Table 1.
Median and interquartile range for R2 and l parameters from three one-parameter models, fitted to data on group median (i.e., fit to median IP) and individual level in cognitive effort conditions.
Table 2.
Median and interquartile range for R2 and l parameters from three one-parameter models, fitted to data on group median (i.e., fit to median IP) and individual level in physical effort conditions.
Fig 1.
Empirical indifference points obtained in cognitive (left panel) and physical (right panel) effort discounting, with curves fitted corresponding to the one-parameter exponential model in three different reward magnitudes.
Table 3.
Median and interquartile range for the R2 and l and s parameters from three two-parameter models, fitted to the data on group median (i.e., fit to median IP) and individual level in cognitive effort conditions.
Table 4.
Median and interquartile range for R2 and l and s parameters from three two-parameter models, fitted to data on group median (i.e., fit to median IP) and individual level in physical effort conditions.
Fig 2.
Empirical indifference points obtained in cognitive (left panel) and physical (right panel) effort discounting, with curves fitted corresponding to the two-parameter power function model in three different reward magnitudes.
Table 5.
Model comparisons using AICc and BIC criteria on median group level (data were fitted to median indifference points) and aggregate.
Summed across participants AICc and BIC, values were converted to delta values.
Table 6.
Model comparisons on individual level.
Table contains frequencies and ratios of cases for which the given model yielded best fit.
Table 7.
Correlations (Spearman’s rho coefficient) for power function model l, and s parameters for cognitive and physical effort conditions across three reward magnitudes.
Table 8.
Correlations (Spearman’s rho coefficient) of power-function model s parameters for cognitive and physical effort conditions across three reward magnitudes.
Table 9.
Correlations (Spearman’s rho coefficient) between power-function model l and s parameters for physical and cognitive effort conditions across three reward magnitudes.
Fig 3.
Theoretical account for the effects of varying parameter s and l values: Holding constant the value of s with low and high l values (left panel), and holding constant the value of l with low and high s values (right panel).