Skip to main content
. 2022 May 17;29(5):1531–1557. doi: 10.3758/s13423-022-02117-w

Table 4.

Amount and percentages of papers meeting the 11 content criteria (columns 1–3) and percentages of papers within each criteria category meeting a second criterion (columns 4–14)

Criteria Met Percent met Visual capabilities characterized Predictions on peripheral-vision usage Peripheral-vision manipulation Attentional manipulation Peripheral vision manipulation check Compares foveal and peripheral vision Compares with limited peripheral vision Different attentional load/demands Discussions based on own results Functionalities discussed Effects on actions discussed
Visual capabilities characterized 15 25.00 100.00 46.67 66.67 20.00 46.67 60.00 13.33 26.67 100.00 66.67 46.67
Predictions on peripheral-vision usage 19 31.67 36.84 100.00 73.68 42.11 57.89 52.63 31.58 47.37 89.47 63.16 68.42
Peripheral-vision manipulation 27 45.00 37.04 51.85 100.00 29.63 51.85 70.37 25.93 33.33 92.59 66.67 59.26
Attentional manipulation 21 35.00 14.29 38.10 38.10 100.00 28.57 33.33 19.05 85.71 66.67 52.38 28.57
Peripheral vision manipulation check 17 28.33 41.18 64.71 82.35 35.29 100.00 76.47 41.18 35.29 94.12 82.35 70.59
Comparison foveal and peripheral vision 21 35.00 42.86 47.62 90.48 33.33 61.90 100.00 19.05 38.10 95.24 76.19 61.90
Comparison with and without (or limited) peripheral vision 8 13.33 25.00 75.00 87.50 50.00 87.50 50.00 100.00 37.50 100.00 87.50 87.50
Differences attentional load/demands 24 40.00 16.67 37.50 37.50 75.00 25.00 33.33 12.50 100.00 66.67 41.67 20.83
Discussions based on own results 50 83.33 30.00 34.00 50.00 28.00 32.00 40.00 16.00 32.00 100.00 62.00 48.00
Functionalities discussed 36 60.00 27.78 33.33 50.00 30.56 38.89 44.44 19.44 27.78 86.11 100.00 63.89
Effects on actions discussed 25 41.67 28.00 52.00 64.00 24.00 48.00 52.00 28.00 20.00 96.00 92.00 100.00

In column 1, the 11 criteria are listed. In columns 2 and 3, the number and percentage of studies meeting the criteria are displayed, respectively. In columns 4–14, the studies that met each criterion are further characterized. Percentages below 100% in a given row show the percentages of papers that met one of the other criteria. As an example, 46.67% of the papers that characterized visual capabilities also made predictions on peripheral vision usage (first criteria line, column 5)