The expectation–attention interaction is significant for MSPCres but not MSPCstim.

Predicted MSPCstim (left) and MSPCres (right) values obtained from a full Linear Mixed Effects interaction model, with their standard error indicated by the shaded area. The model included expectation, attention, and an expectation–attention interaction term as the fixed effects, while the random effects included a random intercept for frequency nested within channels nested within participants and random expectation and attention slopes for each participant. Consistent with the colours used in the previous figures, attended images are represented by the dark green lines and unattended images by the light green lines, while the pink–red gradient indicates increasing expectation. The significance of the interaction term was tested using the likelihood ratio test between the full model and the reduced model, which excluded the interaction fixed effect. The expectation–attention interaction was not significant for MSPCstim (χ2 = 3.47, P < 0.05) but was highly significant for MSPCres (χ2 = 19.56, P < 0.001). The data underlying this figure is available in FigShare at DOI: 10.26180/5b9abfe5687e3. MSPCres, multispectral phase coherency (response); MSPCstim, MSPC (stimulus).