Table 1.

Individual fitting of each of the five DPPS modelsa (see Fig. 2)

NLinearSmallLarge rampLarge stepExtra-large
10.08550.07770.0077*0.15320.5388
20.10840.0256*0.04460.25940.5274
30.12220.0176*0.05960.29130.5342
40.17530.48250.13280.0101*0.5312
50.05910.10970.0009*0.11420.4837
60.10180.23740.0239*0.04170.5499
70.13210.0223*0.04580.26430.5862
80.09940.20120.0152*0.05870.5604
90.13470.17800.0221*0.09020.6384
100.08660.04070.0292*0.22090.5006
110.08100.04920.0217*0.20100.5005
120.11430.04920.0224*0.20220.5852
130.13700.0128*0.06550.30520.5611
140.12500.0212*0.04760.26820.5646
150.12290.0263*0.09900.34910.4607
  • 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.