## 5 Results
### Presence  
The detailed presence results assessed by the SPES questionnaire for all conditions are shown in Table 8. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**User Experience Scale** & **Condition** & **Z** & \(\mathbf{p}\) \\ \hline UEQ-S & LA\_NORF–LA\_RFG & \(-1.701\) & 0.090 \\ Overall & LA\_NORF–LA\_RFH & \(-0.891\) & 0.382 \\  & HA\_NORF–HA\_RFG & \(-0.932\) & 0.360 \\  & HA\_NORF– & \(-1.594\) & 0.113 \\  & HA\_RFH & \(-2.866\) & **0.003 \({}^{*}\)** \\ \hline UEQ-S & LA\_NORF–LA\_RFG & \(-2.866\) & **0.003 \({}^{*}\)** \\ Pragmatic & LA\_NORF–LA\_RFH & \(-1.883\) & 0.059 \\ Quality & HA\_NORF–HA\_RFG & \(-0.180\) & 0.872 \\  & HA\_NORF– & \(-1.122\) & 0.272 \\ \hline UEQ-S & LA\_NORF–LA\_RFG & \(-0.017\) & 0.993 \\ Hedonic & LA\_NORF–LA\_RFH & \(-0.503\) & 0.626 \\ Quality & HA\_NORF–HA\_RFG & \(-1.605\) & 0.115 \\  & HA\_NORF– & \(-1.907\) & 0.056 \\  & HA\_RFH & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\) and bold = \(p\) \(<\) 0.05 (2-tailed significance).  
\end{table} 
Table 6: Wilcoxon signed-rank test for user experience scores assessed by the UEQ-S Questionnaire between the no rest-frame and rest-frames conditions. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**UX Scale** & **Condition** & **Z** & \(\mathbf{p}\) \\ \hline UEQ-S & LA\_NORF– & \(-1.439\) & 0.078 \\ Overall & **LA\_RFG** & \(-2.713\) & **0.003 \({}^{*}\)** \\  & LA\_RFH–HA\_RFH & \(-0.589\) & 0.284 \\ \hline UEQ-S & **LA\_NORF–** & \(-1.846\) & **0.034 \({}^{*}\)** \\  & HA\_NORF–HA\_RFG & \(-1.588\) & 0.058 \\ Pragmatic & LA\_RFH–HA\_RFH & \(-0.314\) & 0.382 \\ \hline UEQ-S & **LA\_NORF–** & \(-3.836\) & **0.000 \({}^{*}\)** \\  & HA\_NORF–** & \(-2.839\) & **0.002 \({}^{*}\)** \\  & LA\_RFH–HA\_RFH & \(-1.167\) & 0.125 \\ \hline VRNQ & **LA\_NORF–** & \(-1.733\) & **0.042 \({}^{*}\)** \\ User Experience & **LA\_RFG–HA\_RFG** & \(-2.680\) & **0.003 \({}^{*}\)** \\ subscale & **LA\_RFH–HA\_RFH** & \(-2.836\) & **0.002 \({}^{*}\)** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\) and bold = \(p\) \(<\) 0.05 (1-tailed significance).  
\end{table} 
Table 7: Wilcoxon signed-rank test for user experience scores assessed by the UEQ-S and VRNQ (User Experience Section) Questionnaire between the modes of the game (LA vs. HA). For the LA mode of the game, it is evident that the mean SPES scores were lower (worsened presence) when the rest-frames were used, and for the HA mode of the game, it is evident that the SPES scores were higher when the rest-frames were used, with the exception of the SPES Possible Actions score in the HA_RFH condition. Those mixed results can be related to the elevated VRISE scores in the LA mode the game. The Shapiro-Wilk test showed that the data was not normally distributed for all variables, so we used nonparametric statistical tests. To observe the differences between the combinations of conditions for the SPES scores and examine the hypothesis, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used as presented in Table 9.  
We assumed that using rest-frames would positively affect the presence. Still, we found a statistically significant difference between the LA_NORF and LA_RFG conditions for the SPES Total score and the SPES Self-location and SPES Possible actions subscales. Using rest-frame glasses in the LA mode of the game did affect the presence negatively (less presence), which did not support hypothesis H4. This might be related to the elevated VRISE levels in the LA mode of the game when rest-frames were used. However, the effect