In terms of condition, one effect overlapped with the time window commonly reflecting the feedback negativity ERP, ~200-300 ms and 5-6.5 Hz (ERSP Condition Effect 1, p = .031, see Figure 4A). Note that the Condition panel spectral plot in Figure 3A has a different range of effect size (larger), which appears less intense than the age group plot in Figure 3A because of the broader effective range for the Condition plot. A second condition effect appeared at the end of our analysis windo ~500-550 ms and 4-8 Hz (ERSP Condition Effect 2, p = .014, see Figure 4B). Both Condition Effect 1 and 2 reflected greater spectral power for the no win condition (Table 3, post hoc). In terms of age group (average feedback collapsed across condition) one main effect (ERSP Age Effect 1, p = .022, Figure 4C, bottom left panel) emerged early ~50-150 ms and 4-5 Hz. Pairwise comparisons suggest this effect mainly reflected greater spectral power for the 13-14-year-old group compared to the 15-17 year-old group (p = .010, Figure 4C) and the 10-12-year-old group (trend,
