A Literature Review on Reaction Time Clemson University Retrieved September 11 2008
A Literature Review
on Reaction Time
past Robert J. Kosinski
Clemson Academy
Reaction time has a been a favorite field of study of experimental psychologists since the center of the nineteenth century. However, most studies ask questions about the organization of the brain, so the authors spend a lot of time trying to determine if the results conform to some mathematical model of brain activity. This makes these papers hard to sympathize for the starting time pupil. In this review, I have ignored these encephalon organization questions and summarized the major literature conclusions that are applicable to undergraduate laboratories using my Reaction Time software.
I promise this review helps you write a good report on your reaction time experiment. I also apologize to reaction time researchers for omissions and oversimplifications.
- Get out this review and go to Biology Homepage.
- Kinds of Reaction Time Experiments
- Hateful Reaction Times
Simple vs. Recognition vs. Choice Experiments
Number of possible valid stimuli
Stimulus Intensity
Other Factors Influencing Reaction Time
- Arousal
Age
Gender
Left or right paw
Directly vs. peripheral vision
Practice and errors
Fatigue
Fasting
Distraction
Warning
Harm by Booze
Order of presentation
Breathing cycle
Finger tremors
Personality type
Exercise
Punishment
Stimulant drugs
Intelligence
Encephalon injury
Illness
Psychologists have named three bones kinds of reaction fourth dimension experiments (Luce, 1986; Welford, 1980):
In unproblematic reaction time experiments, there is only one stimulus and one response. 'X at a known location,' 'spot the dot,' and 'reaction to sound' all mensurate simple reaction time.
In recognition reaction time experiments, there are some stimuli that should be responded to (the 'memory set up'), and others that should get no response (the 'distractor set up'). There is still only i correct response. 'Symbol recognition' and 'tone recognition' are both recognition experiments.
In choice reaction time experiments, the user must give a response that corresponds to the stimulus, such as pressing a key corresponding to a letter if the letter appears on the screen. The Reaction Time program does not use this type of experiment because the response is always pressing the spacebar.
By the mode, professional psychologists doing these experiments typically employ nearly twenty people doing 100-200 reaction times each...per treatment (Luce, 1986, Ch. vi)! Sanders (1998, p. 23) recommends an adequate flow of practice, and then collection of 300 reaction times per person. Our experiments of 3 or 4 people doing 10 reaction times each are very small.
Mean Reaction Times
For about 120 years, the accepted figures for hateful elementary reaction times for college-age individuals have been about 190 ms (0.xix sec) for calorie-free stimuli and nearly 160 ms for sound stimuli (Galton, 1899; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980).
Uncomplicated vs. Recognition vs. Choice Reaction Times
The pioneer reaction time study was that of Donders (1868). He showed that a unproblematic reaction time is shorter than a recognition reaction time, and that the choice reaction time is longest of all. Laming (1968) concluded that simple reaction times averaged 220 msec simply recognition reaction times averaged 384 msec. This is in line with many studies concluding that a complex stimulus (e.chiliad., several messages in symbol recognition vs. one letter of the alphabet) elicits a slower reaction time (Brebner and Welford, 1980; Teichner and Krebs, 1974; Luce, 1986). An instance very much similar our experiment was reported past Surwillo (1973), in which reaction was faster when a single tone sounded than when either a high or a low tone sounded and the subject was supposed to react only when the loftier tone sounded.
Miller and Low (2001) adamant that the fourth dimension for motor training (due east.g., tensing muscles) and motor response (in this case, pressing the spacebar) was the aforementioned in all iii types of reaction fourth dimension test, implying that the differences in reaction time are due to processing time.
Numer of possible valid stimuli. Several investigators have looked at the event of increasing the number of possible stimuli in recognition and selection experiments. Hick (1952) constitute that in choice reaction time experiments, response was proportional to log(Northward), where N is the number of different possible stimuli. In other words, reaction time rises with Northward, merely once N gets big, reaction fourth dimension no longer increases so much as when Due north was small. This human relationship is called "Hick's Law." Sternberg (1969) maintained that in recognition experiments, equally the number of items in the memory set increases, the reaction fourth dimension rises proportionately (that is, proportional to N, not to log N). Reaction times ranged from 420 msec for 1 valid stimulus (such equally one letter in symbol recognition) to 630 msec for 6 valid stimuli, increasing past most xl msec every fourth dimension another detail was added to the retention set. Nickerson (1972) reviewed several recognition studies and agreed with these results.
