Skip to main content
. 2015 Jul 29;6:1084. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01084

Table 2.

Linear mixed model results.

City block Single City block Dual SD Single SD Dual RT Single RT Dual
Intercept 0.35* 0.52* 0.26* 0.38* 0.81* 0.84*
[0.10; 0.59] [0.24; 0.77] [0.17; 0.36] [0.29; 0.47] [0.70; 0.92] [0.71; 0.95]
VIAU vs. AU 0.59* 0.54* 0.24* 0.17* 0.04 0.02
[0.42; 0.76] [0.36; 0.75] [0.11; 0.36] [0.07; 0.29] [−0.02; 0.11] [−0.05; 0.09]
VIAU vs. VI 0.50* 0.39* 0.36* 0.18* 0.07* 0.05
[0.33; 0.67] [0.19; 0.60] [0.23; 0.47] [0.07; 0.29] [0.01; 0.13] [−0.01; 0.12]
Log Likelihood −5.94 −8.72 10.34 10.31 15.90 14.62
Participants 9 9 9 9 9 9

Dependent variables are the city block distance (as a measurement of localization error; columns one and two for comparisons in the single task and dual task conditions), the standard deviation (“SD”) of the city block distance for each participant (columns three and four), and reaction times (“RT;” columns five and six). Unstandardized coefficient estimates of the differences between conditions are displayed. The intercept represents the mean of values in the VIAU condition, which was tested against zero (with zero representing a perfect performance for the city block error measure).

*

0 outside of 95% confidence interval.