Page 1
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Factors Affecting Reaction Time
Scientific Journal Reviews
Reviewing journal articles can be a daunting task because of the length and complexity of the
research conducted. I have conducted a review of reaction time articles and summarized the
results into categories. References are listed with each category and can be reviewed in depth
at the end under bibliography.
You can use this information to better understand and predict performance under a variety of
conditions and situations.
Mean Reaction Times
1. For about 120 years, the accepted figures for mean simple reaction times for collegeage
individuals have been about 190 ms (0.19 sec) for light stimuli and about 160 ms
(0.16) for sound stimuli (Galton, 1899; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and
Welford, 1980).
Simple vs. Complex Responses & Reaction Times
1. More complex responses also elicit slower reaction times. Henry and Rogers (1960)
proposed the "memory drum" theory: that more complex responses require more
stored information, and hence take longer. The status of this theory was reviewed by
Klapp (2010).
Number of Possible Valid Stimuli.
1. Several investigators have looked at the effect of increasing the number of possible
stimuli in recognition and choice experiments. Hick (1952) found that in choice reaction
time experiments, response was proportional to log(N), where N is the number of
different possible stimuli. In other words, reaction time rises with N, but once N gets
large, reaction time no longer increases so much as when N was small. This relationship
is called "Hick's Law."
2. Sternberg (1969) maintained that in recognition experiments, as the number of items in
the memory set increases, the reaction time rises proportionately (that is, proportional
to N, not to log N). Reaction times ranged from 420 msec for 1 valid stimulus (such as
one letter in symbol recognition) to 630 msec for 6 valid stimuli, increasing by about 40
Page 2
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
msec every time another item was added to the memory set. Nickerson (1972) reviewed
several recognition studies and agreed with these results.
Type of Stimulus
1. Many researchers have confirmed that reaction to sound is faster than reaction to light,
with mean auditory reaction times being 140-160 msec and visual reaction times being
180-200 msec (Galton, 1899; Woodworth and Schlosberg, 1954; Fieandt et al., 1956;
Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980). Perhaps this is because an auditory
stimulus only takes 8-10 msec to reach the brain (Kemp et al., 1973), but a visual
stimulus takes 20-40 msec (Marshall et al., 1943).
2. Reaction time to touch is intermediate, at 155 msec (Robinson, 1934). Differences in
reaction time between these types of stimuli persist whether the subject is asked to
make a simple response or a complex response (Sanders, 1998, p. 114).
Stimulus Intensity
1. Froeberg (1907) found that visual stimuli that are longer in duration elicit faster reaction
times, and Wells (1913) got the same result for auditory stimuli.
2. Piéron (1920) and Luce (1986) reported that the weaker the stimulus (such as a very
faint light) is, the longer the reaction time is. However, after the stimulus gets to a
certain strength, reaction time becomes constant. In other words, the relationship is:
Arousal
1. One of the most investigated factors affecting reaction time is 'arousal' or state of
attention, including muscular tension. Reaction time is fastest with an intermediate
level of arousal, and deteriorates when the subject is either too relaxed or too tense
Page 3
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
(Welford, 1980; Broadbent, 1971; Freeman, 1933). That is, reaction time responds to
arousal as follows:
2. while some subjects showed the traditional pattern in the graph above, others showed
the opposite trend. In general, reaction time tended to improve as arousal increased.
Martinie et al. (2010) found that being forced to write an essay defending opinions that
the writer
Age
1. Simple reaction time shortens from infancy into the late 20s, then increases slowly until
the 50s and 60s, and then lengthens faster as the person gets into his 70s and beyond
(Welford, 1977; Jevas and Yan, 2001; Luchies et al., 2002; Rose et al., 2002; Der and
Deary, 2006).
2. Luchies et al.(2002) also reported that this age effect was more marked for complex
reaction time tasks, and Der and Deary (2006) concurred.
3. Reaction time also becomes more variable with age (Hultsch et al., 2002; Gorus et al.,
2008).
4. MacDonald et al. (2008) found that reaction time variability in older adults was usually
associated with slower reaction times and worse recognition of stimuli, and suggested
that variability might be a useful measure of general neural integrity.
