An Accurate Measure of Reaction Time can Provide Objective Metrics of Concussion

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Tommerdahl ◽  
Eric Francisco ◽  
Jameson Holden ◽  
Rachel Lensch ◽  
Anna Tommerdahl ◽  
...  

There have been numerous reports of neurological assessments of post-concussed athletes and many deploy some type of reaction time assessment. However, most of the assessment tools currently deployed rely on consumer-grade computer systems to collect this data. In a previous report, we demonstrated the inaccuracies that typical computer systems introduce to hardware and software to collect these metrics with robotics (Holden et al, 2020). In that same report, we described the accuracy of a tactile based reaction time test (administered with the Brain Gauge) as approximately 0.3 msec and discussed the shortcoming of other methods for collecting reaction time. The latency errors introduced with those alternative methods were reported as high as 400 msec and the system variabilities could be as high as 80 msec, and these values are several orders of magnitude above the control values previously reported for reaction time (200-220msec) and reaction time variability (10-20 msec). In this report, we examined the reaction time and reaction time variability from 396 concussed individuals and found that there were significant differences in the reaction time metrics obtained from concussed and non-concussed individuals for 14-21 days post-concussion. A survey of the literature did not reveal comparable sensitivity in reaction time testing in concussion studies using alternative methods. This finding was consistent with the prediction put forth by Holden and colleagues with robotics testing of the consumer grade computer systems that are commonly utilized by researchers conducting reaction time testing on concussed individuals. The significant difference in fidelity between the methods commonly used by concussion researchers is attributed to the differences in accuracy of the measures deployed and/or the increases in biological fidelity introduced by tactile based reaction times over visually administered reaction time tests. Additionally, while most of the commonly used computerized testing assessment tools require a pre-season baseline test to predict a neurological insult, the tactile based methods reported in this paper did not utilize any baselines for comparisons. The reaction time data reported was one test of a battery of tests administered to the population studied, and this is the first of a series of papers that will examine each of those tests independently.  

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeehyun Kim ◽  
Eric Francisco ◽  
Jameson Holden ◽  
Rachel Lensch ◽  
Bryan Kirsch ◽  
...  

Reaction time is one of the most commonly used measures in online cognitive assessments.  However, there are significant technical problems with the methods that are commonly deployed for obtaining this measure.  Most online cognitive toolkits obtain reaction time measures with a visual cue and some type of mechanical response (keyboard, mouse or touchscreen).  Both the hardware and software involved in the computer systems that these online cognitive tests depend on introduce significant delays and more significantly, variation in these delays.  The variability that is introduced by these systems leads to inaccurate results that health care professionals have come to rely on.  In this report, a comparison is made between the reaction time data collected with a tactile based device that is accurately calibrated to sub-millisecond accuracy (the Brain Gauge) to a visual reaction time test that relies on consumer grade computer systems in a manner that parallels the methods commonly used in online cognitive testing.  Forty healthy controls took both the tactile based and visually based reaction time test, and the results demonstrated a significant difference in both reaction time and reaction time variability.  Most significant was the difference in reaction time variability, which was 16 msec for the tactile test and 81 msec for the visual test.  While the differences could be partially accounted for by tactile vs. visual biological pathways, the variability of the results from the visual task are in the range predicted by error measured from previous reports that performed robotic testing to derive differences between the two modalities of testing.


Author(s):  
Abdel Karim Chouamo ◽  
Svetlana Griego ◽  
Fatima Susana Martinez Lopez

In most individuals, there is a significant difference in hand dominance and this suggests that  sensorimotor tasks, such as reaction time, would demonstrate a difference in performance tasks conducted with dominant versus non-dominant hand. In this study, comparisons were made between the reaction time of the dominant to the nondominant hand, the reaction time of the male participants to that of the female participants, the reaction time variability of the dominant hand of the male participants to that of the dominant hand of female participants, and finally the reaction time variability of the nondominant hand of the male participants to that of the female participants. The study was conducted virtually with participants performing a set of instructions emailed to them. The results demonstrated that the reaction time of the dominant hand was faster than that of the nondominant hand in all participants, the reaction time of the male participants was faster than that of the female participants, the reaction time variability of the dominant hand was higher in male than in female participants, and lastly, the reaction time variability of the nondominant hand was lower for the male than in the female participants.


GeroPsych ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 169-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Rast ◽  
Daniel Zimprich

In order to model within-person (WP) variance in a reaction time task, we applied a mixed location scale model using 335 participants from the second wave of the Zurich Longitudinal Study on Cognitive Aging. The age of the respondents and the performance in another reaction time task were used to explain individual differences in the WP variance. To account for larger variances due to slower reaction times, we also used the average of the predicted individual reaction time (RT) as a predictor for the WP variability. Here, the WP variability was a function of the mean. At the same time, older participants were more variable and those with better performance in another RT task were more consistent in their responses.


2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hagen C. Flehmig ◽  
Michael B. Steinborn ◽  
Karl Westhoff ◽  
Robert Langner

Previous research suggests a relationship between neuroticism (N) and the speed-accuracy tradeoff in speeded performance: High-N individuals were observed performing less efficiently than low-N individuals and compensatorily overemphasizing response speed at the expense of accuracy. This study examined N-related performance differences in the serial mental addition and comparison task (SMACT) in 99 individuals, comparing several performance measures (i.e., response speed, accuracy, and variability), retest reliability, and practice effects. N was negatively correlated with mean reaction time but positively correlated with error percentage, indicating that high-N individuals tended to be faster but less accurate in their performance than low-N individuals. The strengthening of the relationship after practice demonstrated the reliability of the findings. There was, however, no relationship between N and distractibility (assessed via measures of reaction time variability). Our main findings are in line with the processing efficiency theory, extending the relationship between N and working style to sustained self-paced speeded mental addition.


2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Helfer ◽  
Stefanos Maltezos ◽  
Elizabeth Liddle ◽  
Jonna Kuntsi ◽  
Philip Asherson

Abstract Background. We investigated whether adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) show pseudoneglect—preferential allocation of attention to the left visual field (LVF) and a resulting slowing of mean reaction times (MRTs) in the right visual field (RVF), characteristic of neurotypical (NT) individuals —and whether lateralization of attention is modulated by presentation speed and incentives. Method. Fast Task, a four-choice reaction-time task where stimuli were presented in LVF or RVF, was used to investigate differences in MRT and reaction time variability (RTV) in adults with ADHD (n = 43) and NT adults (n = 46) between a slow/no-incentive and fast/incentive condition. In the lateralization analyses, pseudoneglect was assessed based on MRT, which was calculated separately for the LVF and RVF for each condition and each study participant. Results. Adults with ADHD had overall slower MRT and increased RTV relative to NT. MRT and RTV improved under the fast/incentive condition. Both groups showed RVF-slowing with no between-group or between-conditions differences in RVF-slowing. Conclusion. Adults with ADHD exhibited pseudoneglect, a NT pattern of lateralization of attention, which was not attenuated by presentation speed and incentives.


1994 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasba Simpson ◽  
David Huron

An analysis of reaction time data collected by Miyazaki (1989) provides additional support for absolute pitch as a learned phenomenon. Specifically, the data are shown to be consistent with the Hick- Hyman law, which relates the reaction time for a given stimulus to its expected frequency of occurrence. The frequencies of occurrence are estimated by analyzing a computer-based sample of Western music. The results are consistent with the view that absolute pitch is acquired through ordinary exposure to the pitches of Western music.


1981 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph B Kadane ◽  
Jill H Larkin ◽  
Richard H Mayer

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document