Skip to main content

Table 2 Accuracy as a Function of Experiment and Condition

From: Eye movement feedback fails to improve visual search performance

Experiment

Hit Rate

FA Rate

Corrected Accuracy (Hits − FAs)

Independent Samples t Test (Two-tailed)

Bayes Factor

Strength of Evidencea

Effect of Feedback

No Feedback

Feedback

No Feedback

Feedback

No Feedback

Feedback

1

65.3% (3.8%)

75.5% (2.8%)

15.2% (2.6%)

11.6% (1.5%)

50.1% (4.6%)

63.9% (3.1%)

t(74) = −2.43, p = .02

Support for H1 2.48

Weak

Improved performance

2

65.9% (4.4%)

53.4% (3.8%)

9.2% (1.4%)

10.0% (2.4%)

56.7% (4.9%)

43.4% (3.8%)

t(63) = 2.19, p = .03

Support for H1 1.60

Weak

Hindered performance

3

71.0% (3.6%)

59.1% (2.7%)

21.9% (2.2%)

27.0% (3.5%)

49.1% (4.1%)

32.1% (5.0%)

t(83) = 2.60, p = .01

Support for H1 3.52

Some

Hindered performance

4a

34.7% (4.1%)

32.2% (3.6%)

2.3% (1.8%)

3.2% (1.7%)

32.4% (3.9%)b

29.0% (3.7%)

t(72) = .646, p = .52

Support for H0 5.85

Some

No effect

4b

34.7% (4.1%)

36.9% (2.8%)

2.3% (1.8%)

6.4% (2.3%)

32.4% (3.9%)b

30.5% (3.2%)

t(74) = .393, p = .70

Support for H0 4.66

Some

No effect

  1. FA False alarm
  2. aCriterion based on Jeffreys (1961) as cited in Rouder et al. (2009)
  3. b Note: This condition is repeated in the table for consistency but represents a single condition in Experiment 4