To assess the first three hypotheses, Pearson’s correlations were used with partial correlations used to account for the effect of state anxiety (state score from the STAI . Tests of normality showed that all variables were normally distributed and hence suitable for this parametric test, except for the following: fixation count to head and body, dwell time to the head and background and time to first fixate the body. For correlations where one variable was not normally distributed both Pearson’s (r) and Spearman’s (rs) analyses were conducted and reported. Partial correlations are based on Pearson’s correlation regardless of distribution. All tests are two-tailed.
Efficiency
Once pre-running got took place, the interest movement data are looked having outliers (investigation things bigger than 1.5 times the fresh interquartile range having a given changeable), from the investigating boxplots. The fresh new rural research factors (n = 19) was indeed omitted getting personal investigation things inside the vision-tracking steps , consisting of cuatro.22% of your overall data.
Hypervigilance
No significant correlation was found between LSAS scores and time to first fixate the head r (16) = .101, p = .709 and the body r (21) = -.062, p = .790, (r s (21) = -.144, p = .522). This remained the case when controlling for state anxiety using a partial correlation, r (13) = .088, p = .754, and the body r (18) = -.070, p = .7710
502, p = .034 (Fig dos) (overlooking county nervousness) and you may r (15) = -.499, p = .041 (controlling having county stress).
Discover no extreme relationship ranging from LSAS results and you will very first fixation course toward system, r (23) = -.141, p = .521 which had been also the situation when dealing with for county anxiety playing with a partial correlation r (20) = -.133, p =. 556