scholarly journals Response triggering by an acoustic stimulus increases with stimulus intensity and is best predicted by startle reflex activation

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana Maslovat ◽  
Christin M. Sadler ◽  
Victoria Smith ◽  
Allison Bui ◽  
Anthony N. Carlsen
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Auditory Stimulus ◽  
Stimulus Intensity ◽  
Acoustic Stimulus ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Startle Reflex ◽  
Simple Reaction Time Task ◽  
Startling Acoustic Stimulus ◽  
Reflex Activation ◽  
Prepared Response

AbstractIn a simple reaction time task, the presentation of a startling acoustic stimulus has been shown to trigger the prepared response at short latency, known as the StartReact effect. However, it is unclear under what conditions it can be assumed that the loud stimulus results in response triggering. The purpose of the present study was to examine how auditory stimulus intensity and preparation level affect the probability of involuntary response triggering and the incidence of activation in the startle reflex indicator of sternocleidomastoid (SCM). In two reaction time experiments, participants were presented with an irrelevant auditory stimulus of varying intensities at various time points prior to the visual go-signal. Responses were independently categorized as responding to either the auditory or visual stimulus and those with or without SCM activation (i.e., SCM+/−). Both the incidence of response triggering and proportion of SCM+ trials increased with stimulus intensity and presentation closer to the go-signal. Data also showed that participants reacted to the auditory stimulus at a much higher rate on trials where the auditory stimulus elicited SCM activity versus those that did not, and a logistic regression analysis confirmed that SCM activation is a reliable predictor of response triggering for all conditions.

scholarly journals Differential Effects of Startle on Reaction Time for Finger and Arm Movements

2009 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 306-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony N. Carlsen ◽  
Romeo Chua ◽  
J. Timothy Inglis ◽  
David J. Sanderson ◽  
Ian M. Franks
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Stimulus Intensity ◽  
Index Finger ◽  
Acoustic Stimulus ◽  
Arm Movements ◽  
Startle Reaction ◽  
Differential Effects ◽  
Startling Acoustic Stimulus ◽  
Startling Stimulus

Recent studies using a reaction time (RT) task have reported that a preprogrammed response could be triggered directly by a startling acoustic stimulus (115–124 dB) presented along with the usual “go” signal. It has been suggested that details of the upcoming response could be stored subcortically and are accessible by the startle volley, directly eliciting the correct movement. However, certain muscles (e.g., intrinsic hand) are heavily dependent on cortico-motoneuronal connections and thus would not be directly subject to the subcortical startle volley in a similar way to muscles whose innervations include extensive reticular connections. In this study, 14 participants performed 75 trials in each of two tasks within a RT paradigm: an arm extension task and an index finger abduction task. In 12 trials within each task, the regular go stimulus (82 dB) was replaced with a 115-dB startling stimulus. Results showed that, in the arm task, the presence of a startle reaction led to significantly shorter latency arm movements compared with the effect of the increased stimulus intensity alone. In contrast, for the finger task, no additional decrease in RT caused by startle was observed. Taken together, these results suggest that only movements that involve muscles more strongly innervated by subcortical pathways are susceptible to response advancement by startle.

scholarly journals StartReact effects are dependent on engagement of startle reflex circuits: support for a subcortically mediated initiation pathway

2019 ◽  
Vol 122 (6) ◽  
pp. 2541-2547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Smith ◽  
Dana Maslovat ◽  
Anthony N. Carlsen
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Acoustic Stimulus ◽  
Neural Mechanism ◽  
Startle Reflex ◽  
Short Latency ◽  
Electromyographic Activity ◽  
Neural Pathways ◽  
Startling Acoustic Stimulus ◽  
Startreact Effect

The “StartReact” effect refers to the rapid involuntary triggering of a prepared movement in response to a loud startling acoustic stimulus (SAS). This effect is typically confirmed by the presence of short-latency electromyographic activity in startle reflex-related muscles such as the sternocleidomastoid (SCM); however, there is debate regarding the specific neural pathways involved in the StartReact effect. Some research has implicated a subcortically mediated pathway, which would predict different response latencies depending on the presence of a startle reflex. Alternatively, other research has suggested that this effect involves the same pathways responsible for voluntary response initiation and simply reflects higher preparatory activation levels, and thus faster voluntary initiation. To distinguish between these competing hypotheses, the present study assessed preparation level during a simple reaction time (RT) task involving wrist extension in response to a control tone or a SAS. Premotor RT and startle circuitry engagement (as measured by SCM activation) were determined for each trial. Additionally, preparation level at the go signal on each trial was measured using motor-evoked potentials (MEP) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Results showed that SAS trial RTs were significantly shorter ( P = 0.009) in the presence of startle-related SCM activity. Nevertheless, preparation levels (as indexed by MEP amplitude) were statistically equivalent between trials with and without SCM activation. These results indicate that the StartReact effect relates to engagement of the startle reflex circuitry rather than simply being a result of an increased level of preparatory activation. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The neural mechanism underlying the early triggering of goal-directed actions by a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) is unclear. We show that although significant reaction time differences were evident depending on whether the SAS elicited a startle reflex, motor preparatory activation was the same. Thus, in a highly prepared state, the short-latency responses associated with the StartReact effect appear to be related to engagement of startle reflex circuitry, not differences in motor preparatory level.