Blazon of Stimulus
Many researchers take confirmed that reaction to sound is faster than reaction to lite, with mean auditory reaction times being 140-160 msec and visual reaction times being 180-200 msec (Galton, 1899; Woodworth and Schlosberg, 1954; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980). Perhaps this is considering an auditory stimulus merely takes 8-10 msec to reach the encephalon (Kemp et al., 1973), just a visual stimulus takes twenty-forty msec (Marshall et al., 1943). Reaction fourth dimension to impact is intermediate, at 155 msec (Robinson, 1934). Differences in reaction fourth dimension betwixt these types of stimuli persist whether the discipline is asked to make a uncomplicated response or a complex response (Sanders, 1998, p. 114).
Stimulus Intensity
Froeberg (1907) found that visual stimuli that are longer in duration elicit faster reaction times, and Wells (1913) got the same result for auditory stimuli.
Piéron (1920) and Luce (1986) reported that the weaker the stimulus (such as a very faint light) is, the longer the reaction time is. Still, after the stimulus gets to a certain forcefulness, reaction time becomes constant. In other words, the relationship is:
Kohfeld (1971) found that the difference between reaction fourth dimension to light and sound could be eliminated if a sufficiently high stimulus intensity was used.
Other Factors Influencing Reaction Time
If variation caused by the type of reaction time experiment, type of stimulus, and stimulus intensity are ignored, there are however many factors affecting reaction time.
Arousal. One of the most investigated factors affecting reaction time is 'arousal' or country of attention, including muscular tension. Reaction time is fastest with an intermediate level of arousal, and deteriorates when the subject area is either likewise relaxed or as well tense (Welford, 1980; Broadbent, 1971; Freeman, 1933). That is, reaction time responds to arousal equally follows:
Etnyre and Kinugasa (2002) constitute that subjects who had to react to an auditory stimulus past extending their leg had faster reaction times if they performed a 3 2nd isometric contraction of the leg muscles prior to the stimulus. You lot might wait that the muscle contraction itself would exist faster (because the musculus was warmed upward, etc.), but what was surprising was that the precontraction office of the reaction time was shorter besides. Information technology was as if the isometric contraction allowed the brain to work faster.
Age. Reaction time shortens from infancy into the late 20s, so increases slowly until the 50s and 60s, and then lengthens faster as the person gets into his 70s and beyond (Welford, 1977; Jevas and Yan, 2001; Luchies et al., 2002; Rose et al., 2002). Luchies et al.(2002) also reported that this age effect was more marked for complex reaction time tasks. Reaction fourth dimension likewise becomes more variable with age (Hultsch et al., 2002). Welford (1980) speculates on the reason for slowing reaction time with historic period. Information technology is not just simple mechanical factors like the speed of nervous conduction. It may be the tendency of older people to be more than conscientious and monitor their responses more than thoroughly (Botwinick, 1966). When troubled past a distraction, older people besides tend to devote their exclusive attending to one stimulus, and ignore some other stimulus, more completely than younger people (Redfern et al., 2002). Lajoie and Gallagher (2004) found that old people who tend to fall in nursing homes had a significantly slower reaction time than those that did not tend to autumn. An early study (Galton, 1899) reported that for teenagers (15-xix) mean reaction times were 187 msec for light stimuli and 158 ms for audio stimuli. Reaction times may be getting slower, because we hardly ever meet a Clemson freshman (or professor) who is that fast.
