Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 27;14(3):e1006070. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006070

Fig 8. Different patterns of response time between the time-dependent gambling task (Experiment 3) and dynamic combination of sensory and reward information (Experiment 2, Fig 7C).

Fig 8

(A) Comparison between the actual RT and the predicted optional RT in Experiment 3. Conventions are the same as in Fig 7C. (B) Comparison between the average RT in Experiments 2 and 3. Overall, subjects showed larger RT in Experiment 3 for slower schedules. The asterisk indicates statistical significance for the difference between actual and optimal RT in panel A, and actual RT between Experiments 2 and 3 in panel B (two-sided sign test, p < 0.05).