5. Welford (1980) speculates on the reason for slowing reaction time with age. It is not just
simple mechanical factors like the speed of nervous conduction. It may be the tendency
of older people to be more careful and monitor their responses more thoroughly
(Botwinick, 1966). When troubled by a distraction, older people also tend to devote
Page 4
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
their exclusive attention to one stimulus, and ignore another stimulus, more completely
than younger people.
6. Redfern et al., (2002), & Myerson et al. (2007) found that older adults were as adept as
younger people at assimilating information, but they did take longer to react.
Gender
1. In almost every age group, males have faster reaction times than females, and female
disadvantage is not reduced by practice (Noble et al., 1964; Welford, 1980; Adam et al.,
1999; Dane and Erzurumlugoglu, 2003; Der and Deary, 2006). The last study is
remarkable because it included over 7400 subjects. Bellis (1933) reported that mean
time to press a key in response to a light was 220 msec for males and 260 msec for
females; for sound the difference was 190 msec (males) to 200 msec (females).
2. Botwinick and Thompson (1966) found that almost all of the male-female difference was
accounted for by the lag between the presentation of the stimulus and the beginning of
muscle contraction. Muscle contraction times were the same for males and females.
3. Barral and Debu (2004) found that while men were faster than women at aiming at a
target, the women were more accurate.
4. Jevas and Yan (2001) reported that age-related deterioration in reaction time was the
same in men and women.
Left vs. Right Hand
1. The hemispheres of the cerebrum are specialized for different tasks. The left
hemisphere is regarded as the verbal and logical brain, and the right hemisphere is
thought to govern creativity, spatial relations, face recognition, and emotions, among
other things. Also, the right hemisphere controls the left hand, and the left hemisphere
controls the right hand. This has made researchers think that the left hand should be
faster at reaction times involving spatial relationships (such as pointing at a target).
2. Boulinquez and Bartélémy (2000) and Bartélémy and Boulinquez (2001 and 2002) all
supported this idea. Dane and Erzurumluoglu (2003) found that in handball players, the
left-handed people were faster than right-handed people when the test involved the left
hand, but there was no difference between the reaction times of the right and left
handers when using the right hand. Finally, although right-handed male handball players
had faster reaction times than right-handed women, there was no such sexual
difference between left-handed men and women. The authors concluded that left-
Page 5
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
handed people have an inherent reaction time advantage. In an experiment using a
computer mouse, Peters and Ivanoff (1999) found that right-handed people were faster
with their right hand (as expected), but left-handed people were equally fast with both
hands. The preferred hand was generally faster. However, the reaction time advantage
of the preferred over the non-preferred hands was so small that they recommended
alternating hands when using a mouse. Derakhshan (2006 and 2009) cautions that
preferred hand is not always a good guide to the dominant hemisphere. In most people,
a dominant (and faster) right hand implies a dominant left hemisphere. However, he
found that a minority (20%-25%) of right-handed people actually had a dominant right
hemisphere, and that reaction time on the right side of the body was slower in these
people because commands had to originate in the right hemisphere and then cross over
to the left hemisphere, and then get to the right hand. In other words, the side of the
body with the longer reaction time (not always the side with the nonpreferred hand) is
the side with the dominant hemisphere. Bryden (2002), using right-handed people only,
found that task difficulty did not affect the reaction time difference between the left
and right hands. Miller and Van Nes (2007) found that responses involving both hands
were faster when the stimulus was presented to both hemispheres of the brain
simultaneously. Because the right (emotional) hemisphere is supplied with input by the
left eye, it might be suspected that the left visual field would be the fastest at
identifying emotions. Alves et al. (2009) confirmed that faces showing happiness or fear
were identified most rapidly when presented to the left visual field (e.g., and examined
by the right hemisphere), and that neutral expressions were detected most rapidly by
the right visual field. Godard and Fiori (2010) found that men are just as accurate at face
recognition as women, but that women were faster. They also found that men were
more strongly "lateralized" than women, with dominance of the right cerebral
hemisphere. Muscians appear to have hemispheres that are more equally capable of
paying attention to stimuli than non-muscians, and to have faster reaction times as well
(Patston et al., 2007).
