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.
After pre-processing had took place, the interest path studies try featured for outliers (investigation activities larger than step one.5 times the fresh new interquartile assortment to have certain varying), by the investigating boxplots. This new outlying analysis items (n = 19) was excluded to have individual study factors during the attention-recording actions , comprising 4.22% of complete data.
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 state nervousness) and roentgen (15) = -.499, p = .041 (managing having county nervousness).
There was zero extreme matchmaking between LSAS results and you can earliest obsession duration into the muscles, roentgen (23) = -.141, p = .521 which had been along with the circumstances when controlling for condition nervousness playing with a limited correlation roentgen (20) = -.133, p =. 556
There were no significant relationships between LSAS scores and dwell time to the head r (28) = -.073, p = .714 (rs (28) = -.132, p = .502) the body r (30) = -.090, p = .637, and the background r (30) = -.231, p = .220 (rs (30) = -.254, p = .175).
Partial correlations along with indicated that when controlling for condition anxiety, there can be zero tall relationship amongst the LSAS score and you can dwell time and energy to your face r (25) = -.063, p = .756, the human body r (27) = -.090, p = .643, and record roentgen (27) = -.231, p = .229.
There was no significant relationship between the LSAS scores and fixation count to the head r (28) = .049, p = .805 (rs (28) = -.055, p = .782), the body r (29) = -.075, p = .700 (rs (21) = -.033, p = .865) and the background r (29) = -.258, p = .176. Partial correlations also showed that when controlling for state anxiety, there were still no significant relationships between the LSAS scores and fixation count to the head r (25) = .068, p = .743, the body r (26) = -.075, p = .704, and the background r (28) = -.258, p = .185
A robust inverse relationships try found ranging from scanpath size and LSAS rating, r (28) = -.483, p = .008 whenever overlooking county nervousness, and you can remained when condition nervousness is actually managed for roentgen (26) = -.498, p = .007 (Fig step three).
A robust bad dating try receive ranging from complete saccade matter and you may LSAS rating, roentgen (29) = -.511, p = .005 when disregarding county nervousness, and therefore stayed extreme an once state nervousness try regulated to have r (26) = -.516, p = .005. No relationship is actually found anywhere between indicate saccade amplitude and you may LSAS score but not, roentgen (29) = -.176, p = .362 regardless of if county nervousness is actually managed for roentgen (26) = -.160, p = .417