Gender. At the risk of being politically incorrect, in nigh every age group, males accept faster reaction times than females, and female disadvantage is non reduced past practice (Noble et al., 1964; Welford, 1980; Adam et al., 1999; Dane and Erzurumlugoglu, 2003). Bellis (1933) reported that mean time to press a key in response to a light was 220 msec for males and 260 msec for females; for audio the departure was 190 msec (males) to 200 msec (females). In comparison, Engel (1972) reported a reaction fourth dimension to audio of 227 msec (male) to 242 msec (female person). Botwinick and Thompson (1966) found that most all of the male-female person divergence was accounted for by the lag betwixt the presentation of the stimulus and the beginning of musculus contraction. Muscle wrinkle times were the same for males and females. In a surprising finding, Szinnai et al. (2005) institute that gradual aridity (loss of 2.vi% of body weight over a 7-day period) caused females to accept lengthened choice reaction time, merely males to have shortened choice reaction times. Adam et al. (1999) reported that males use a more than complex strategy than females. Barral and Debu (2004) constitute that while men were faster than women at aiming at a target, the women were more than accurate. Jevas and Yan (2001) reported that age-related deterioration in reaction time was the aforementioned in men and women.
Left vs. right manus. The hemispheres of the cerebrum are specialized for different tasks. The left hemisphere is regarded equally the verbal and logical brain, and the right hemisphere is thought to govern creativity and spatial relations, among other things. Likewise, the right hemisphere controls the left hand, and the left hemisphere controls the right paw. This has made researchers recollect that the left manus should be faster at reaction times involving spatial relationships (such as pointing at a target). The results of Boulinquez and Bartélémy (2000) and Bartélémy and Boulinquez (2001 and 2002) all supported this idea. Dane and Erzurumluoglu (2003) found that in handball players, the left-handed people were faster than right-handed people when the test involved the left manus, but in that location was no difference between the reaction times of the right and left handers when using the right hand. Finally, although right-handed male person handball players had faster reaction times than right-handed women, there was no such sexual difference between left-handed men and women. The authors concluded that left-handed people have an inherent reaction time reward. In an experiment using a figurer mouse, Peters and Ivanoff (1999) constitute that right-handed people were faster with their right hand (as expected), simply left-handed people were as fast with both hands. The preferred hand was generally faster. Yet, the reaction time advantage of the preferred over the non-preferred easily was so pocket-sized that they recommended alternate hands when using a mouse. Bryden (2002), using right-handed people only, institute that task difficulty did not affect the reaction time difference between the left and right hands.
Directly vs. Peripheral Vision. Brebner and Welford (1980) cite literature that shows that visual stimuli perceived by different portions of the eye produce different reaction times. The fastest reaction fourth dimension comes when a stimulus is seen past the cones (when the person is looking correct at the stimulus). If the stimulus is picked up by rods (around the border of the eye), the reaction is slower. Ando et al., 2002 institute that practice on a visual stimulus in central vision shortened the reaction time to a stimulus in peripheral vision, and vice versa.
Practice and Errors. Sanders (1998, p. 21) cited studies showing that when subjects are new to a reaction time task, their reaction times are less consistent than when they've had an adequate corporeality of practice. Also, if a discipline makes an error (similar pressing the spacebar earlier the stimulus is presented), subsequent reaction times are slower, as if the field of study is existence more than cautious. Ando et al. (2002) found that reaction fourth dimension to a visual stimulus decreased with three weeks of practice, and the aforementioned enquiry team (2004) reported that the effects of do terminal for at least three weeks. Rogers et al. (2003) found that training older people to resist falls by stepping out to stabilize themselves did ameliorate their reaction time.
Fatigue. Welford (1968, 1980) found that reaction time gets slower when the subject is fatigued. Singleton (1953) observed that this deterioration due to fatigue is more marked when the reaction time chore is complicated than when it is simple. Mental fatigue, peculiarly sleepiness, has the greatest effect. Kroll (1973) plant no event of purely muscular fatigue on reaction fourth dimension. Philip et al. (2004) found that 24 hours of slumber deprivation diffuse the reaction times of 20-25 year old subjects, only had no effect on the reaction times of 52-63 year old subjects. Takahashi et al. (2004) studied workers who were immune to take a short nap on the chore, and found that although the workers thought the nap had improved their alertness, at that place was no upshot on choice reaction fourth dimension.
Fasting. Three days without nutrient does not decrease reaction time, although information technology does impair capacity to exercise piece of work (Gutierrez et al., 2001).
Distraction. Welford (1980) and Broadbent (1971) reviewed studies showing that distractions increment reaction fourth dimension. Richard et al. (2002) and Lee et al. (2001) found that higher students given a simulated driving task had longer reaction times when given a simultaneous auditory chore. They drew conclusions about the safety effects of driving while using a cellular phone or voice-based e-mail. Redfern et al. (2002) found that subjects strapped to a platform that periodically changed orientation had slowed reaction time before and during platform movement. The reaction time to auditory stiimuli was more than affected than response to visual stimuli.
