a Group effect (F (9, 102) = 2.252, p < .025, partial eta2 = 1.66) reflecting better performance of TNAD compared to NAC. Analysis of individual domains yielded a significant (F (1, 110) = 10.64, p < .002, partial eta2 = .088) Group effect for the Attention domain, with TNAC performing better than NAC, and a significant (F (1, 110) = 4.41, p = .038, partial eta2 = .039) overall advantage of men over women in the spatial processing domain, consistent with the earlier analysis reported above. As with the earlier analysis, TNAD still showed better performance than NAC in the Attention domain after the three GCIS outliers were removed (p < .007).
