. 2022 Jun 22;9(3):ENEURO.0497-21.2022. doi: 10.1523/ENEURO.0497-21.2022

Table 1.

The effects of cueing on proportions and pupil size

	Proportions	Pupil size
Dominant percept	F_(1,37) = 146.46* p < 0.001 logBF = 30.54 η_p² = 0.80	F_(1,37) = 46.09* p < 0.001 logBF = 22.52 η_p² = 0.55

Rivalry type	F_(1,37) = 82.62* p < 0.001 logBF = 25.49 η_p² = 0.69	F_(1,37) = 0.12 p = 0.73 logBF = −0.90 η_p² = 0.003

Cued percept	F_(1,37) = 5.37* p = 0.03 logBF = −0.82 η_p² = 0.13	F_(1,37) = 1.91 p = 0.17 logBF = −0.78 η_p² = 0.05

Dominant percept × rivalry type	F_(1,37) = 0.99 p = 0.33 logBF = −0.62 η_p² = 0.03	F_(1,37) = 0.17 p = 0.68 logBF = −0.72 η_p² = 0.005

Dominant percept × cued percept	F_(1,37) = 32.96* p < 0.001 logBF = 11.33 η_p² = 0.47	F_(1,37) = 1.78 p = 0.19 logBF = −0.53 η_p² = 0.05

Rivalry type × cued percept	F_(1,37) = 0.08 p = 0.77 logBF = −0.78 η_p² = 0.002	F_(1,37) = 1.92 p = 0.17 logBF = −0.54 η_p² = 0.05

Dominant percept × rivalry type × cued percept	F_(1,37) = 5.45* p = 0.02 logBF = −0.11 η_p² = 0.13	F_(1,37) = 0.03 p = 0.85 logBF = −0.41 η_p² < 0.001

Three-way ANOVA for attention cueing results, with factors: dominant percept (white/black disk), cueing (white/black cued), rivalry type (binocular/interocular grouping rivalry). These results were not affected by shifting the baseline or skipping this step (Extended Data Table 1-1). * for p < 0.05 or lower.