Table 4. Analysis of school polarization times.
| Source | df | MS | Pseudo-F | p(perm) |
| Type of boat presence | 4 | 13.31 | 4.6394 | 0.0023 |
| Residuals | 76 | 2.87 | ||
| Pairwise comparisons | t | p (perm) | ||
| no boat A vs B | 0.6112 | 0.5520 | ||
| no boat A vs moored boat | 0.2973 | 0.7669 | ||
| no boat A vs boat passage | 1.2239 | 0.2279 | ||
| no boat A vs boat above | 4.2068 | 0.0006 | ||
| no boat B vs moored boat | 0.6495 | 0.5288 | ||
| no boat B vs boat passage | 0.9179 | 0.3787 | ||
| no boat B vs boat above | 3.8865 | 0.0009 | ||
| moored boat vs boat passage | 1.0751 | 0.2935 | ||
| moored boat vs boat above | 3.7432 | 0.0089 | ||
| boat passage vs boat above | 1.9354 | 0.1005 |
PerMANOVA results showing the effect of different types of boat presence on the school polarization times of C. chromis. Bold format indicates significant difference.