Table 5.
AIC and relative likelihood values show the FG-LBA model fits best for each participant
| Subject | AIC |
Relative likelihood |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LBAst | LBAdc | FG-LBA | LBAst vs FG-LBA | LBAdc vs FG-LBA | |
| S1 | 28442 | 28458 | 27918 | 1.64E-114 | 5.50E-118 |
| S2 | 27867 | 28276 | 27743 | 1.19E-27 | 1.82E-116 |
| S3 | 28125 | 28139 | 27855 | 2.35E-59 | 2.14E-62 |
| S4 | 26886 | 26924 | 26836 | 1.39E-11 | 7.78E-20 |
| S5 | 28561 | 28589 | 28342 | 2.78E-48 | 2.32E-54 |
| S6 | 25127 | 25169 | 24978 | 4.42E-33 | 3.35E-42 |
| S7 | 27523 | 27538 | 27285 | 2.08E-52 | 1.15E-55 |
| S8 | 29451 | 29495 | 29285 | 8.99E-37 | 2.51E-46 |
| S9 | 31548 | 31572 | 31110 | 7.75E-96 | 4.76E-101 |
| S10 | 27493 | 27561 | 27406 | 1.28E-19 | 2.20E-34 |
| S11 | 26444 | 26489 | 25943 | 1.62E-109 | 2.74E-119 |
| S12 | 29987 | 30206 | 29310 | 9.80E-148 | 2.73E-195 |
| S13 | 29893 | 29933 | 29476 | 2.82E-91 | 5.80E-100 |