Literature DB >> 21416303

Response time accuracy in Apple Macintosh computers.

Ian Neath1, Avery Earle, Darcy Hallett, Aimée M Surprenant.   

Abstract

The accuracy and variability of response times (RTs) collected on stock Apple Macintosh computers using USB keyboards was assessed. A photodiode detected a change in the screen's luminosity and triggered a solenoid that pressed a key on the keyboard. The RTs collected in this way were reliable, but could be as much as 100 ms too long. The standard deviation of the measured RTs varied between 2.5 and 10 ms, and the distributions approximated a normal distribution. Surprisingly, two recent Apple-branded USB keyboards differed in their accuracy by as much as 20 ms. The most accurate RTs were collected when an external CRT was used to display the stimuli and Psychtoolbox was able to synchronize presentation with the screen refresh. We conclude that RTs collected on stock iMacs can detect a difference as small as 5-10 ms under realistic conditions, and this dictates which types of research should or should not use these systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21416303     DOI: 10.3758/s13428-011-0069-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods        ISSN: 1554-351X


  19 in total

1.  Can we measure individual differences in cognitive measures reliably via smartphones? A comparison of the flanker effect across device types and samples.

Authors:  Thomas Pronk; Rebecca J Hirst; Reinout W Wiers; Jaap M J Murre
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-06-16

2.  Collecting response times using Amazon Mechanical Turk and Adobe Flash.

Authors:  Travis Simcox; Julie A Fiez
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2014-03

3.  Attention Measures of Accuracy, Variability, and Fatigue Detect Early Response to Donepezil in Alzheimer's Disease: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Pilot Trial.

Authors:  Clara Vila-Castelar; Jenny J Ly; Lillian Kaplan; Kathleen Van Dyk; Jeffrey T Berger; Lucy O Macina; Jennifer L Stewart; Nancy S Foldi
Journal:  Arch Clin Neuropsychol       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 2.813

4.  ScriptingRT: A Software Library for Collecting Response Latencies in Online Studies of Cognition.

Authors:  Thomas W Schubert; Carla Murteira; Elizabeth C Collins; Diniz Lopes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Could millisecond timing errors in commonly used equipment be a cause of replication failure in some neuroscience studies?

Authors:  Richard R Plant; Philip T Quinlan
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 3.526

6.  Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time.

Authors:  David L Woods; John M Wyma; E William Yund; Timothy J Herron; Bruce Reed
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-03-26       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Age-related slowing of response selection and production in a visual choice reaction time task.

Authors:  David L Woods; John M Wyma; E William Yund; Timothy J Herron; Bruce Reed
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Presentation and response timing accuracy in Adobe Flash and HTML5/JavaScript Web experiments.

Authors:  Stian Reimers; Neil Stewart
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2015-06

9.  Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk as a tool for experimental behavioral research.

Authors:  Matthew J C Crump; John V McDonnell; Todd M Gureckis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Conducting perception research over the internet: a tutorial review.

Authors:  Andy T Woods; Carlos Velasco; Carmel A Levitan; Xiaoang Wan; Charles Spence
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.