Direct vs. Peripheral Vision
1. Brebner and Welford (1980) cite literature that shows that visual stimuli perceived by
different portions of the eye produce different reaction times. The fastest reaction time
comes when a stimulus is seen by the cones (when the person is looking right at the
stimulus).
2. If the stimulus is picked up by rods (around the edge of the eye), the reaction is slower.
Page 6
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
3. Ando et al., 2002 found that practice on a visual stimulus in central vision shortened the
reaction time to a stimulus in peripheral vision, and vice versa.
Practice and Errors
1. Sanders (1998, p. 21) cited studies showing that when subjects are new to a reaction
time task, their reaction times are less consistent than when they've had an adequate
amount of practice.
2. Also, if a subject makes an error, subsequent reaction times are slower, as if the subject
is being more cautious. Koehn et al. (2008) also found that "accusing" subjects of
making an error slowed their processing of the next stimulus more than indicating that
they had made a correct choice.
3. Ando et al. (2002) found that reaction time to a visual stimulus decreased with three
weeks of practice, and the same research team (2004) reported that the effects of
practice last for at least three weeks.
4. Fontani et al. (2006) showed that in karate, more experienced practitioners had shorter
reaction times, but in volleyball, the inexperienced players had shorter reaction times
(and made more errors too). Visser et al. (2007) found that training on a complex task
both shortened reaction time and improved accuracy.
Fatigue.
1. Welford (1968, 1980) found that reaction time gets slower when the subject is fatigued.
2. Singleton (1953) observed that this deterioration due to fatigue is more marked when
the reaction time task is complicated than when it is simple.
3. Mental fatigue, especially sleepiness, has the greatest effect.
4. Kroll (1973) found no effect of purely muscular fatigue on reaction time. Philip et al.
(2004) found that 24 hours of sleep deprivation lengthened the reaction times of 20-25
year old subjects, but had no effect on the reaction times of 52-63 year old subjects.
5. Van den Berg and Neely (2006) found that sleep deprivation caused subjects to have
slower reaction times and to miss stimuli over a test period that lasted two hours. Cote
et al. (2009) had the same conclusions about two days of restricted sleep, and also
found that the more restricted sleep was, the worse the deterioration in reaction time,
and the subjects seemed to be compensating for this by more mental effort (measured
by high-frequency EEG waves).
Page 7
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
6. Takahashi et al. (2004) studied workers who were allowed to take a short nap on the
job, and found that although the workers thought the nap had improved their alertness,
there was no effect on choice reaction time.
Distraction
1. Welford (1980) and Broadbent (1971) reviewed studies showing that distractions
increase reaction time.
2. Trimmel and Poelzl (2006) found that background noise lengthened reaction time by
inhibiting parts of the cerebral cortex.
3. Richard et al. (2002) and Lee et al. (2001) found that college students given a simulated
driving task had longer reaction times when given a simultaneous auditory task. They
drew conclusions about the safety effects of driving while using a cellular phone or
voice-based e-mail. Horrey and Wickens (2006) and Hendrick and Switzer (2007) had
similar conclusions about cell phone use while driving, and said that hands-free phones
did not improve reaction time performance. Reaction time suffered more than tasks like
keeping in the right lane. Redfern et al. (2002) found that subjects strapped to a
platform that periodically changed orientation had slowed reaction time before and
during platform movement. The reaction time to auditory stimuli was more affected
than response to visual stimuli. Hsieh et al. (2007) found that simulated vibration of a
computer monitor increased reaction times to stimuli presented on the monitor,
worsened error rates, and caused more visual fatigue. The effect of distraction may
depend on emotional state and prior experiences. Reed and Antonova (2007) frustrated
some subjects by giving them unsolvable problems, and then tested the reaction times
of all the subjects with distraction. Subjects who had been given the difficult problems
were more slowed and distracted than subjects who had not been frustrated before the
reaction time measurement. Similar results were cited by Gerdes et al. (2008), who
found that subjects who were phobic about spiders had their reaction time slowed more
by distracting pictures of spiders than by distracting pictures of objects like flowers and
mushrooms. This was caused by the phobic subjects' failure to look away from the
spider pictures as fast as they looked away from the other pictures. Martinie et al.
(2010) found that being forced to write an essay defending opinions that the writer did
not really share actually improved reaction time, possibly due to increased arousal.
