Fig 1.
Overview of the methods and processes for generating experimental stimuli.
(A) HUM stimuli were generated from the model with a consistent cross-correlation structure, and based on these HUM stimuli, RAN stimuli with a random cross-correlation structure were produced. These stimuli were sequentially presented to participants, who were asked to discriminate between them. (B) Correlation structures of the stimuli.
Table 1.
ITI and asynchrony for each stimulus group.
Table 2.
Demographics of participants who passed the screening.
Table 3.
Fixed effect estimates on total G-MSI score.
Fig 2.
Comparison of the percentage of “human-like” responses by group and stimulus.
chance levels Panels A and B display the data for participants with ensemble experience, whereas panels C and D show the data for participants without ensemble experience. (A) and (C): box charts illustrating the percentages of participants’ responses as “human-like” to the RAN (blue) and HUM (red) stimuli, with adjacent dots representing individual participant data. (B) and (D): box chart for the difference between the percentage of “human-like” responses to RAN and HUM, with neighboring dots indicating each participant’s data. The dashed lines indicate chance levels (50% for panels A and B, and 0 for C and D).
Table 4.
Fixed effect estimates on “human-like” response rate.
Fig 3.
Comparison of sensitivity and response bias.
Panels A and B present the data for participants with ensemble experience, whereas panels C and D present the data for those without ensemble experience. (A) and (C): box charts for sensitivity d’, with adjacent dots representing individual participant data. (B) and (D): box charts for bias C, with neighboring dots indicating each participant’s data.
Table 5.
Fixed effect estimates of sensitivity d’.
Table 6.
Fixed effect estimates on bias C.
Fig 4.
Comparison of accurate response rate in practice trials.
Panels A and B present data for participants with and without ensemble experience, respectively, with adjacent dots representing individual participant data.
Table 7.
Fixed effect estimates of the accurate response rate in practice trials.