Table 3.
Results of model comparisons for Studies 1, 2, and 3
| Study 1 | Study 2 | Study 3 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WAIC | SE | Rank | WAIC | SE | Rank | WAIC | SE | Rank | |
| Exponential | 3140.03 | 88.49 | 8 | 7678.12 | 134.06 | 8 | 10082.57 | 121.12 | 9 |
| Hyperbolic | 3138.66 | 88.45 | 7 | 7677.44 | 131.59 | 7 | 9605.51 | 119.56 | 7 |
| Double exponential | 3102.99 | 88.58 | 3 | 7257.16 | 131.35 | 4 | 8397.71 | 125.71 | 3 |
| Generalized hyperbolic | 3106.46 | 87.51 | 6 | 7256.28 | 131.9 | 3 | 8397.21 | 125.25 | 2 |
| Hyperboloid | 3104.92 | 87.94 | 4 | 7329.27 | 131.78 | 6 | 8675.39 | 123.48 | 5 |
| Generalized hyperbola | 3106.11 | 87.95 | 5 | 7328.88 | 131.8 | 5 | 8675.61 | 123.48 | 6 |
| Constant sensitivity | 3158.26 | 88.46 | 9 | 7243.11 | 131.67 | 1 | 8455.16 | 124.73 | 4 |
| Additive utility | 2819.08 | 82.02 | 1 | 7255.28 | 128.9 | 2 | 7289.19 | 127.38 | 1 |
| Proportional difference | 3004.95 | 79.96 | 2 | 13401.67 | 126.94 | 11 | 9876.74 | 114.93 | 8 |
| ITCH | 3504.33 | 96.71 | 10 | 9336.58 | 165.12 | 9 | 14343.42 | 269.08 | 11 |
| Tradeoff | 8063.80 | 201.78 | 11 | 12068.47 | 295.06 | 10 | 14262.83 | 325.54 | 10 |