Table 2:

Post hoc contrasts across light condition, sensory condition, and visual group.

Comparison Set	Contrast	Estimated Difference	SE	df	t	95% CI	p
Light Condition within Visual Group	SC: Light – Dark	−16.06	4.18	96.1	−3.842	[−24.40, −7.76]	0.0002***
	EB: Light – Dark	−3.22	4.52	107.6	−0.714	[−12.20, 5.73]	0.4769
Visual Group within Light Condition	Light: SC – EB	−16.76	4.85	47.5	−3.456	[−26.50, −7.01]	0.0012**
	Dark: SC – EB	−3.92	5.55	64.6	−0.706	[−15.00, 7.17]	0.4827
Sensory Condition within Visual Group	SC: Baseline – Anosmia	−18.03	5.50	114.4	−3.282	[−31.08, −4.98]	0.0039**
	SC: Baseline – Trimmed	−15.53	5.07	115.3	−3.064	[−27.56, −3.50]	0.0076**
	SC: Anosmia – Trimmed	2.51	5.68	98.7	0.441	[−11.02, 16.03]	0.8985
	EB: Baseline – Anosmia	−34.44	5.70	111.7	−6.046	[−47.97, −20.91]	< 0.0001***
	EB: Baseline – Trimmed	−19.59	5.00	104.4	−3.918	[−31.48, −7.70]	0.0005***
	EB: Anosmia – Trimmed	14.84	5.96	114.0	2.492	[0.70, 28.99]	0.0374*
Visual Group within Sensory Condition	Baseline: SC – EB	−3.52	5.23	67.1	−0.672	[−14.00, 6.93]	0.5039
	Anosmia: SC – EB	−19.92	6.99	89.9	−2.848	[−33.80, −6.02]	0.0055**
	Trimmed: SC – EB	−7.58	6.10	76.3	−1.244	[−19.70, 4.56]	0.2173
Sex Contrast	Female – Male	11.6	4.22	22	2.746	[2.84, 20.3]	0.0118*

Estimated marginal mean (EMM) contrasts were derived from a linear mixed-effects model. Values represent estimated differences in reaching error between conditions or groups.

Degrees of freedom were estimated using the Kenward–Roger method. Confidence intervals (CI) are reported at 95%. SC, sighted control; EB, early blind.

^*p < 0.05,

^**p < 0.01,

^***p < 0.001.