Skip to main content

Advertisement

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