scholarly journals Manipulations of the Response-Stimulus Intervals as a Factor Inducing Controlled Amount of Reaction Time Intra-Individual Variability

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 669
Author(s):  
Paweł Krukow ◽  
Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik ◽  
Arkadiusz Podkowiński
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Individual Variability ◽  
Simple Reaction Time Task ◽  
Stimulus Interval ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Response Stimulus

Aggrandized fluctuations in the series of reaction times (RTs) are a very sensitive marker of neurocognitive disorders present in neuropsychiatric populations, pathological ageing and in patients with acquired brain injury. Even though it was documented that processing inconsistency founds a background of higher-order cognitive functions disturbances, there is a vast heterogeneity regarding types of task used to compute RT-related variability, which impedes determining the relationship between elementary and more complex cognitive processes. Considering the above, our goal was to develop a relatively new assessment method based on a simple reaction time paradigm, conducive to eliciting a controlled range of intra-individual variability. It was hypothesized that performance variability might be induced by manipulation of response-stimulus interval’s length and regularity. In order to verify this hypothesis, a group of 107 healthy students was tested using a series of digitalized tasks and their results were analyzed using parametric and ex-Gaussian statistics of RTs distributional markers. In general, these analyses proved that intra-individual variability might be evoked by a given type of response-stimulus interval manipulation even when it is applied to the simple reaction time task. Collected outcomes were discussed with reference to neuroscientific concepts of attentional resources and functional neural networks.

Analysis of Task Difficulty under Varying Conditions of Induced Stress

1970 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry W. Thornton ◽  
Paul D. Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Simple Reaction Time Task ◽  
Simple Task ◽  
Practical Applications ◽  
Time Task ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Task Relatedness ◽  
Related Stress

Two tasks (simple and choice reaction time) were examined while varying three types of stressors (shock, threat of shock, and noise) and the stressor task relationship (i.e., task-related stress, task-unrelated stress, and no-stress). Four specific hypotheses were tested and 3 were supported in the simple reaction-time task. There were no significant differences among stressors for either task, although greater differences were reported in the simple than in the choice reaction-time task. A significant difference between the “task-relatedness” of stress levels in the simple task was interpreted as possibly due to a “coping” or “protective adaptive mechanism” in which increases in performance serve to reduce stress. Practical applications were examined.

Reaction time and spinal excitability in a simple reaction time task

1976 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia T. Michie ◽  
Alex M. Clarke ◽  
John D. Sinden ◽  
Leonard C.T. Glue
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Simple Reaction Time Task ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Time Task ◽  
Spinal Excitability

Acceptable Levels of Tonal and Broad-Band Repetitive and Continuous Sounds during the Performance of Nonauditory Tasks

1995 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 803-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulf Landström ◽  
Anders Kjellberg ◽  
Marianne Byström
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Sound Pressure ◽  
Broad Band ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Simple Reaction Time Task ◽  
Reasoning Test ◽  
Band Noise ◽  
Time Test ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Reaction Time Test

Three groups of 24 subjects were exposed to a 1000–Hz tone or broad band noise in a sound chamber. During the exposures subjects were engaged in an easy reaction time test or a difficult grammatical reasoning test. For each exposure and work subjects adjusted the noise to a tolerance level defined by its interference with task performance. During the simple reaction-time task significantly higher sound-pressure levels were accepted than during the reasoning test. At the tonal exposure, much lower levels were accepted than during the exposure to broad-band noise. For continuous sound exposures much higher levels were accepted than for noncontinuous exposures. For tonal exposures the difference was approximately 5 dB, for the broad-band exposures approximately 9 dB. In a separate study the effects of the noncontinuity of the noise and pauses were analysed. The raised annoying effect of the noncontinuous noise was not more affected by the noncontinuity of the noise periods than by the noncontinuity of the pauses. The results imply that the annoying reactions to the sound will be increased for repetitive noise and that the reaction is highly influenced by the over-all noncontinuity of the exposure.

Evidence for interhemispheric motor-level transfer in a simple reaction time task: an EEG study

1999 ◽  
Vol 128 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 256-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregor Thut ◽  
Claude-Alain Hauert ◽  
Stéphanie Morand ◽  
Margitta Seeck ◽  
Theodor Landis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Simple Reaction Time Task ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Time Task

Reaction Speed as a Function of Stimulus Intensity in Normals and Retardates

1965 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 649-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred A. Baumeister ◽  
William F. Hawkins ◽  
George Kellas
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Stimulus Intensity ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Time Task ◽  
Motor Set ◽  
Reaction Speed

The reaction times of retardates and normals were compared as a function of intensity of the reaction signal. Three intensity levels of a 1000-cycle tone were used: 5, 15, and 25 db above threshold. Each S was presented all tones in a completely counterbalanced order. The results revealed that both intelligence groups reacted faster with each increase in intensity of the signal. Since no significant interactions emerged, it cannot be concluded that the groups benefited differentially from increases in intensity of reaction signal. It is suggested that retardates may have a sensory set whereas normals have a motor set in the reaction time task.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document