Page 8
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Warnings of Impending Stimuli
1. Brebner and Welford (1980) report that reaction times are faster when the subject has
been warned that a stimulus will arrive soon.
2. Bertelson (1967) found that as long as the warning was longer than about 0.2 sec., the
shorter the warning was, the faster reaction time was. This effect probably occurs
because attention and muscular tension cannot be maintained at a high level for more
than a few seconds.
3. Gottsdanker, (1975). Jakobs et al. (2009) found that stimuli that were predictable
elicited faster reaction times, probably because of decreased computational load on the
brain. Also, warning of the stimulus can increase the number of erroneous responses
given before the stimulus (O'Neill and Brown, 2007).
Alcohol
1. Hernandez et al. (2007) found that the slowing of reaction time by alcohol was due to a
slowing of muscle activation, not muscle action.
2. Fillmore and Blackburn (2002) found that subjects who had drunk an impairing dose of
alcohol reacted faster when they were warned that this was enough alcohol to slow
their reaction time. Unwarned subjects who drank suffered more decreased reaction
times. However, the warned subjects were also less inhibited and careful in their
responses. Even subjects who drank some non-alcoholic beverage and then were
warned (falsely) about impairment by alcohol reacted faster than unwarned subjects
who drank the same beverage.
Order of Presentation
1. Welford (1980), Laming (1968) and Sanders (1998) observed that when there are several
types of stimuli, reaction time will be faster where there is a 'run' of several identical
stimuli than when the different types of stimuli appear in mixed order. This is called the
"sequential effect."
2. Hsieh (2002) found that the shifting of attention between two different types of tasks
caused an increase in reaction time to both tasks.
Page 9
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Breathing Cycle.
1. Buchsbaum and Calloway (1965) found that reaction time was faster when the stimulus
occurred during expiration than during inspiration.
Personality Type
1. Brebner (1980) found that extroverted personality types had faster reaction times, and
Welford (1980) and Nettelbeck (1973) said that anxious personality types had faster
reaction times.
Exercise
1. Exercise can affect reaction time. Welford (1980) found that physically fit subjects had
faster reaction times, and both Levitt and Gutin (1971) and Sjoberg (1975) showed that
subjects had the fastest reaction times when they were exercising sufficiently to
produce a heartrate of 115 beats per minute.
2. Kashihara and Nakahara (2005) found that vigorous exercise did improve choice
reaction time, but only for the first 8 minutes after exercise.
Punishment, Stress, & Threats
1. Punishing a subject when he reacts slowly does shorten reaction time (Johanson, 1922;
Weiss, 1965).
2. Simply making the subject feel anxious about his performance has the same effect, at
least on simple reaction time tasks (Panayiotou, 2004).
3. Mogg et al. (2008) found that it might be hard to disentangle the effects of threatinduced
anxiety from the simple distraction that the threat was causing. In other words,
even a non-threatening stimulus can cause distraction and slow reaction time, but not
by causing anxiety.
4. Verlasting (2006) found that deployment to Iraq caused soldiers to have shorter
reaction times, but also increased tension and reduced proficiency at tasks requiring
memory and attention. In any timed task, there are speed-accuracy tradeoffs. For
example, if speed is rewarded more than accuracy, reaction times will be shorter than
when heavy penalties are attached to making mistakes.
Page 10
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
5. Simen et al. (2009) produced a model of this situation, and found that human subjects
adjusted their speed and accuracy to optimize their rewards, just as the model had
predicted.
Stimulant Drugs
1. Caffeine has often been studied in connection with reaction time. Lorist and Snel (1997)
found that moderate doses of caffeine decreased the time it took subjects to find a
target stimulus and to prepare a response for a complex reaction time task.
2. Durlach et al. (2002) found that the amount of caffeine in one cup of coffee did reduce
reaction time and increase ability to resist distraction, and did so within minutes after
consumption.
3. McLellan et al. (2005) found that soldiers in simulated urban combat maintained their
marksmanship skills and their reaction times through a prolonged period without sleep
better when given caffeine.
4. Liguori et al. (2001) found that caffeine can reduce the slowing effect of alcohol on
reaction time, but can't prevent other effects such as body sway.
