Figure 2.
Behavioral results. A, Average d ' (SE) differed significantly between discriminability levels. Error bars indicate SEM. B, Average choice index ([nπ − nch]/[nπ + nch]) indicated a slight but nonsignificant tendency toward piano choices. C, Probability of choosing piano (p) or chair (c) on a pure noise trial as a function of choices made on two consecutive noise trials. Priming effects were significant and even stronger if the same choice had been made on the preceding two trials. D, Repetition trials were faster than alternation trials. E, Diffusion model fit. The correct and error response time quantiles (black symbols) for each discriminability condition for both chair and piano stimuli are plotted together with predictions of the diffusion model (open circles/gray lines). In each panel, the response time quantiles for each discriminability condition are plotted (y-axis) as a function of choice probability (x-axis). The noise condition is redundantly plotted in each panel. F, Diffusion model fit for biased starting point model. Trials are collapsed across piano and chair decisions and sorted with respect to the choice from the previous trial. The correct and error response time quantiles (black symbols) for each discriminability condition are plotted together with predictions of the diffusion model (open circles/gray lines). In each panel, the response time quantiles for each discriminability condition are plotted (y-axis) as a function of choice probability (x-axis).