Table 2.
Percentage of participants who report no hangover symptoms following alcohol consumption across various eBAC ranges for Method 1 and Method 2.
| eBAC Range | % No Hangover Method 1 | % No Hangover Method 2 | χ 2 | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | 0 ≤ BAC < 0.02% | 48.0 (36/75) | 36.1 (53/147) | 2.95 | 0.09 |
| Group 2 | 0.02% ≤ BAC < 0.05% | 37.1 (62/167) | 29.1 (53/182) | 2.53 | 0.11 |
| Group 3 | 0.05% ≤ BAC < 0.08% | 22.6 (33/146) | 21.9 (30/137) | 0.02 | 0.89 |
| Group 4 | 0.08% ≤ BAC < 0.11% | 17.9 (22/123) | 10.8 (13/120) | 2.45 | 0.12 |
| Group 5 | 0.11 ≤ BAC < 0.20% | 8.0 (22/275) | 8.9 (22/246) | 0.15 | 0.70 |
| Group 6 | 0.20 ≤ BAC < 0.30% | 11.5 (15/131) | 15.7 (14/89) | 0.85 | 0.36 |
| Group 7 | 0.30 ≤ BAC < 0.40% | 16.2 (6/37) | 9.5 (2/21) | 0.50 | 0.48 |
Note. This table also shows results of a chi-square test of independence to investigate associations between the two methods and hangover resistance.