Table 1.
Means and standard deviations of the regression slope data used in one-sample t tests examining relationships between DVP/scene instability and cybersickness severity
| Relationship | Mean slope | SD slope | t (20) value | P value | Mean R2 | SD R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean DVP versus FMS (pitch) | .41 | .40 | 4.744 | < .0001 | .41 | .28 |
| Mean DVP versus FMS (yaw) | .17 | .15 | 4.940 | < .0001 | .39 | .29 |
| Mean DVP versus FMS (roll) | .32 | .30 | 4.941 | < .0001 | .42 | .28 |
| Peak DVP versus FMS (pitch) | .21 | .19 | 5.069 | < .0001 | .43 | .27 |
| Peak DVP versus FMS (yaw) | .08 | .07 | 5.114 | < .0001 | .35 | .23 |
| Peak DVP versus FMS (roll) | .16 | .14 | 5.337 | < .0001 | .44 | .26 |
| SD DVP versus FMS (pitch) | .36 | .34 | 4.846 | < .0001 | .41 | .27 |
| SD DVP versus FMS (yaw) | .16 | .14 | 5.360 | < .0001 | .38 | .27 |
| SD DVP versus FMS (roll) | .30 | .25 | 5.379 | < .0001 | .44 | .28 |
| Instability versus FMS (pitch) | 1.93 | 1.69 | 5.101 | < .0001 | .57 | .28 |
| Instability versus FMS (yaw) | 1.51 | 1.11 | 5.731 | < .0001 | .53 | .31 |
| Instability versus FMS (roll) | 1.69 | 1.89 | 4.123 | = .001 | .51 | .31 |
After Bonferroni correction for 12 tests, the pcritical for each of these statistical tests was 0.0042. Thus, all 12 positive linear relationships were found to be significant (i.e. their slopes were significantly greater than 0). Means and standard deviations of the goodness-of-fit (R2) data are also provided.