5. O'Neill and Brown (2007) found that amphetamine and a drug called KW-6002 speeded
reaction times and also increased the frequency of erroneous responses before the
stimulus in the hyper-alert participants.
Intelligence
1. Among people of normal intelligence, there is a slight tendency for more intelligent
people to have faster reaction times, but there is much variation between people of
similar intelligence (Nettelbeck, 1980).
2. The speed advantage of more intelligent people is greatest on tests requiring complex
responses (Schweitzer, 2001).
Illness
1. Minor upper respiratory tract infections slow reaction time, make mood more negative,
and cause disturbance of sleep (Smith et al., 2004).
Page 11
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Bibliography
Adam, J., F. Paas, M. Buekers, I. Wuyts, W. Spijkers and P. Wallmeyer. 1999. Gender differences
in choice reaction time: evidence for differential strategies. Ergonomics 42: 327.
Alves, N. T., J. A. Aznar-Casanova, and S. S. Fukusima. 2009. Patterns of brain asymmetry in the
perception of positive and negative facial expressions. Laterality 14(3): 256-272.
Ando, S., N. Kida and S. Oda. 2002. Practice effects on reaction time for peripheral and central
visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills 95(3): 747-752.
Ando, S, N. Kida and S Oda. 2004. Retention of practice effects on simple reaction time for
peripheral and central visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills 98(3): 897-900.
Barral, J. and B. Debu. 2004. Aiming in adults: Sex and laterality effects. Laterality:
Assymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition 9(3): 299-312.
Barthélémy, S., and P. Boulinguez. 2001. Manual reaction time asymmetries in human subjects:
the role of movement planning and attention. Neuroscience Letters 315(1): 41-44.
Barthélémy, S., and P. Boulinguez. 2002. Orienting visuospatial attention generates manual
reaction time asymmetries in target detection and pointing. Behavioral Brain Research 133(1):
109-116.
Bashore, T. R. and K. R. Ridderinkhof. 2002. Older age, traumatic brain injury, and cognitive
slowing: some convergent and divergent findings. Psychological Bulletin 128(1): 151.
Bellis, C. J. 1933. Reaction time and chronological age. Proceedings of the Society for
Experimental Biology and Medicine 30: 801.
Bertelson, P. 1967. The time course of preparation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology 19: 272-279.
Boesveldt, S., J. Frasnelli, J., A. R. Gordon, and J. N. Lundström. 2010. The fish is bad: Negative
food odors elicit faster and more accurate reactions than other odors. Biological Psychology
84(2): 313-317.
Botwinick, J. 1966. Cautiousness in advanced age. Journal of Gerontology 21: 347-353.
Page 12
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Botwinick, J. and L. W. Thompson. 1966. Components of reaction time in relation to age and
sex. Journal of Genetic Psychology 108: 175-183.
Boulinguez. P. and S. Barthélémy. 2000. Influence of the movement parameter to be controlled
on manual RT asymmetries in right-handers. Brain and Cognition 44(3): 653-661.
Brebner, J. T. 1980. Reaction time in personality theory. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times.
Academic Press, New York, pp. 309-320.
Brebner, J. T. and A. T. Welford. 1980. Introduction: an historical background sketch. In A. T.
Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times. Academic Press, New York, pp. 1-23.
Broadbent, D. E. 1971. Decision and Stress. Academic Press, London.
Bryden, P. 2002. Pushing the limits of task difficulty for the right and left hands in manual
aiming. Brain and Cognition 48(2-3): 287-291.
Buchsbaum, M. and E. Callaway. 1965. Influence of respiratory cycle on simple RT. Perceptual
and Motor Skills 20: 961-966.
Cheatham, R. A., S. B. Roberts, S. K. Das, C. H. Gilhooly, J. K. Golden, R. Hyatt, D. Lerner, E.
Saltzman, and H. R. Lieberman. 2009. Long-term effects of provided low- and high-glycemicload
low-energy diets on mood and cognition. Physiology and Behavior 98(3): 374-379.
Collardeau, M., J. Brisswalter, and M. Audiffren. 2001. Effects of a prolonged run on simple
reaction time of well-trained runners. Perceptual and Motor Skills 93(3): 679.