Warnings of Impending Stimuli. Brebner and Welford (1980) report that reaction times are faster when the subject has been warned that a stimulus volition get in soon. In the Reaction Time program, the delay is never more than than virtually 3 sec, just these authors report that even giving five minutes of alarm helps. Bertelson (1967) found that as long equally the warning was longer than well-nigh 0.2 sec., the shorter the warning was, the faster reaction time was. This effect probably occurs because attention and muscular tension cannot be maintained at a high level for more than a few seconds (Gottsdanker, 1975).
Warnings almost Impairment by Alcohol. Fillmore and Blackburn (2002) found that subjects who had boozer an impairing dose of alcohol reacted faster when they were warned that this was enough booze to deadening their reaction time. Unwarned subjects who drank suffered more decreased reaction times. Even so, the warned subjects were too less inhibited and careful in their responses. Even subjects who drank some nonalcoholic potable and and then were warned (falsely) about impairment by alcohol reacted faster than unwarned subjects who drank the same beverage.
Order of Presentation. Welford (1980), Laming (1968) and Sanders (1998) observed that when in that location are several types of stimuli, reaction time will be faster where there is a 'run' of several identical stimuli than when the dissimilar types of stimuli appear in mixed order. This is called the "sequential issue." Hsieh (2002) institute that the shifting of attention between two different types of tasks caused an increase in reaction time to both tasks.
Breathing Wheel. Buchsbaum and Calloway (1965) constitute that reaction time was faster when the stimulus occurred during expiration than during inspiration.
Finger Tremors. Brebner and Welford (1980) report that fingers tremble upward and down at the rate of 8-10 cycles/sec, and reaction times are faster if the reaction occurs when the finger is already on the 'downswing' part of the tremor.
Personality Type. Brebner (1980) plant that extroverted personality types had faster reaction times, and Welford (1980) and Nettelbeck (1973) said that anxious personality types had faster reaction times. Lenzenweger (2001) plant that the reaction times of schizophrenics was slower than those of normal people, but their fault rates were the aforementioned. Robinson and Tamir (2005) constitute that neurotic higher students had more variable reaction times than their more stable peers.
Exercise. Practise can touch reaction fourth dimension. Welford (1980) institute that physically fit subjects had faster reaction times, and both Levitt and Gutin (1971) and Sjoberg (1975) showed that subjects had the fastest reaction times when they were exercising sufficiently to produce a heartrate of 115 beats per minute. Kashihara and Nakahara (2005) found that vigorous exercise did improve selection reaction time, but only for the beginning 8 minutes after exercise. Exercise had no effect on the percent of correct choices the subjects made. On the other paw, McMorris et al. (2000) plant no effect of exercise on reaction time in a test of soccer skill, and Lemmink and Visscher (2005) found that selection reaction fourth dimension and mistake rate in soccer players were not afflicted by exercise on a stationary bicycle. Collardeau et al. (2001) found no mail service-practise effect in runners, but did find that exercise improved reaction fourth dimension during the practise. They attributed this to increased arousal during the exercise.
Penalization. Shocking a discipline when he reacts slowly does shorten reaction time (Johanson, 1922; Weiss, 1965). Simply making the subject feel anxious well-nigh his operation has the same upshot, at least on simple reaction time tasks (Panayiotou, 2004).
Stimulant Drugs. Caffeine has oftentimes been studied in connection with reaction time. Lorist and Snel (1997) found that moderate doses of caffeine decreased the fourth dimension it took subjects to observe a target stimulus and to prepare a response for a circuitous reaction time task. Durlach et al. (2002) found that the corporeality of caffeine in one cup of java did reduce reaction fourth dimension and increase power to resist distraction, and did so within minutes after consumption. McLellan et al. (2005) constitute that soldiers in faux urban gainsay maintained their marksmanship skills and their reaction times through a prolonged period without sleep improve when given caffeine. Liguori et al. (2001) found that caffeine tin can reduce the slowing issue of alcohol on reaction time, merely can't prevent other furnishings such as body sway. On the other hand, Linder (2001), using our software and a "Spot-the-Dot" test, plant that drinking one can of either a caffeinated or a caffeine-complimentary cola had no detectable effect on reaction time. Kleemeier et al. (1956) found that administering an amphetamine-like drug to a group of elderly men did non make their reaction times faster, although it did make their physical responses more vigorous.
