Example of visual search display with an orientation target.

<p>Example of visual search display with an orientation target.</p

A list of the levels and the associated parameters for each of the four factors.

<p>A list of the levels and the associated parameters for each of the four factors.</p

Scatterplot of predicted vs. observed mean RTs for all experiments, participants, ratio conditions, and inter-trial conditions, for each experiment.

<p>Lines show the corresponding linear fits.</p

Goodness of predictions based on the slope (±95% confidence interval), correlation coefficient r (*p<0.05), and RMSE for the MLE, motor dominance, and auditory dominance models in Experiment 2.

<p>Goodness of predictions based on the slope (±95% confidence interval), correlation coefficient r (*p<0.05), and RMSE for the MLE, motor dominance, and auditory dominance models in Experiment 2.</p

Mean SDs (with±1 standard errors) for the pure reproduction (blue bar), auditory comparison (cyan bar), auditory reproduction (yellow bar), and predicted according to the MLE model (red bar) in Experiment 1.

<p>Mean SDs (with±1 standard errors) for the pure reproduction (blue bar), auditory comparison (cyan bar), auditory reproduction (yellow bar), and predicted according to the MLE model (red bar) in Experiment 1.</p

Schematic illustration of prior updating and the resulting changes of the starting point.

<p>The top panels show the hyperprior, i.e., the probability distribution on the frequency of target present trials (p), and how it changes over three subsequent trials. The middle panels show the current best estimate of the frequency distribution over target-present and -absent trials (i.e., p and 1 − p). The best estimate of p is defined as the expected value of the hyperprior. The bottom panels show a sketch of the evidence accumulation process where the starting point is set as the log prior odds for the two response options (target- present vs. -absent), computed based on the current best estimate of p. T_p and T_a are the decision thresholds for target-present and -absent responses, respectively, and μ_p and μ_a are the respective drift rates. The sketch of the evidence accumulation process is based on the LATER model (rather than the DDM) and therefore shown with a single boundary (that associated with the correct response). Note that the boundary depicted for trial 2 (target absent) is not the same as those for (target-present trials) trials 1 and 3. In the equivalent figure based on the DDM, there would have been two boundaries, and on trial 2, the drift rate would have been negative and the starting point would have been closer to the upper boundary than on the first trial. Note also that this figure illustrates updating with some memory decay (see level 3). Without memory decay, the distribution on trial 3 would be exactly the same as on trial 1.</p

Inter-trial effects on mean RTs for all three experiments.

<p>Error bars show the standard error of the mean.</p

Dimension repetition/switch effect in Experiment 3.

<p>Mean RTs were significantly faster when the target-defining dimension was repeated. Error bars show the standard error of the mean.</p

Mean SDs (with±1 standard errors) for pure reproduction (blue bars), auditory comparison (cyan bars), auditory reproduction (yellow bars), and predicted according to the MLE model (red bars), as a function of standard duration and SNR in Experiment 2.

<p>H and L denote high and low SNRs, 800 and 1200 short and long standard durations.</p

Stimulus and target positions (A) and sequence of events within a trial (B).

<p>Stimulus and target positions (A) and sequence of events within a trial (B).</p