Next, the effects of display type, search type, target presence/absence, and set size on the search RT in the correct trials were analyzed using Bayesian repeated measures ANOVA. The search RT was affected by target presence, set size, and the interaction between target presence and set size, and all three
BF10 were greater than 100. The search RT was shorter in target present trials than in target absent trials (mean
present = 3.69 s, 95% within-subject CI = 3.03, 4.35; mean
absent = 5.06 seconds, 95% within-subject CI = 4.34, 5.79). The search RT increased with set size (set size 3: mean = 2.46 seconds, 95% within-subject CI = 2.31, 2.61; set size 6: mean = 3.73 seconds, 95% within-subject CI = 3.52, 3.94; set size 9: mean = 5.05 seconds, 95% within-subject CI = 4.76, 5.34; set size 12: mean = 6.28 seconds, 95% within-subject CI = 5.87, 6.69). Post hoc analysis showed that all the pairwise comparisons reached significance (all
BF10>100). Finally, as shown in
Figure 8, the slope in target absent trials was larger than that in the target present trials. Specifically, in the target present trials, the search RT increased at the rate of 0.30 seconds/item. The RT – set size relation was linear (RT = 0.30 × set size + 1.48,
r2 = 0.39,
F (1, 58) = 36.79,
p < 0.001) and monotonically increasing, with the slope significantly different from 0 (
BF10 = 834,062.74). In the target absent trials, the search RT increased at the rate of 0.54 seconds/item. The RT – set size relation was linear (RT = 0.54 × set size + 0.90,
r2 = 0.65,
F (1, 50) = 107.3,
p < 0.001) and monotonically increasing, with the slope significantly different from 0 (
BF10 = 2.01 × e
7). The search RT was not affected by display type (
BFincl = 0.33) and the mean search RT when the search array was rotating was 4.50 seconds (95% within-subject CI = 4.18, 4.82) and the mean search RT when the search array was stationary was 4.26 seconds (95% within-subject CI = 3.97, 4.55). Furthermore, the search RT was equivalent for the memory search and the reference search (
BFincl = 0.05; mean
memory = 4.32 seconds, 95% within-subject CI = 3.96, 4.68; mean
reference = 4.44 seconds; 95% within-subject CI = 4.10, 4.78).