The files "data_criticalfix.csv" and "data_noncriticalfix.csv" contain data accompanying the preprint "The selection balance: contrasting value, proximity and priming in a multitarget foraging task" by Jérôme Tagu and Árni Kristjánsson. The file "TheSelectionBalance_ANOVAtables.html" contains all mean and ANOVA tables used for data analysis. You can use them or modify the data as you wish as long as you cite the original paper (see LICENSE.txt): Tagu, J., & Kristjansson, A. (2022). The selection balance: contrasting value, proximity and priming in a multitarget foraging task. *Cognition, 218*, 104935, doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104935 Additionally, please cite the data: Tagu, J. (2020, December 7). Supplemental materials for preprint: The selection balance: contrasting value, proximity and priming in a multitarget foraging task. Retrieved from osf.io/e7cnd A description of the variables is provided in the "README.txt" file. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at jerome.tagu@u-bordeaux.fr. Jérôme Tagu Short description from the paper: "A critical question in visual foraging concerns the mechanisms driving the next target selection. Observers first identify a set of candidates, and then select the best option among these candidates. Recent evidence suggests that target selection relies on internal biases towards proximity (nearest target from the last selection), priming (target from the same category as the last selection) and value (target associated with high value). Here, we tested the role of eye movements in target selection, and notably whether disabling eye movements during target selection could affect search strategy. We asked observers to perform four foraging tasks differing by selection modality and target value. During gaze foraging, participants had to accurately fixate the targets to select them and could not anticipate the next selection with their eyes, while during mouse foraging they selected the targets with mouse clicks and were free to move their eyes. We moreover manipulated both target value and proximity. Our results revealed notable individual differences in search strategy, confirming the existence of internal biases towards value, proximity and priming. Critically, there were no differences in search strategy between mouse and gaze foraging, suggesting that disabling eye movements during target selection did not affect foraging behaviour. These results importantly suggest that overt orienting is not necessary for target selection. This study provides fundamental information for theoretical conceptions of attentional selection, and emphasizes on the importance of covert attention for target selection during visual foraging."