The ‘cognitive styles’ hypothesis suggests that individual differences in behavior are associated with variation in cognitive performance via underlying speed-accuracy trade-offs. While this is supported, in part, by a growing body of evidence, some studies did not find the expected relationships between behavioral type and cognitive performance. In some cases, this may reflect methodological limitations rather than the absence of a true relationship. The physical design of the testing arena and the number of choices offered in an assay can hinder our ability to detect inter-individual differences in cognitive performance. Here, we re-investigated the cognitive styles hypothesis in threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), adapting the maze design of a previous study which found no cost to decision success by faster (bolder) individuals. We used a similar design but increased the size of the maze and incorporated an additional choice in the form of a third maze arm. We found, in accordance with cognitive style expectations, that individuals that were consistently slower to emerge from the start chamber made fewer errors than fish that emerged faster. Activity in an open field test, however, did not show evidence of a relationship with decision success, possibly due to the low number of repeated observations per fish in this separate assay. Our results provide further empirical support for the cognitive styles hypothesis and highlight important methodological aspects to consider in studies of inter-individual differences in cognition.