Literature DB >> 8935900

On the relation between stimulus intensity and processing time: Piéron's law and choice reaction time.

D Pins1, C Bonnet.   

Abstract

Piéron (1914, 1920, 1952) demonstrated that simple reaction time (SRT) decays as a hyperbolic function of luminance in detection tasks. However, whether such a relationship holds equally for choice reaction time (CRT) has been questioned (Luce, 1986; Nissen, 1977), at least when the task is not brightness discrimination. In two SRT and three CRT experiments, we investigated the function that relates reaction time (RT) to stimulus intensity for five levels of luminance covering the entire mesopic range. The psychophysical experiments consisted of simple detection, two-alternative forced choice (2 AFC) with spatial uncertainty, 2 AFC with semantic categorization, and 2 AFC with orientation discrimination. The results of the experiments showed that mean RT increases with task complexity. However, the exponents of the functions relating RT to stimulus intensity were found to be similar in the different experiments. This finding indicates that Piéron's law holds for CRT as well as for SRT. It describes RT as a power function of stimulus intensity, with similar exponents, regardless of the complexity of the task.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8935900     DOI: 10.3758/bf03206815

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  21 in total

1.  STIMULUS INTENSITY EFFECTS DEPEND UPON THE TYPE OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN.

Authors:  G R GRICE; J J HUNTER
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1964-07       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Global shape cannot be attended without object identification.

Authors:  M Boucart; G W Humphreys
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Possible neural basis of brightness magnitude estimations.

Authors:  R T Marrocco
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1975-03-14       Impact factor: 3.252

4.  Psychophysical scaling within an information processing approach?

Authors:  C Bonnet
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 12.579

5.  Properties of cat retinal ganglion cells: a comparison of W-cells with X- and Y-cells.

Authors:  J Stone; Y Fukuda
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1974-07       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Multiple intracellular contributions to light adaptation in Limulus ommatidia.

Authors:  G S Easland; G S Wasserman
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 7.  Stimulus intensity and response evocation.

Authors:  G R Grice
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1968-09       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  Variation in the response latency of cat retinal ganglion cells.

Authors:  W R Levick
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1973-04       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  A neural timing theory for response times and the psychophysics of intensity.

Authors:  R D Luce; D M Green
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1972-01       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  The functional relation of visual evoked response and reaction time to stimulus intensity.

Authors:  H G Vaughan; L D Costa; L Gilden
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1966-12       Impact factor: 1.886

View more
  27 in total

1.  Response times to Ehrenstein illusions of varying subjective magnitude: complementarity of psychophysical measures.

Authors:  D Pins; C Bonnet; B Dresp
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-09

2.  Assessing the effects of physical and perceived luminance contrast on RT and TMS-induced percepts.

Authors:  Ramisha Knight; Chiara Mazzi; Silvia Savazzi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  The role of response mechanisms in determining reaction time performance: Piéron's law revisited.

Authors:  Tom Stafford; Kevin N Gurney
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-12

4.  Comparison of absolute thresholds derived from an adaptive forced-choice procedure and from reaction probabilities and reaction times in a simple reaction time paradigm.

Authors:  Peter Heil; Heinrich Neubauer; Andreas Tiefenau; Hellmut von Specht
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-07-06

5.  Stimulus intensity modifies saccadic reaction time and visual response latency in the superior colliculus.

Authors:  A H Bell; M A Meredith; A J Van Opstal; D P Munoz
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  The spatial scale of attention strongly modulates saccade latencies.

Authors:  Mark R Harwood; Laurent Madelain; Richard J Krauzlis; Josh Wallman
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-01-30       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  The effect of marker size on the perception of an empty interval.

Authors:  Fuminori Ono; Shigeru Kitazawa
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-02

8.  Sound-driven enhancement of vision: disentangling detection-level from decision-level contributions.

Authors:  Alexis Pérez-Bellido; Salvador Soto-Faraco; Joan López-Moliner
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Short reaction times in response to multi-electrode intracortical microstimulation may provide a basis for rapid movement-related feedback.

Authors:  Joseph T Sombeck; Lee E Miller
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 5.379

10.  Tactile perception during action observation.

Authors:  Roberta Vastano; Alberto Inuggi; Claudia D Vargas; Gabriel Baud-Bovy; Marco Jacono; Thierry Pozzo
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.