Collins, M. W., M. field, M. R. Lovell, G. Iverson, K. M. Johnston, J. Maroon, and F. H. Fu. 2003.
Relationship between postconcussion headache and neuropsychological test performance in
high school athletes. The American Journal of Sports Medicine (31(2): 168-174.
Cote, K. A., C. E. Milner, B. A. Smith, A. J. Aubin, T. A. Greason, B. P. Cuthbert, S. Wiebe, and S. E.
G. Duffus. 2009. CNS arousal and neurobehavioral performance in a short-term sleep restriction
paradigm. Journal of Sleep Research18(3): 291-303.
Dane, S. and A. Erzurumluoglu. 2003. Sex and handedness differences in eye-hand visual
reaction times in handball players. International Journal of Neuroscience 113(7): 923-929.
Page 13
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Davranche, K., M. Audiffren, and A. Denjean. 2006. A distributional analysis of the effect of
physical exercise on a choice reaction time task. Journal of Sports Sciences 24(3): 323-330.
Deary, I. J., G. Der, and G. Ford. 2001. Reaction times and intelligence differences: A populationbased
cohort study. Intelligence 29(5): 389.
Der, G., and I. J. Deary. 2006. Age and sex differences in reaction time in adulthood: Results
from the United Kingdom health and lifestyle survey. Psychology and Aging 21(1): 62-73.
Derakhshan, I. 2006. Crossed-uncrossed difference (CUD) in a new light: anatomy of the
negative CUD in Poffenberger's paradigm. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 113(3): 203-208.
Derakhshan, I. 2009. Right sided weakness with right subdural hematoma: Motor
deafferentation of left hemisphere resulted in paralysis of the right side. Brain Injury 23(9): 770-
774.
Donders, F. C. 1868. On the speed of mental processes. Translated by W. G. Koster, 1969. Acta
Psychologica 30: 412-431.
Durlach, P. J., R. Edmunds, L. Howard, and S. P. Tipper. 2002. A rapid effect of daffeinated
beverages on two choice reaction time tasks. Nutritional Neuroscience 5(6): 433-442.
Engel, B. T., P. R. Thorne, and R. E. Quilter. 1972. On the relationship among sex, age, response
mode, cardiac cycle phase, breathing cycle phase, and simple reaction time. Journal of
Gerontology 27: 456-460.
Eckner, J. T., J. S. Kutcher and J. K. Richardson. 2010. Pilot evaluation of a novel clinical test of
reaction time in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I football players. Journal of
Athletic Training 45(4): 327-333.
Etnyre, B. and T. Kinugasa. 2002. Postcontraction influences on reaction time (motor control
and learning). Research Quaterly for Exercise and Sport 73(3): 271-282.
Fieandt, K. von, A. Huhtala, P. Kullberg, and K. Saarl. 1956. Personal tempo and phenomenal
time at different age levels. Reports from the Psychological Institute, No. 2, University of
Helsinki.
Page 14
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Fillmore, M. T. and J. Blackburn. 2002. Compensating for alcohol-induced impairment: alcohol
expectancies and behavioral disinhibition. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63(2): 237.
Fontani, G., L. Lodi, A. Felici, S. Migliorini and F. Corradeschi. 2006. Attention in athletes of high
and low experience enganged in different open skill sports. Perceptual and Motor Skills 102(3):
791-816.
Freeman, G. L. 1933. The facilitative and inhibitory effects of muscular tension upon
performance. American Journal of Psychology 26: 602-608.
Froeberg, S. 1907. The relation between the magnitude of stimulus and the time of reaction.
Archives of Psychology, No. 8.
Froeliger, B., D. G. Gilbert, and F. J. McClernon. 2009. Effects of nicotine on novelty detection
and memory recognition performance: double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of smokers and
nonsmokers. Psychopharmacology 205(4): 625-633
Galton, F. 1899. On instruments for (1) testing perception of differences of tint and for (2)
determining reaction time. Journal of the Anthropological Institute 19: 27-29.
Gerdes, A. B. M., G. W. Alpers and P. Pauli. 2008. When spiders appear suddenly: spider-photic
patients are distracted by task-irrelevant spiders. Behavior Research and Therapy 46(2): 174-
188.
