Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Cognition. 2009 May 8;113(3):293–313. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.03.013

Table 2.

Comparison of mean AICimb score for each model, m, relative to the baseline for all participants in a particular condition. In parentheses is the percentage of participants for whom model m provides a better fit than baseline (i.e., AICimb is positive). The best fit model in each condition is indicated in bold.

Experiment 1 Experiment 2
Model (m) cont. prob. no-cue shuffled consistent
Softmax 18.4 (0.78) 130.0 (1.00) −11.2 (0.47) 1.0 (0.59) −26.9 (0.53)
ET 41.1 (1.00) 96.3 (1.00) 30.5 (0.76) 78.6 (0.82) 11.1 (0.76)
Q-learning 105.3 (1.00) 137.5 (1.00) 93.2 (0.94) 166.7 (0.94) 118.2 (0.94)