**3. Results**

### *3.1. EEG-Related Indices*

The AWI did not show any significant main effect or interactions. The MI showed a significant main effect for the video (F(33, 1) = 5.493, *p* = 0.025) and a significant interaction of the theme × video (F(2.250, 74.246) = 5.711, *p* = 0.004, *ω* = 0.750). Post-hoc comparisons showed a significant (*p* = 0.025) difference between M (MM = 0.060, SE = 0.079) and R (MM = −0.202, SE = 0.079). Nature × R (M = 0.001, SD = 0.251) and Territory × R (M = −0.420, SD = 0.480) showed a significant (*p* = 0.027) difference, similarly to Product × R (M = −0.310, SD = 0.365, n = 17) and Territory × M (M = 0.230, SD = 0.481) - *p* = 0.015, as well as Territory × M (M = 0.230, SD = 0.481) and Territory × R (M = −0.420, SD = 0.480) - *p* = 0.001. The following Figure 1 and Table 1 show, respectively, the descriptive plot with standard error bars and the descriptive statistics of the MI, split for video and theme.

**Figure 1.** Descriptive plot with error bars of the MI, split for the video (M = The Myth, R = Rewind) and the theme (Nt = Nature, Pr = Product, Prd = Production, Tr = Territoriality). The vertical axis is expressed as unit-less z-scores.

**Table 1.** Descriptive statistics (M = mean, SD = standard deviation, n = number) of the MI, split for the video (M = The Myth, R = Rewind) and theme (Nt = Nature, Pr = Product, Prd = Production, Tr = Territoriality). All values are expressed as unitless z-scores.


*3.2. SC- and BVP-Related Indices*

HR showed a significant main effect of the theme (F(1.504, 45.135) = 3.669, *p* = 0.045, *ω* = 0.501) and the video (F(1, 30) = 15.263, *p* < 0.001). Post hoc comparisons found a significant (*p* = 0.013) difference between Product (MM = −0.640, SE = 0.167) and Territory (MM = −0.046, SE = 0.167), as well as between M (MM = 0.081, SE = 0.172) and R (MM = −0.867, SE = 0.172), *p* < 0.001. The following Figure 2 and Table 2 show, respectively, the descriptive plot with standard error bars and the descriptive statistics of the HR, split for video and theme.

**Table 2.** Descriptive statistics (M = mean, SD = standard deviation, n = number) of the HR, split for the video (M = The Myth, R = Rewind) and theme (Nt = Nature, Pr = Product, Prd = Production, Tr = Territoriality). All values are expressed as unitless z-scores.


**Figure 2.** Descriptive plot with error bars of the HR, split for the video (M = The Myth, R = Rewind) and the theme (Nt = Nature, Pr = Product, Prd = Production, Tr = Territoriality). The vertical axis is expressed as unit-less z-scores.

EI showed a significant main effect of the video (F(1, 31) = 7.728, *p* = 0.009). Post hoc comparisons showed a significant difference between M (MM = −0.033, SE = 0.062) and R (MM = −0.279, SE = 0.062), *p* = 0.009. The following Figure 3 and Table 3 show, respectively, the descriptive plot with standard error bars and the descriptive statistics of the EI, split for video and theme.

**Figure 3.** Descriptive plot with error bars of the EI, split for the video (M = The Myth, R = Rewind) and the theme (Nt = Nature, Pr = Product, Prd = Production, Tr = Territoriality). The vertical axis is expressed as unit-less z-scores.

**Table 3.** Descriptive statistics (M = mean, SD = standard deviation, n = number) of the EI, split for the video (M = The Myth, R = Rewind) and theme (Nt = Nature, Pr = Product, Prd = Production, Tr = Territoriality). All values are expressed as unitless z-scores.



**Table 3.** *Cont.*
