Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jan 10.
Published in final edited form as: Child Dev. 2022 May 21;93(5):1601–1615. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13791

Figure 3. Model comparison.

Figure 3.

(A) Across participants, average AIC values were lowest for the four learning rate model, indicating that participants used different learning rates for both better-than-expected and worse-than-expected outcomes and across task blocks. (B) Average AIC values within each age group as well as (C) the proportion of participants best fit by each model indicated that the four-learning-rate model was also the best-fitting model within each age group.