Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Measurement of the DPPS size. Top, Group-average HBR waveforms elicited while the hand was placed at four distances from the eye: “ultra-far,” 60 cm; “far,” 40 cm; “near,” 20 cm; “ultra-near,” 4 cm. Bottom, Point-by-point one-way ANOVA and post hoc comparisons exploring the effect of “hand position” at different distances. These results show that the DPPS has a sharp boundary, located between 20 and 40 cm from the face, and that within such space there is a thin, highest-risk area closest to the face (i.e., an “ultra-near” defensive space).
- Figure 2.
Interindividual variability in DPPS size. Left, One model representing a linear increase of HBR magnitude with hand–face proximity (a) and four models representing different DPPS sizes (b–e). Models c and d both represent a large DPPS and differ only for the presence or absence of a further increase within the DPPS. Single-subject data were tested against each model. All but one subject best fitted either model b or model c. Right, Group-average HBR waveforms of the participants whose data best fitted model b (N = 6; top), model c (N = 8; middle), and model d (N = 1; bottom). None of the participants' data fitted model a. Insets, The HBR magnitude is expressed as the AUC (in arbitrary units).
- Figure 3.
Relationship between DPPS size and personality traits. The DPPS size (y-axis) was positively related with trait anxiety (x-axis) (p = 0.02; left). In contrast, there was no significant association between the DPPS size (y-axis) and claustrophobic fear (x-axis) (p = 0.7; right).
Tables
N Linear Small Large ramp Large step Extra-large 1 0.0855 0.0777 0.0077* 0.1532 0.5388 2 0.1084 0.0256* 0.0446 0.2594 0.5274 3 0.1222 0.0176* 0.0596 0.2913 0.5342 4 0.1753 0.4825 0.1328 0.0101* 0.5312 5 0.0591 0.1097 0.0009* 0.1142 0.4837 6 0.1018 0.2374 0.0239* 0.0417 0.5499 7 0.1321 0.0223* 0.0458 0.2643 0.5862 8 0.0994 0.2012 0.0152* 0.0587 0.5604 9 0.1347 0.1780 0.0221* 0.0902 0.6384 10 0.0866 0.0407 0.0292* 0.2209 0.5006 11 0.0810 0.0492 0.0217* 0.2010 0.5005 12 0.1143 0.0492 0.0224* 0.2022 0.5852 13 0.1370 0.0128* 0.0655 0.3052 0.5611 14 0.1250 0.0212* 0.0476 0.2682 0.5646 15 0.1229 0.0263* 0.0990 0.3491 0.4607 ↵aData are given as p values. In 8 of 15 participants, the model corresponding to a “Large ramp” DPPS provided the best fit compared with all other models. In 6 of 15 participants, the model corresponding to a “Small” DPPS provided the best fit. The model corresponding to a “Large step” DPPS provided the best fit in only one participant, and the model representing a gradual transition between DPPS and far space (“Linear”) did not provide the best fit in any of the participants.
↵*The lowest significant p value in each participant.
In this issue