Intelligence. The tenuous link between intelligence and reaction fourth dimension is reviewed in Deary et al. (2001). Serious mental retardation produces slower and more variable reaction times. Among people of normal intelligence, there is a slight tendency for more intelligent people to have faster reaction times, simply there is much variation between people of similar intelligence (Nettelbeck, 1980). The speed advantage of more intelligent people is greatest on tests requiring circuitous responses (Schweitzer, 2001).
Brain Injury. Every bit might exist expected, brain injury slows reaction fourth dimension, but different types of responses are slowed to different degrees (reviewed in Bashore and Ridderinkhof, 2002). Collins et al. (2003) constitute that high school athletes with concussions and headache a week after injury had worse performance on reaction fourth dimension and memory tests than athletes with concussions but no headache a week after injury.
Affliction. Minor upper respiratory tract infections slow reaction time, make mood more negative, and cause disturbance of slumber (Smith et al., 2004).
Bibliography
Adam, J., F. Paas, Yard. Buekers, I. Wuyts, West. Spijkers and P. Wallmeyer. 1999. Gender differences in choice reaction time: testify for differential strategies. Ergonomics 42: 327.
Ando, Due south., N. Kida and South. Oda. 2002. Exercise effects on reaction fourth dimension for peripheral and central visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills 95(3): 747-752.
Ando, S, N. Kida and South Oda. 2004. Retention of practice effects on elementary reaction time for peripheral and primal visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills 98(3): 897-900.
Barral, J. and B. Debu. 2004. Aiming in adults: Sex and laterality effects. Laterality: Assymmetries of Body, Brain and Knowledge 9(3): 299-312.
Barthélémy, Due south., and P. Boulinguez. 2001. Transmission reaction time asymmetries in human being subjects: the role of movement planning and attention. Neuroscience Messages 315(1): 41-44.
Barthélémy, South., and P. Boulinguez. 2002. Orienting visuospatial attention generates transmission reaction time asymmetries in target detection and pointing. Behavioral Encephalon Research 133(1): 109-116.
Bashore, T. R. and K. R. Ridderinkhof. 2002. Older age, traumatic brain injury, and cerebral slowing: some convergent and divergent findings. Psychological Bulletin 128(i): 151.
Bellis, C. J. 1933. Reaction time and chronological age. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine xxx: 801.
Bertelson, P. 1967. The fourth dimension course of preparation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 19: 272-279.
Botwinick, J. 1966. Cautiousness in advanced age. Periodical of Gerontology 21: 347-353.
Botwinick, J. and Fifty. W. Thompson. 1966. Components of reaction time in relation to age and sex. Journal of Genetic Psychology 108: 175-183.
Boulinguez. P. and S. Barthélémy. 2000. Influence of the motility parameter to be controlled on manual RT asymmetries in correct-handers. Brain and Cognition 44(3): 653-661.
Brebner, J. T. 1980. Reaction time in personality theory. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times. Academic Press, New York, pp. 309-320.
Brebner, J. T. and A. T. Welford. 1980. Introduction: an historical groundwork sketch. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times. Academic Press, New York, pp. 1-23.
Broadbent, D. E. 1971. Decision and Stress. Academic Press, London.
Bryden, P. 2002. Pushing the limits of task difficulty for the right and left easily in manual aiming. Brain and Cognition 48(2-3): 287-291.
Buchsbaum, M. and East. Callaway. 1965. Influence of respiratory bike on simple RT. Perceptual and Motor Skills 20: 961-966.
Collardeau, M., J. Brisswalter, and M. Audiffren. 2001. Effects of a prolonged run on simple reaction time of well-trained runners. Perceptual and Motor Skills 93(iii): 679.
Collins, Thou. W., M. field, Grand. R. Lovell, G. Iverson, K. K. Johnston, J. Maroon, and F. H. Fu. 2003. Human relationship between postconcussion headache and neuropsychological test performance in loftier schoolhouse athletes. The American Journal of Sports Medicine (31(two): 168-174.
