Visual vs. Tactile Reaction Testing Demonstrates Problems with Online Cognitive Testing

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeehyun Kim ◽  
Eric Francisco ◽  
Jameson Holden ◽  
Rachel Lensch ◽  
Bryan Kirsch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Computer Systems ◽  
Cognitive Testing ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
Technical Problems ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Time Test ◽  
Reaction Time Test

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.

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 ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Computer Systems ◽  
Reaction Time Data ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Computerized Testing ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Time Data ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
Significant Difference

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.  

The Impact of Caffeine on Memory

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Emily Chappelear ◽  
Cassa Drury
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Caffeine Intake ◽  
Daily Routine ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
Caffeine Consumption ◽  
Memory And Attention ◽  
Brain Functions ◽  
Time Test ◽  
The Impact

Many people rely on caffeine as part of their daily routine to induce the feeling of wakefulness. However, the effects of caffeine on various brain functions, such as memory, remains unclear. To study the impact of caffeine on memory and attention, we conducted a pilot study on individuals with varying levels of caffeine consumption. Each individual completed a survey, memory test, and reaction time test. The results did not elucidate clear trends or significant differences between those who consumed caffeine and those who did not. This study suggests that caffeine intake does not have a direct impact on memory, but a correlation between reaction time variability and memory suggested that more research could provide deeper insights into the effects of various levels of caffeine consumption.

scholarly journals PERBAIKAN INTENSITAS CAHAYA MEMPERCEPAT WAKTU REAKSI PADA SISWA KELAS ENAM SEKOLAH DASAR NOMOR 8 DAUH PURI DENPASAR

1970 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agha Bhargah ◽  
Made Muliarta
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Light Intensity ◽  
Additional Data ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sixth Grade Students ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Time Test ◽  
The One ◽  
Reaction Time Test

The learning process in a room with low intensity may cause the eyestrain amongstudents, it would be a disadvantage because it makes students become tired and sleepy. The assessment of fatigue used psychomotor reaction time test. This test provides a description of the fatigue that occurs among students. This study aims to investigate the influence of improvement of light intensity to the reaction time among sixth grade students at ElementarySchool Dauh Puri Number 8 Denpasar.This research was using pre experimental study with the one group pre test-post test design among sixth grade students at Elementary School Dauh Puri Number 8 Denpasar. This study used 22 subjects, 11 men and 11 women. The study was conducted first by measuring the reaction time after the first period of study is completed, and then the light intensity improved to meet the standards for one week. The second measurement of the reaction timedid after one week period of the intervention.The results showed a significant difference between the reaction time before the intervention (522 ms) and after the intervention (476 ms), CI 95% : 42.68 – 50.68, p = 0.000. There was additional data regarding the reaction time comparisons between men and women. The reaction time is faster in men (480 ms) than in women (564 ms), p = 0.004. It was concluded that the improvement of light intensity is able to accelerate the reaction time, and reaction time is faster in men than women.

scholarly journals The Effect of Agility Training on Reaction Time in Fencers

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 127
Author(s):  
Bulent Turna
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Vertical Jump ◽  
Training Group ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Time Test ◽  
Reaction Time Test

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of agility training on reaction time in fencers. Accordingly, 48 athletes (24 females and 24 males) actively involved in fencing participated in the study. Fencers were divided into two groups as 24 fencers in the Agility Training Group (ATG: 12F, 12M) (aged 11.95 years, sports age 2.54 years, height 159 cm, body weight 48.08 kg and body mass index 18.81 kg/m²) and Conventional Training Group (CTG: 12F, 12M) (aged 12.12 years, sports age 2.20 years, height 156.54 cm, body weight 46.25 kg and body mass index 18.81 kg/m²). There was a statistically significant difference between the pre-test and post-test values in agility, vertical jump, simple reaction time and multiple reaction time tests in the ATG (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference between the pre-test and post-test values in agility and vertical jump tests in the CTG (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the pre-tests between the groups in the simple reaction time test (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in post-tests between the groups in the agility, simple reaction time and multiple reaction time test values (p<0.05). Based on the results of the study, it was found that simple and multiple reaction time could be positively affected by active-reactive agility training applications.

Reaction time and hand dominance

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdel Karim Chouamo ◽  
Svetlana Griego ◽  
Fatima Susana Martinez Lopez
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Dominant Hand ◽  
Hand Dominance ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
Performance Tasks ◽  
Nondominant Hand ◽  
Significant Difference

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.

scholarly journals PERBANDINGAN MENGONSUMSI BERBAGAI JENIS MINUMAN BERKAFEIN (KOPI, TEH HIJAU, DAN MINUMAN BERENERGI) TERHADAP WAKTU REAKSI

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Wigit Kisworo ◽  
Hamidie Ronald Daniel Ray ◽  
Ugelta Surdiniaty
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Green Tea ◽  
Energy Drink ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Time Test ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Reaction Result ◽  
Reaction Time Test ◽  
One Way Anova

Generally, the aim of this research to know the comparison of caffeine drinks through the result of reaction time after consumption coffee, green tea, and energy drink by the same amount of caffeine. The way to gather the data is using purposive sampling, the population that chosen by the researcher is 10 respondents’ college students of Ilmu Keolahragaan batch 2016. For data analysis, using SPSS 21 program for windows and Statistical calculation that used is One-Way ANOVA continues with Post Hoc Tukey. The average result from time reaction on Speed Anticipation Reaction is 1.263 (placebo), 1,257 (green tea), 1.271 (energy drink), and 1.358 (black coffee). For Body Reaction Time Test (visual) shows the average around 1.239 (placebo), 0.245 (green tea), 0.257 (green tea), and 0.244 (black coffee). While on Whole Body Reaction Time Test (auditory) shows the average0.239 (placebo), 0.239 (green tea), 0.274 (energy drink), and 0.263 (black coffee). The signification value from three-time reaction test are (Speed Anticipation Reaction Sig. 0.706 > 0.05, Whole Body Reaction (visual) Sig. 0.877 > 0.05, and Whole Body Reaction (auditory) Sig. 0.348 > 0.05) all of the result above 0.05. Hence, it can be concluded there is no significant difference through time reaction result after consumption kind of caffeine drinks with the same concentration.

Neuroticism and Speed-Accuracy Tradeoff in Self-Paced Speeded Mental Addition and Comparison

2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hagen C. Flehmig ◽  
Michael B. Steinborn ◽  
Karl Westhoff ◽  
Robert Langner
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Response Speed ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
Comparison Task ◽  
Processing Efficiency ◽  
Mental Addition ◽  
Speed Accuracy ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Accuracy Tradeoff

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.

scholarly journals Lateralization of attention in adults with ADHD: Evidence of pseudoneglect

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Helfer ◽  
Stefanos Maltezos ◽  
Elizabeth Liddle ◽  
Jonna Kuntsi ◽  
Philip Asherson
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Study Participant ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Incentive Condition ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
The Right

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document