Table 2. Correlations between participants’ LOLS scores and each of the variables for the magic video, the control video, and overall.

Scale	Overall (n = 200)	Magic video (n = 101)	Control video (n = 99)	Magic vs control correlations
	r [95% CI] (p)	r [95% CI] (p)	r [95% CI] (p)	z (p)
ERES—Surprise	−.26 [−0.38, −0.13] (.0002)	−.50 [−0.63, −0.34] (.0001)	−.12 [−0.31, 0.079] (.28)	2.98 (.003)
ERES—Curiosity	−.28 [−0.41, −0.15] (.0001)	−.58 [−0.7, −0.43] (.0001)	−.12 [−0.31, 0.079] (.25)	−3.77 (.0002)
ERES—Excitement	−.39 [−0.5, −0.26] (.0001)	−.61 [−0.72, −0.47] (.0001)	−.18 [−0.36, 0.018] (.07)	−3.67 (.0002)
MJT	−.017 [−0.16, 0.12] (.82)	−.09 [−0.28, 0.11] (.36)	.06 [−0.14, 0.25] (.58)	−1.05 (.29)
SOM	−.17 [−0.3, −0.032] (.02)	−.18 [−0.36, 0.016] (.08)	−.16 [−0.35, 0.039] (.11)	−0.14 (.89)
SWLS	−.16 [−0.29, −0.022] (.03)	−.17 [−0.35, 0.026] (.09)	−.14 [−0.33, 0.059] (.16)	−0.21 (.83)

Notes.

Pearson correlations between participants’ LOLS scores and other variables (95% Confidence Intervals in brackets; 2-t p-values in parentheses; significant p-values in bold). For completeness, the correlations are also shown for each of the two conditions, along with the z-score and associated 2-t p-values comparing the correlations in each condition.