Literature DB >> 11318047

Motor processes in simple, go/no-go, and choice reaction time tasks: a psychophysiological analysis.

J O Miller1, K Low.   

Abstract

Psychophysiological measures were used to compare the response preparation and response execution processes of modified versions of F. C. Donders's (1868/1969) classic simple, go/no-go, and choice reaction time tasks. On all measures, differences between tasks were minimal prior to test stimulus onset, supporting the idea of equivalent motor preparation for the 3 tasks. In addition, the psychophysiological measures indicated that the time from the onset of motor processing to the keypress response was also approximately constant across tasks. These results support the assumption that the mean duration of motor processes can be invariant across simple, go/no-go, and choice tasks, at least for the present modified versions of these tasks. The findings emphasize the utility of psychophysiological measures for both examining preparatory processes preceding stimulus onset and for localizing effects on reaction time.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11318047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  21 in total

1.  Differential involvement of parietal and precentral regions in movement preparation and motor intention.

Authors:  Daniel Thoenissen; Karl Zilles; Ivan Toni
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-10-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Temporal organization of covert motor processes during response selection and preparation.

Authors:  Allen Osman; Cathleen M Moore; Rolf Ulrich
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.251

3.  Threshold units: a correct metric for reaction time?

Authors:  Andrew J Zele; Dingcai Cao; Joel Pokorny
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-01-22       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Multisensory enhancement: gains in choice and in simple response times.

Authors:  David Hecht; Miriam Reiner; Avi Karni
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-05-14       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Dual-task practice enhances motor learning: a preliminary investigation.

Authors:  Hui-Ting Goh; Katherine J Sullivan; James Gordon; Gabriele Wulf; Carolee J Winstein
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  LRP predicts smooth pursuit eye movement onset during the ocular tracking of self-generated movements.

Authors:  Jing Chen; Matteo Valsecchi; Karl R Gegenfurtner
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Poststimulation time interval-dependent effects of motor cortex anodal tDCS on reaction-time task performance.

Authors:  Andrés Molero-Chamizo; José R Alameda Bailén; Tamara Garrido Béjar; Macarena García López; Inmaculada Jaén Rodríguez; Carolina Gutiérrez Lérida; Silvia Pérez Panal; Gloria González Ángel; Laura Lemus Corchero; María J Ruiz Vega; Michael A Nitsche; Guadalupe N Rivera-Urbina
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.282

8.  Performance degradation and altered cerebral activation during dual performance: evidence for a bottom-up attentional system.

Authors:  Yunglin Gazes; Brian C Rakitin; Jason Steffener; Christian Habeck; Brady Butterfield; Claude Ghez; Yaakov Stern
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2010-02-25       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Reaction time in ankle movements: a diffusion model analysis.

Authors:  Konstantinos P Michmizos; Hermano Igo Krebs
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Electrophysiological markers of visual dimension changes and response changes.

Authors:  Thomas Töllner; Klaus Gramann; Hermann J Müller; Monika Kiss; Martin Eimer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.332

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.