## 3 Results
### Behavioural Outcomes: Recall
#### 3.4.1 Influence on Emotions  
The results of the \(t\)-tests showed that when listening to the Divine Comedy performed by an actor and an actress, AOTs expressed greater SURPRISE compared to NAs for the female voice for Inferno (t = 2.135, \(p\) = 0.038), Purgatorio (t = 2.094, \(p\) = 0.042), Paradiso (t = 2.045, \(p\) = 0.046) (Figure 14).  
Figure 14: Graph representing the significant differences between participants with alexithymiaa or alexithymiaa traits (AOT) and non-alexithymia (NA) for SURPRISE during listening modality of fruition (MOF) for each cantica (Inferno, Purgatorio, Paradiso) resulting from the \(t\)-tests for independent groups analysis. * \(p\)\(\leq\) 0.05. Bars describe means, and error bars describe standard deviations.  
Figure 13: Graph representing the statistically significant difference between modalities of fruition (MOF) resulting from the CANTICA \(\times\) MOF \(\times\) EXERTISE ANOVA analysis for arousal INTENSITY self-reported perception. * \(p\)\(\leq\) 0.05. Bars describe means, and error bars describe standard deviations.  
Overall, CANTICA \(\times\) VOICE \(\times\) ALEXITHYMIA ANOVA confirmed that AOT perceived statistically significantly more SURPRISE during the overall listening F(1,24) = 7.2531, \(p\) = 0.012, \(\eta_{p}^{2}\) = 0.232). (Figure 15).  
Considering the interaction between CANTICA excited by the two VOICES and groups, the results of the ANOVA conducted for JOY showed a significant difference between cantica (F (2,48) = 4.251, \(p\) = 0.019, \(\eta_{p}^{2}\) = 0.150) and significant interactions among both Cantica \(\times\) Voice (F (2,48) = 3.270, \(p\) = 0.046, \(\eta_{p}^{2}\) = 0.119) and Cantica \(\times\) Expertise (F (2,48)=3.953, \(p\)=0.0257, 0.141). The post hoc on the last interaction shows that Ls manifested significantly more JOY towards Inferno than either Purgatorio (\(p\) = 0.001) or Paradiso (\(p\) = 0.0024) (Figure 16).  
Regarding NEUTRAL emotion, ANOVA results showed a statistically significant interaction among CANTICA \(\times\) VOICE \(\times\) EXPERTISE, (F (2,48) = 3.377, \(p\) = 0.044, \(\eta_{p}^{2}\) = 0.121). [PERSON]'s post hoc results (significant only within the L group) are shown in Figure 17.  
Figure 16: Graph representing the significant interactions among the factors CANTICA (Inferno, Purgatorio, Paradiso) and EXPERTISE (Literature: literature students; Scientific: scientific students) resulting from the CANTICA \(\times\) VOICE \(\times\) EXPERTISE ANOVA analysis for JOY. \(\mathbf{\texttt{{}^{*}}}p\leq\) 0.01. Vertical bars denote a 0.95 confidence interval.  
Figure 15: Graph representing the statistically significant difference between alexithymia (AOT) and non-alexithymic (NA) students for SURPRISE emerging from VOICE \(\times\) CANTICA \(\times\) ALEXITHYMIA ANOVA analysis. \(\mathbf{\texttt{{}^{*}}}p\leq\) 0.01. Bars describe means, and error bars describe standard deviations.  
Concerning DISGUST, the ANOVA performed on the CANTICA \(\times\) VOICE \(\times\) EXPERTSE showed a statistically significant difference between Cantica (F (2,48) = 4.289, \(p\) = 0.019, \(\eta_{p}^{2}\) = 0.151). [PERSON]'s Post hoc revealed that Purgatorio is more disgusting than Paradiso regardless of the group (\(p\) = 0.039) (Figure 18).  
Concerning SADNESS, the CANTICA \(\times\) VOICE \(\times\) ALEXITHYMIA showed a statistically significant difference between cantica (F (2,48) = 5.439, \(p\) = 0.007). Post hoc showed that overall, Inferno is less sad than Purgatorio (\(p\) = 0.041) and Paradiso (\(p\) < 0.001) (Figure 19).