Godard, O. and Fiori, N. 2010. Sex differences in face processing: Are women less lateralized
and faster than men? Brain & Cognition 73(3): 167-175.
Gorus, E., R. De Raedt, M. Lambert, J. Lemper and T. Mets. 2008. Reaction times and
performance variability in normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease.
Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology 21(3): 204-219.
Gottsdanker, R. 1975. The attaining and maintaining of preparation. Pages 33-49 in P. M. A.
Rabbitt and S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and Performance, Vol. 5. London, Academic Press.
Gutierrez, A., M. Gonzalez-Gross, M. Delgado, and M. J. Castillo. 2001. Three days fast in
sportsmen decrease physical work capacity but not strength or perception-reaction time.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism 11(4): 420.
Page 15
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Hendrick, J. L. and J. R. Switzer. 2007. Hands-free versus hand-held cell phone conversation on a
braking response by young drivers. Perceptual and Motor Skills (105(2): 514-523.
Hernandez, O. H., M. Vogel-Sprott, and V. I. Ke-Aznar. 2007. Alcohol impairs the cognitive
component of reaction time to an omitted stimulus: a replication and an extension. Journal of
Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 68(2): 276-282.
Henry, F. M., & Rogers, D. E. 1960. Increased response latency for complicated movements and
a "memory drum" theory of neuromotor reaction. The Research Quarterly 31: 448-458.
Hick, W. E. 1952. On the rate of gain of information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology 4: 11-26.
Horrey, W. J., and C. D. Wickens. 2006. Examining the impact of cell phone conversations on
driving using meta-analytic techniques. Human Factors 48(1): 196.
Hsieh, S. 2002. Tasking shifting in dual-task settings. Perceptual and Motor Skills 94(2): 407.
Hsieh, Y., C. J. Lin and H. Chen. 2007. Effect of vibration on visual display terminal work
performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills 105(3): 1055-1059.
Hultsch, D. F., S. W. MacDonald and R. A. Dixon. 2002. Variability in reaction time performance
of younger and older adults. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B 57(2): 101.
Jauch-Chara, K., M. Hallschmid, S. Schmid, N. Bandorf, J. Born, and B. Schultes. 2010. Sleep loss
does not aggravate the deteriorating effect of hypoglycemia on neurocognitive function in
healthy men. Psychoneuroendocrinology 35(4): 624-628.
Jevas, S. and J. H. Yan. 2001. The effect of aging on cognitive function: a preliminary
quantitative review. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 72: A-49.
Johanson, A. M. 1922. The influence of incentive and punishment upon reaction-time. Archives
of Psychology, No. 54.
Jakobs, O., L. E. Wang, M. Dafotakis, C. Grefkes, K. Zilles, and S. B. Eickhoff. 2009. Effects of
timing and movement uncertainty implicate the temporo-parietal junction in the prediction of
forthcoming motor actions. NeuroImage 47(2): 667-677.
Page 16
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Kaminski, T. W., E. S. Cousino and J. J. Glutting. 2008. Examining the relationship between
purposeful heading in soccer and computerized neuropsychological test performance. Research
Quaterly for Exercise and Sport 79(2): 235-245.
Kashihara, K. and Y. Nakahara. 2005. Short-term effect of physical exercise at lactate threshold
on choice reaction time. Perceptual and Motor Skills 100(2): 275-281.
Kemp, B. J. 1973. Reaction time of young and elderly subjects in relation to perceptual
deprivation and signal-on versus signal-off condition. Developmental Psychology 8: 268-272.
Klapp, Stuart T. 2010. Comments on the classic Henry and Rogers (1960) paper on its 50th
anniversary: resolving the issue of simple versus choice reaction time." Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport 81(1): 108-113.
Kleemeier, R. W., T. A. Rich, and W. A. Justiss. 1956. The effects of alpha-(2-piperidyl)
benzhydrol hydrochloride (Meratran) on psychomotor performance in a group of aged males.
Journal of Gerontology 11: 165-170.
Koehn, J. D., J. Dickenson, and D. Goodman. 2008. Cognitive demands of error processing.
Psychological Reports 102(2): 532-539.
