scholarly journals CORRELATION BETWEEN SMARTPHONE SCREEN TIME AND REACTION TIME IN YOUNG ADULTS OF AGE 18-25 YEARS

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr.Shruti Ashok Gada(PT) ◽  
Dr.Nisha Dhasal(PT)
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Screen Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Human Anatomy ◽  
P Value ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Males And Females ◽  
R Value ◽  
Human Brains

Due to ever increasing use of smartphones and increase dependency on it, it has been a topic of great interest among researchers to find out how mobile phones have an effect on human anatomy and human brains but there haven't been several studies regarding the same. And as reaction time is one amongst the tool to measure cognitive function in human beings. This study included males and females of age 18-25years within BMI 18.5- 22.9kg/m2 and having two weekly average screen-time of more than 4 hours. These individuals were asked to perform Deary Liewald’s test for Simple and Choice reaction time. The included 54 participants (3 males and 51 females) and data collected did not pass normality, hence Spearman’s test was used to find the correlation. The correlation coefficient (r value) and p value for the correlation between smartphone screen time and Simple reaction time is 0.070 and 0.61 and for Choice reaction time is -0.048 and 0.729 respectively. The study shows no significant correlation between the parameters screen time and reaction time (simple and choice reaction time) since p>0.05.

Study of Neuromotor Reaction Times under the Influence of Thyrotropin-Releasing Hormone

1987 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 627-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Repperger ◽  
Tom Jennings ◽  
James Jacobson ◽  
Norman Michel ◽  
Chuck Goodyear ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Thyrotropin Releasing Hormone ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Releasing Hormone ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Decision Choice

Neuromotor reaction times (simple, choice, and decision) were measured when Thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) was administered intravenously to nine healthy men in a double-blind study. Measurements were made of simple reaction time, choice reaction time, and decision time for each subject at various intervals over a 54-hr. period. Given the observed inherent interaction of the drug with the long time used (54 hr.), most analyses were conducted across separate time epochs. Injected subjects showed inhibition in the normal improvement of simple reaction time (which occurs with practice), and they reduced the time required to make a decision. Choice reaction time, however, remained unchanged across the drug-nondrug experimental conditions.

Is simple reaction time or choice reaction time an indicator of all-cause mortality or CVD mortality?

Public Health ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 199 ◽  
pp. 34-41
Author(s):  
T. Zou ◽  
S. Cao ◽  
W. Liu ◽  
L. Li ◽  
J. Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Cvd Mortality

Factors Affecting Reaction-Time Testing and the Interpretation of Results

1991 ◽  
Vol 73 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1195-1202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simo Taimela
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Color Vision ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Time Of Day ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Testing Schedule

The aim of this study was to identify factors that might affect reaction-time (RT) testing and interpretation. Simple reaction time and choice reaction time were measured in a cohort of 893 white young men. Age, body size, color vision, and intelligence (IQ) were analyzed as subject-related factors. Effects of time of day of test and different examiners were analyzed in relation to testing facilities. All factors were statistically correlated to RTs; however, the relationships between age and RTs and between height and RTs were noticeably weak and apparently insignificant in practice. A defect in color vision was notably associated with slow choice RT and with mistakes on the test. As the choice was coded by color in the choice RT test, the result was expected. Low IQs were significantly related with slow RTs. Slow RTs have been correlated with low-grade IQs in previous studies also. Lower grades and greater variation in RTs were recorded just before meals or if testing was done outside the daily testing schedule. The examiner supervising the RT testing significantly affected the results. It was concluded that the introduction for tests should be given impersonally using a tape recorder or comparable equipment.

Decisions concerning the Rejected Channel

1966 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 260-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Everdina A. Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
False Positives ◽  
Auditory Stimuli ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
The Third ◽  
Verbal Messages

It was thought that the physical aspects of auditory stimuli were possibly transmitted via separate pathways from those transmitting the verbal aspects. Three experiments were designed to test this hypothesis. In these experiments subjects had to perform a shadowing task and had to respond simultaneously on response keys to pips superimposed in either ear on verbal messages. The response to these pips was of increasing complexity, in that it was a simple reaction time which was measured in the first experiment, a choice reaction time in the second experiment and a more complex choice reaction time in the third experiment. Subjects were able to perform these tests although the increasing difficulty was reflected in longer reaction times and more errors. The reaction times to the pips presented to the ear which was not being shadowed were slower, and the errors, made to pips in both channels, were “false positives” rather than errors of omission. These results were taken as favouring the hypothesis.

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.

A-171 An Evaluation of Remotely Administered Reaction Time Subtests

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 1226-1226
Author(s):  
Christina Nunez ◽  
Bailey McDonald ◽  
Samantha Spagna ◽  
Charles Golden
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Medium Effect ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Neuropsychological Measures ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Medium Effect Size ◽  
Different Response

Abstract Objective Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many services attempted to quickly transition to a remote format. A need to incorporate and evaluate a remote delivery of neuropsychological measures arose. TestMyBrain (TMB) from the Many Brains Project has been utilizing teleneuropsychology in research since 2017. Method Volunteer research participants (N = 176, Mage = 29, Medu = 15 years, 64.7% white, 54.2% female, 83.2% right-handed) were administered TMB Simple Reaction Time and Choice Reaction Time subtest as part of a larger battery via zoom. Participants were able to choose between completing these measures using a keyboard, mouse, or a touch screen. There were no significant differences among demographic variables across the different completion methods. Results An ANCOVA indicated there was not a significant difference in simple reaction time across the different response F(2,168) = 0.482, p = 0.618, ηp2 = 0.006. There was however a significant difference in choice reaction time across the different response methods F(2,168) = 11.486, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.120. Conclusion Results suggest different response methods maybe suitable for simpler tasks, yet there lacks consistency in response methods for more complex tasks. This medium effect size may have occurred as a result of the lack of sensitivity for devices to detect taps on different portions of the screen as effectively as various keys on a keyboard. Administrators must be aware of the limitations response methods may introduce into results. Limitation to this analysis include limited samples and not controlling for other factors that may potentially influence reaction time such as internet connection. Future research should focus on creating a standardized method for teleneuropsychology administration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document