Dane, Due south. and A. Erzurumluoglu. 2003. Sexual practice and handedness differences in heart-hand visual reaction times in handball players. International Journal of Neuroscience 113(7): 923-929.
Deary, I. J., One thousand. Der, and G. Ford. 2001. Reaction times and intelligence differences: A population-based cohort study. Intelligence 29(5): 389.
Donders, F. C. 1868. On the speed of mental processes. Translated past W. G. Koster, 1969. Acta Psychologica 30: 412-431.
Durlach, P. J., R. Edmunds, Fifty. Howard, and Due south. P. Tipper. 2002. A rapid effect of daffeinated beverages on two choice reaction fourth dimension tasks. Nutritional Neuroscience 5(6): 433-442.
Engel, B. T., P. R. Thorne, and R. E. Quilter. 1972. On the relationship among sex, age, response way, cardiac bike stage, breathing bike stage, and uncomplicated reaction time. Journal of Gerontology 27: 456-460.
Etnyre, B. and T. Kinugasa. 2002. Postcontraction influences on reaction time (motor control and learning). Research Quaterly for Exerciseand Sport 73(3): 271-282.
Fieandt, One thousand. von, A. Huhtala, P. Kullberg, and K. Saarl. 1956. Personal tempo and phenomenal time at dissimilar historic period levels. Reports from the Psychological Institute, No. 2, University of Helsinki.
Fillmore, M. T. and J. Blackburn. 2002. Compensating for booze-induced harm: alcohol expectancies and behavioral disinhibition. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63(2): 237.
Freeman, G. L. 1933. The facilitative and inhibitory effects of muscular tension upon operation. American Periodical of Psychology 26: 602-608.
Froeberg, S. 1907. The relation between the magnitude of stimulus and the time of reaction. Archives of Psychology, No. 8.
Galton, F. 1899. On instruments for (ane) testing perception of differences of tint and for (2) determining reaction time. Journal of the Anthropological Institute xix: 27-29.
Gottsdanker, R. 1975. The attaining and maintaining of preparation. Pages 33-49 in P. M. A. Rabbitt and S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and Performance, Vol. 5. London, Academic Printing.
Gutierrez, A., 1000. Gonzalez-Gross, Grand. Delgado, and Thousand. J. Castillo. 2001. Three days fast in sportsmen decrease physical work capacity but not force or perception-reaction fourth dimension. International Journal of Sport Diet and Exercise Metabolism 11(4): 420.
Hick, Due west. E. 1952. On the rate of gain of information. Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 4: 11-26.
Hsieh, S. 2002. Tasking shifting in dual-task settings. Perceptual and Motor Skills 94(2): 407.
Hultsch, D. F., S. W. MacDonald and R. A. Dixon. 2002. Variability in reaction fourth dimension functioning of younger and older adults. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B 57(two): 101.
Jevas, S. and J. H. Yan. 2001. The effect of aging on cognitive function: a preliminary quantitative review. Inquiry Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 72: A-49.
Johanson, A. Grand. 1922. The influence of incentive and penalization upon reaction-time. Archives of Psychology, No. 54.
Kashihara, Yard. and Y. Nakahara. 2005. Brusque-term effect of physical practise at lactate threshold on choice reaction time. Perceptual and Motor Skills 100(ii): 275-281.Kemp, B. J. 1973. Reaction time of immature and elderly subjects in relation to perceptual deprivation and signal-on versus bespeak-off condition. Developmental Psychology 8: 268-272.
Kleemeier, R. W., T. A. Rich, and W. A. Justiss. 1956. The effects of blastoff-(ii-piperidyl) benzhydrol hydrochloride (Meratran) on psychomotor performance in a grouping of aged males. Journal of Gerontology 11: 165-170.
Kohfeld, D. L. 1971. Uncomplicated reaction time as a function of stimulus intensity in decibels of light and sound. Journal of Experimental Psychology 88: 251-257.
Kroll, W. 1973. Effects of local muscular fatigue due to isotonic and isometric exercise upon fractionated reaction time components. Journal of Motor Behavior 5: 81-93.
