Figure 5. Top row, BIC-based approximations to posterior model probabilities in favor of the fixed bounds, urgency signal, and collapsing bounds models separately for the nine datasets. Shade represents the three models and columns represent individual subjects, with subject labels from the original reports below. Second row, Average decision boundaries for fixed and collapsing models for each experiment using parameters averaged over subjects. Third, fourth, and fifth rows, Choice probabilities and response times for both data and model fits, as quantile-probability plots. Panels show the probability of a correct response on the x-axes and response time (in seconds) on the y-axes. Green and red crosses represent correct and error responses, respectively, across experimental conditions. Vertical placement of the crosses show, for each condition, the 10th, 30th, 50th (i.e., median), 70th, and 90th percentiles of the response time distribution, aggregated across subjects. Predictions of the fixed bounds, urgency signal, and collapsing bounds models are overlaid on data as black lines. Bottom row, Results of model recovery simulation study. Histograms represent distributions of the difference in BIC values from data simulated from the fixed (gray histograms) and collapsing bounds (black histograms) models. Distributions that fall to the left of zero support the fixed bounds model and those to the right of zero support the collapsing bounds model. Crosses represent the corresponding BIC difference values from the model fits to data. Heading acronyms refer to the nine datasets: RS (2002), Roitman and Shadlen (2002); RCS (2003), Ratcliff et al. (2003); RHHSS (2007), Ratcliff et al. (2007); MS (2014)–M, macaques from Middlebrooks and Schall (2014); PHS (2005), Palmer et al. (2005); MS (2014)–H, humans from Middlebrooks and Schall (2014); RTM (2001), Ratcliff et al. (2001); RM (2008), Ratcliff and McKoon (2008); Experiment 1, Reported in this manuscript.