Effects of Changes in the Intensity of White Noise on Simultaneity Judgements and Simple Reaction Time

1971 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 296-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. Sanford
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
White Noise ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Random Noise ◽  
Difference Threshold ◽  
Response Initiation ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Informal Observation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Difference

On the basis of earlier work and informal observation it was suspected that the effect of loudness on simple reaction time (RT) could not be accounted for by changes in the time it takes the subject to hear the stimulus. Two experiments are described in which an increment in the level of background random noise is presented to the subject. The effect of increment size on RT and on a simultaneity judgement are investigated using a range of increments from just above difference threshold to moderately loud and clear. The difference in the size of loudness effects in the two tasks lends some support to a model which explains the influence of loudness on RT largely in terms of latency of response initiation.

Temporal-Order Judgment and Reaction Time to Stimuli of Different Rise Times

Perception ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 963-970 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Jaśkowski
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Temporal Order ◽  
Temporal Order Judgment ◽  
Stimulus Presentation ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Point Of Subjective Simultaneity ◽  
Subjective Simultaneity ◽  
The Subject

Point of subjective simultaneity and simple reaction time were compared for stimuli with different rise times. It was found that these measures behave differently. To explain the result it is suggested that in the case of temporal-order judgment the subject takes into account not only the stimulus onset but also other events connected with stimulus presentation.

Reaction Times and Derived Information Processing Measures: Limitations of Their Practical Use in Vehicle Operator Screening

1978 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-123
Author(s):  
Helmut T. Zwahlen ◽  
Michael L. Baird
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Rate Difference ◽  
Screening Measure ◽  
Time Averages ◽  
The Difference

The use of information processing rate (difference between the amount of uncertainty in a choice and simple reaction time situation, in bits, divided by the difference of the corresponding reaction time averages, in seconds) as a driver screening measure from a relevance point of view has been suggested by Fergenson (1971).

Field Test of Arousal: A Portable Reaction Timer with Data Storage

1982 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 487-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. T. Wilkinson ◽  
D. Houghton
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Data Storage ◽  
Field Test ◽  
Visual Stimulus ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Cassette Tape ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Cassette Recorder ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Related Stress

A portable, unprepared simple reaction time (USRT) test is described. This test is particularly suitable for assessing performance in the field as a function of arousal-related stress. The test, which is housed in a small, battery-powered cassette recorder, presents a visual stimulus at quasi-random intertrial intervals ranging from 1 to 10 s. The subject responds by pressing a button as quickly as possible, whereupon the reaction time is displayed. The duration of the test is limited only by the cassette tape on which the data are recorded, but 10 min is recommended. Reviewed are studies illustrating the test's brief practice curve and its sensitivity to arousal-related stress.

Do Difficulties in Stimulus Discrimination Affect Luminance Processing?

Perception ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 25 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 124-124
Author(s):  
D Pins ◽  
M Treisman ◽  
R Johnston
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Discrimination Task ◽  
Hyperbolic Function ◽  
Specific Time ◽  
Stimulus Discrimination ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Time Required

Simple reaction time is known to decay as a hyperbolic function of luminance (Piéron's function). An identical relationship has also been demonstrated recently (Pins and Bonnet, 1996 Perception & Psychophysics in press) with different choice-reaction-time tasks. Although mean choice reaction time increased with the complexity of the task, the exponents of the functions relating reaction time (RT) to luminance were found to be equal in each experiment. These results suggest that the task specific time required by the different tasks only adds to the time necessary for luminance processing. In these experiments, the different stimuli presented were easily discriminable. In the present study, we examined the effect of variation in luminance on a more difficult discrimination task involving variation in orientation. Five different luminance levels covering the entire mesopic range were used. In two conditions, tilted lines at nine different angles were used, at a spacing of 2°. In the first condition, the orientations were chosen on both sides of the vertical (the subject responded “left” or “right”); in the second condition, the orientations were on both sides of a line oriented at −40° to the vertical (the subject responded “high” or “low”). The results were compared to those of a second experiment in which only two easily discriminable orientations were used. The results show that RT is greater in the experiments in which nine orientations are used, while the effect of intensity on RT is lower. This effect does not depend on orientation.

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.

Timing of expectancy peak in simple reaction time situation

1974 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 461-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Näätänen ◽  
V. Muranen ◽  
A. Merisalo
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction

Interhemispheric pathways in simple reaction time to lateralized light flash

1982 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.David Milner ◽  
Christopher R. Lines
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Light Flash ◽  
Simple Reaction

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

Postural Preparation to Making a Step: Is There a “Motor Program” for Postural Preparation?

2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 261-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana M. Degani ◽  
Alessander Danna-Dos-Santos ◽  
Mark L. Latash
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Center Of Pressure ◽  
Motor Program ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Single Motor ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Specific Manner ◽  
Young Subjects ◽  
Straight Ahead

We tested the hypothesis that a sequence of mechanical events occurs preceding a step that scales in time and magnitude as a whole in a task-specific manner, and is a reflection of a “motor program.” Young subjects made a step under three speed instructions and four tasks: stepping straight ahead, down a stair, up a stair, and over an obstacle. Larger center-of-pressure (COP) and force adjustments in the anteriorposterior direction and smaller COP and force adjustments in the mediolateral direction were seen during stepping forward and down a stair, as compared with the tasks of stepping up a stair and over an obstacle. These differences were accentuated during stepping under the simple reaction time instruction. These results speak against the hypothesis of a single motor program that would underlie postural preparation to stepping. They are more compatible with the reference configuration hypothesis of whole-body actions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document