Lajoie, Y. and S. P. Gallagher. 2004. Predicting falls within the elderly community: comparison of postural sway, reaction fourth dimension, the Berg residual scale and the Activities-specific Residue Confidence (ABC) scale for comparison fallers and not-fallers. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics 38(one): 11-25.
Laming, D. R. J. 1968. Information Theory of Choice-Reaction Times. Academic Press, London.
Lee, J. D., B. Caven, Southward. Haake, and T. Fifty. Dark-brown. 2001. Speech-based interaction with in-vehicle computers: The effect of speech-based email on drivers' attention to the roadway. Homo Factors 43(four): 631.
Lemmink, Thou. and C. Visscher. 2005. Consequence of intermittent do on multiple-option reaction times of soccer players. Perceptual and Motor Skills 100(i): 85-95.
Lenzenweger, K. F. 2001. Reaction fourth dimension slowing during high-load, sustained-attention task operation in relation to psychometrically identified schizotypy. Periodical of Abnormal Psychology 110: 290.
Liguori, A. and J. H. Robinson. 2001. Caffeine anatagonism of alcohol-induced driving impairment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 63(ii): 123-129.
Linder, G. North. 2001. The effect of caffeine consumption on reaction time. Bulletin of the S Carolina University of Scientific discipline, Annual 2001: 42.
Lorist, One thousand. M. and J. Snel. 1997. Caffeine furnishings on perceptual and motor processes. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 102(5): 401-414.
Levitt, S. and B. Gutin. 1971. Multiple selection reaction fourth dimension and movement time during physical exertion. Research Quarterly 42: 405-410.
Luce, R. D. 1986. Response Times: Their Function in Inferring Elementary Mental Organisation. Oxford Academy Press, New York.
Luchies, C. W., J. Schiffman, L. G. Richards, G. R. Thompson, D. Bazuin, and A. J. DeYoung. 2002. Effects of age, step direction, and reaction condition on the power to step quickly. The Journals of Gerontology, Series A 57(4): M246.
Marshall, West. H., Due south. A. Talbot, and H. West. Ades. 1943. Cortical response of the anaesthesized cat to gross photic and electrical afferent stimulation. Periodical of Nerophysiology vi: 1-xv.
McLellan, T. Thou., G. H. Kamimori, D. Thousand. Bell, I. F. Smith, D. Johnson, and G. Belenky. 2005.Caffeine maintains vigilance and marksmanship in simulated urban operations with sleep deprivation. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 76(1): 39-45.
McMorris, T., J. Sproule, Southward. Draper, and R. Child. 2000. Performance of a psychomotor skill following rest, practice at the plasma epinephrine threshold and maximal intensity exersie. Perceptual and Motor Skills 91(2): 553-563.
Miller, J. O. and Thousand. Depression. 2001. Motor processes in simple, get/no-go, and pick reaction time tasks: a psychophysiological assay. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27: 266.
Nettelbeck, T. 1973. Individual differences in noise and associated perceptual indices of functioning. Perception 2: 11-21.
Nettelbeck, T. 1980. Factors affecting reaction fourth dimension: Mental retardation, brain harm, and other psychopathologies. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times. Academic Press, New York, pp. 355-401.
Nickerson, R. S. 1972. Binary-classification reaction times: A review of some studies of human information-processing capabilities. Psychonomic Monograph Supplements iv: 275-318.
Noble, C. E., B. L. Baker, and T. A. Jones. 1964. Age and sex parameters in psychomotor learning. Perceptual and Motor Skills 19: 935-945.
Panayiotou, G. and S. R. Vrana. 2004. The part of cocky-focus, task difficulty, task self-relevance, and evaluation feet in reaction fourth dimension performance. Motivation and Emotion 28(2): 171-196.
Peters, Chiliad. and J. Ivanoff. 1999. Functioning asymmetries in figurer mouse control of right-handers, and left handers with left- and correct-handed mouse experience. Journal of Motor Beliefs 31(i): 86-94.
Philip, P., J. Taillard, P. Sagaspe, C. Valtat, Thousand. Sanchez-Ortuno, N. Moore, A. Charles, and B. Bioulac. 2004. Historic period, performance, and sleep deprivation. Periodical of Sleep Inquiry 13(two): 105-110.
