Literature DB >> 10024851

Gender differences in choice reaction time: evidence for differential strategies.

J J Adam1, F G Paas, M J Buekers, I J Wuyts, W A Spijkers, P Wallmeyer.   

Abstract

This study considered the hypothesis that on some tasks men and women might employ different information processing strategies. Twelve male and 12 female participants performed a 2- and 4-choice, compatible and incompatible, choice reaction time task that required a verbal response to a spatial location target stimulus. Results demonstrated a near-significant overall reaction time advantage for male participants. Moreover, males and females showed a differential pattern of reaction time as a function of stimulus location. Specifically, in the 4-choice-compatible condition, females exhibited a linear increase in reaction time as a function of the left-right dimension; males, on the other hand, showed a two-component, step-like increase. It was suggested that this gender difference in reaction time performance may reflect differences in processing strategy. Specifically, it was argued that in the present task females may have employed a serial, left-to-right, processing strategy, and males a binary, split-half (dichotomizing) strategy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10024851     DOI: 10.1080/001401399185685

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ergonomics        ISSN: 0014-0139            Impact factor:   2.778


  16 in total

1.  The impact of a sports vision training program in youth field hockey players.

Authors:  Sebastian Schwab; Daniel Memmert
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 2.988

Review 2.  Gender differences in the acquisition of surgical skills: a systematic review.

Authors:  Amir Ali; Yousif Subhi; Charlotte Ringsted; Lars Konge
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Cervical Muscle Activation Characteristics and Head Kinematics in Males and Females Following Acoustic Warnings and Impulsive Head Forces.

Authors:  Mohammad Homayounpour; Nicholas G Gomez; Alexandra C Ingram; Brittany Coats; Andrew S Merryweather
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 3.934

4.  A gender difference related to the effect of a background odor: a magnetoencephalographic study.

Authors:  Peter Walla; Herwig Imhof; Wilfried Lang
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2009-07-02       Impact factor: 3.575

5.  Are there predictors of flexible ureteroscopic aptitude among novice trainees? objective assessment using simulation-based trainer.

Authors:  Ryan Sun; Mohammad Mohaghegh; Karim Sidhom; Lauren Burton; Rahul Bansal; Premal Patel
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  A comparative study of visual and auditory reaction times on the basis of gender and physical activity levels of medical first year students.

Authors:  Aditya Jain; Ramta Bansal; Avnish Kumar; K D Singh
Journal:  Int J Appl Basic Med Res       Date:  2015 May-Aug

7.  Comparison of reaction response time between hand and foot controlled devices in simulated microsurgical testing.

Authors:  Marcel Pfister; Jaw-Chyng L Lue; Francisco R Stefanini; Paulo Falabella; Laurie Dustin; Michael J Koss; Mark S Humayun
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-07-06       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Stereopsis and Response Times between Collegiate Table Tennis Athletes and Non-Athletes.

Authors:  Jiahn-Shing Lee; Shih-Tsung Chang; Li-Chuan Shieh; Ai-Yin Lim; Wei-Sheng Peng; Wei-Min Chen; Yen-Hsiu Liu; Lai-Chu See
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Supplementary low-intensity aerobic training improves aerobic capacity and does not affect psychomotor performance in professional female ballet dancers.

Authors:  Ewelina Smol; Artur Fredyk
Journal:  J Hum Kinet       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 2.193

10.  Electrophysiological correlates of changes in reaction time based on stimulus intensity.

Authors:  Bimal Lakhani; Albert H Vette; Avril Mansfield; Veronica Miyasike-daSilva; William E McIlroy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-05-03       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.