Fig. 4: Model comparison for Study 1 conditions with no first phase.

From left to right, columns show results from baseline (n = 50 participants), squares (n = 50), timing (n = 50) and payoff (n = 51) conditions. Human participant data are reproduced from Fig. 2. In the first row, horizontal solid lines link samples data for humans (black points) and Ideal Observer (grey points) when BF₀₁ > 3 (at least moderate evidence for equal means) while dotted lines indicate when BF₁₀ > 3 (at least moderate evidence for different means). Statistical details for these pairwise tests can be found in Supplementary Table 1. Every condition replicated robust participant undersampling. The second row shows BIC values, where lower values indicate better model fit. Horizontal lines are in the colour corresponding to the point spread of the better-fitting model when BF₁₀ > 3 or shown in black when BF₀₁ > 3. Further statistical details for these pairwise mean difference tests can be found in Table 4. All four conditions replicated Biased Prior model (blue) as the best-fitting model. Similarly, the third row shows that the Biased Prior model best fitted the most participants. Model point spread data colours (See also legend in lower right panel): Cost to Sample (green), Cut Off (orange), Biased Prior (blue). Boxplots reflect first, second (median) and third quartiles, while whiskers reflect 1.5 interquartile range. Point spreads reflect individual participant mean values. Abbreviations: Subj = Models that make choices about subjective values; Obj = Models that makes choices about objective values.