Piéron, H. 1920. Nouvelles recherches sur l'analyse du temps de latence sensorielle et sur la loi qui relie ce temps a fifty'intensité de l'excitation. Année Psychologique 22: 58-142.
Redfern, M. S., M. Muller, J. R. Jennings, J. M. Furman. 2002. Attentional dynamics in postural command during perturbations in immature and older adults. The Journals of Gerontology, Series A 57(viii): B298.
Richard, C. Grand., R. D. Wright, C. Ee, S. L. Prime, U. Shimizu, and J. Vavrik. 2002. Effect of a concurrent auditory chore on visual search performance in a driving-related paradigm-flicker task. Human Factors44(2): 108.
Robinson, East. S. 1934. Piece of work of the integrated organism. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of General Experimental Psychology, Clark University Press, Worcester, MA.
Robinson, M. C. and K. Tamir. 2005. Neuroticism equally mental noise: a relation between neuroticism and reaction fourth dimension standard deviations. Periodical of Personality and Social Psychology 89(1): 107-115.
Rogers, Thou. W., M. E. Johnson, Yard. Chiliad. Martinez, M-Fifty Mille, and L. D. Hedman. 2003. Stride preparation improves the speed of voluntary footstep initiation in crumbling. The Journals of Gerontology, Series A 58(1): 46-52.
Rose, Southward. A., J. F. Feldman, J. J. Jankowski, and D. One thousand. Caro. 2002. A longitudinal study of visual expectation and reaction fourth dimension in the first year of life. Kid Development 73(ane): 47.
Sanders, A. F. 1998. Elements of Human Operation: Reaction Processes and Attending in Human Skill. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey. 575 pages.
Schweitzer, K. 2001. Preattentive processing and cognitive ability. Intelligence 29 i2: p. 169.
Singleton, W. T. 1953. Deterioration of performance on a brusque-term perceptual-motor job. In W. F. Floyd and A. T. Welford (Eds.), Symposium on Fatigue. H. Chiliad. Lewis and Co., London, pp. 163-172.
Sjoberg, H. 1975. Relations between eye rate, reaction speed, and subjective endeavor at different piece of work loads on a bicycle ergometer. Journal of Human Stress i: 21-27.
Smith, A., C. Brice, A. Leach, Thousand. Tilley, and S. Williamson. 2004. Effects of upper respiratory tract illnesses in a working population. Ergonomics 47(4): 363-369.
Sternberg, Due south. 1969. Memory scanning: Mental processes revealed past reaction time experiments. American Scientist 57: 421-457.
Surwillo, W. Due west. 1973. Selection reaction time and speed of data processing in old age. Perceptual and Motor Skills 36: 321-322.
Szinnai, One thousand. H. Schachinger, M. J. Arnaud, Fifty. Linder, and U. Keller. 2005. Result of water impecuniousness on cognitive-motor performance in healthy men and women. The American Periodical of Physiology 289(one): R275-280.
Takahashi, M., A. Nakata, T. Haratani, Y. Ogawa, and H. Arito. 2004. Post-lunch nap as a worksite intervention to promote alertness on the chore. Ergonomics 47(9) 1003-1013.
Teichner, W. H. and M. J. Krebs. 1974. Laws of visual option reaction time. Psychological Review 81: 75-98.
Weiss, A. D. 1965. The locus of reaction time change with set, motivation, and age. Journal of Gerontology 20: sixty-64.
Welford, A. T. 1968. Fundamentals of Skill. Methuen, London.
Welford, A. T. 1977. Motor performance. In J. Due east. Birren and G. West. Schaie (Eds.), Handbook of the Psychology of Crumbling. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 450-496.
Welford, A. T. 1980. Option reaction time: Bones concepts. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times. Academic Printing, New York, pp. 73-128.
Wells, Yard. R. 1913. The influence of stimulus duration on RT. Psychological Monographs xv: 1066.
Woodworth, R. S. and H. Schlosberg. 1954. Experimental Psychology. Henry Holt, New York.
Go to Biology Homepage.
Source: https://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature/LOTwinterschool2006/biae.clemson.edu/bpc/bp/Lab/110/reaction.htm
Post a Comment for "A Literature Review on Reaction Time Clemson University Retrieved September 11 2008"