246Perceptual decision making is an area of research that has received a great deal of attention over the last 10 years or so. In psychology, it has been investigated with a range of approaches, from experimental to theoretical (Bogacz, Usher, Zhang, & McClelland, 2007;Ratcliff & Rouder, 1998;Ratcliff, Van Zandt, & McKoon, 1999;P. L. Smith, 1995;P. L. Smith & Ratcliff, 2009;P. L. Smith, Ratcliff, & Wolfgang, 2004;Usher & McClelland, 2001), and it has been studied with combined theoretical and empirical approaches in neuroscience (Gold & Shadlen, 2000;Newsome, Britten, & Movshon, 1989;Salzman & Newsome, 1994;Shadlen & Newsome, 2001;Supèr, Spekreijse, & Lamme, 2001). In most research to date, the focus has been on the two-choice experimental paradigm (e.g., Ratcliff & Rouder, 1998). There has also been an accumulating body of research that has taken models of processing and extended them to multiple-choice paradigms (Bogacz et al., 2007;McMillen & Holmes, 2006;Usher & McClelland, 2004;Usher, Olami, & McClelland, 2002). But to this point in time, there have been relatively few combined experimental and theoretical studies of multiplealternative perceptual decision making. Our aim in this article is to address the lack of such studies by presenting an experiment and comprehensive theoretical analyses. 1 The growing consensus in the perceptual-decisionmaking domain is that only models that assume that evidence is gradually accumulated over time can account for the full range of experimental data-namely, accuracy and both correct and error reaction time (RT) distributions.Two variants of this general class are the Wiener diffusion process model (Ratcliff, 1978(Ratcliff, , 2002Ratcliff & McKoon, 2008;Ratcliff & Rouder, 2000) and the multiple racing diffusion processes model (Ratcliff, 2006;P. L. Smith, 2000;Usher & McClelland, 2001). In the standard diffusion process, evidence is accumulated in a single variable toward one of two decision criteria. This model is difficult to extend to multiple alternatives, although Laming (1968) and Pike (1966), for example, have offered qualitative suggestions. The model that seems most natural for the multiple-alternative paradigm assumes that evidence is accumulated in separate accumulators, corresponding to the different alternatives. In particular, the model that best exemplifies the set of features we wish to test is the leaky competing accumulator (LCA; Usher & McClelland, 2001). This model assumes that stochastic accumulation of information occurs continuously over time, with leakage (decay) and lateral inhibition (competition among accumulators), with the possibility of variability in both starting point and the drift rates driving the accumulation process. The LCA model, however, has been fit to relatively few experimental data sets.The general evidence accumulation model has been applied to a number of domains, from neurophysiological data to cognitive tasks such as memory, lexical processing, and absolute identification, to aging and impaired processing, and to consumer de...