| Experimental condition | Test statistic for differences between groups | |
---|---|---|---|
Basic information (n = 62–64) | Basic + precautionary information (n = 71–73) | ||
Independent variables | M (90% CI) | M (90% CI) | Â |
 Mean trait anxiety | 2.22 (2.15–2.29) | 2.23 (2.16–2.31) | tdf = 133 = −.22 (p = .82) |
 Mean somatosensory amplification | 2.71 (2.61–2.82) | 2.83 (2.72–2.94) | tdf = 135 = −1.3 (p = .20) |
 Sum social desirability | 10.58 (10.05–11.10) | 10.58 (10.02–11.13) | tdf = 135 = .01 (p = .99) |
 T0 risk perception WLAN score | 2.56 (2.33–2.79) | 2.59 (2.38–2.79) | tdf = 135 = −.14 (p = .89) |
 Mean T1 state anxiety | 1.36 (1.29–1.42) | 1.50 (1.41–1.59) | tdf = 134 = −2.18 (p = .03) |
 Mean T2 state anxiety | 1.29 (1.22–1.35) | 1.42 (1.33–1.50) | tdf = 134 = − 1.96 (p = .05) |
Dependent variables | |||
 Mean symptom difference T3 – T2 | .09 (.04–.14) | .12 (.07–.17) | tdf = 135 = −.65 (p = .52) |
 Mean attributed symptoms | 1.13 (1.09–1.16) | 1.15 (1.11–1.19) | tdf = 135 = −.74 (p = .46) |
 Sum of trials with belief to perceive sham EMF format | 1.53 (1.17–1.90) | 2.10 (1.70–2.49) | tdf = 135 = − 1.74 (p = .08) |