Literature DB >> 15153406

Simple reaction time as a function of response complexity: memory drum theory revisited.

R W Christina1, M G Fischman, M J Vercruyssen.   

Abstract

The prediction emanating from memory drum theory (Henry & Rogers, 1960') that simple reaction time (SRT) increases as a response becomes more complex (i.e., increases in number of movement parts) was investigated. Experiments 1 (N = 20) and 3 (N = 16) indicated that SRT was longer for responses consisting of two and three parts than it was for a one-part response and this may be interpreted as support for the prediction. Failing to support the prediction, however, was the finding that SRT was essentially the same for responses consisting of two and three parts. This may not be too damaging to the theory because it could simply be reflecting an upper limit in terms of numbers of parts or response duration for causing an increase in SRT. Experiments 2 (N = 20) and 3 revealed an SRT effect between two responses that were supposed to be equal in complexity. At first, this finding appeared to be contrary to the prediction, but it may be interpreted as support for it because one of the responses defined as having one movement part could actually have had two

Year:  1982        PMID: 15153406     DOI: 10.1080/00222895.1982.10735282

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mot Behav        ISSN: 0022-2895            Impact factor:   1.328


  4 in total

1.  Programming time in serial tapping responses as a function of pathway constraint.

Authors:  B Sidaway; B Schoenfelder-Zohdi; B Moore
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1990

2.  Interference between saccadic eye and goal-directed hand movements.

Authors:  H Bekkering; J J Adam; A van den Aarssen; H Kingma; H T Whiting
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Sources of interference in cross-modal action: response selection, crosstalk, and general dual-execution costs.

Authors:  Aleks Pieczykolan; Lynn Huestegge
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-09-27

4.  Reaction times can reflect habits rather than computations.

Authors:  Aaron L Wong; Jeff Goldsmith; Alexander D Forrence; Adrian M Haith; John W Krakauer
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2017-07-28       Impact factor: 8.140

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.