Table 1.

Individual fitting of each of the five DPPS models^{^a} (see Fig. 2)

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.