Kohfeld, D. L. 1971. Simple reaction time as a function of stimulus intensity in decibels of light
and sound. Journal of Experimental Psychology 88: 251-257.
Kroll, W. 1973. Effects of local muscular fatigue due to isotonic and isometric exercise upon
fractionated reaction time components. Journal of Motor Behavior 5: 81-93.
Kruisselbrink, L. D., K. L. Martin, M. Megeney, J. R. Fowles, and R. J. L. Murphy. 2006. Physical
and psychomotor functioning of females the morning after consuming low to moderate
quantities of beer. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 67(3): 416-421.
Lajoie, Y. and S. P. Gallagher. 2004. Predicting falls within the elderly community: comparison of
postural sway, reaction time, the Berg balance scale and the Activities-specific Balance
Confidence (ABC) scale for comparing fallers and non-fallers. Archives of Gerontology and
Geriatrics 38(1): 11-25.
Laming, D. R. J. 1968. Information Theory of Choice-Reaction Times. Academic Press, London.
Page 17
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Lee, J. D., B. Caven, S. Haake, and T. L. Brown. 2001. Speech-based interaction with in-vehicle
computers: The effect of speech-based e-mail on drivers' attention to the roadway. Human
Factors 43(4): 631.
Lemmink, K. and C. Visscher. 2005. Effect of intermittent exercise on multiple-choice reaction
times of soccer players. Perceptual and Motor Skills 100(1): 85-95.
Lenzenweger, M. F. 2001. Reaction time slowing during high-load, sustained-attention task
performance in relation to psychometrically identified schizotypy. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology 110: 290.
Liguori, A. and J. H. Robinson. 2001. Caffeine anatagonism of alcohol-induced driving
impairment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 63(2): 123-129.
Linder, G. N. 2001. The effect of caffeine consumption on reaction time. Bulletin of the South
Carolina Academy of Science, Annual 2001: 42.
Lorist, M. M. and J. Snel. 1997. Caffeine effects on perceptual and motor processes.
Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 102(5): 401-414.
Levitt, S. and B. Gutin. 1971. Multiple choice reaction time and movement time during physical
exertion. Research Quarterly 42: 405-410.
Lord, S., R, B. Matters, R. St George, M. Thomas, J. Bindon, K. Chan, A. Collings, and L. Haren.
2006. The effects of water exercise on physical functioning in older people. Australasian Journal
on Ageing 25(1): 36-42.
Luce, R. D. 1986. Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization.
Oxford University Press, New York.
Luchies, C. W., J. Schiffman, L. G. Richards, M. R. Thompson, D. Bazuin, and A. J. DeYoung. 2002.
Effects of age, step direction, and reaction condition on the ability to step quickly. The Journals
of Gerontology, Series A 57(4): M246.
MacDonald, S. W. S., L. Nyberg, J. Sandblom, H. Fischer, and L. Backman. 2008. Increased
response-time variability is associated with reduced inferior parietal activation during episodic
recognition in aging. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20(5): 779-787.
Page 18
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Marshall, W. H., S. A. Talbot, and H. W. Ades. 1943. Cortical response of the anaesthesized cat
to gross photic and electrical afferent stimulation. Journal of Nerophysiology 6: 1-15.
Martinie, M.-A., T. Olive, and L. Milland. 2010. Cognitive dissonance induced by writing a
counterattitudinal essay facilitates performance on simple tasks but not on complex tasks that
involve working memory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 46(4): 587-594.
Masanobu, A. and K. Choshi. 2006. Contingent muscular tension during a choice reaction task.
Perceptual and Motor Skills 102(3) (June 2006): 736-747.
McKeown, D., S. Isherwood and G. Conway. 2010. Auditory displays as occasion setters. Human
Factors 52(1): 54-63.
McLellan, T. M., G. H. Kamimori, D. G. Bell, I. F. Smith, D. Johnson, and G. Belenky.
2005.Caffeine maintains vigilance and marksmanship in simulated urban operations with sleep
deprivation. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 76(1): 39-45.
McMorris, T., and Graydon, J. 2000. The effect of incremental exercise on cognitive
performance. International Journal of Sport Psychology 31: 66-81.
McMorris, T., J. Sproule, S. Draper, and R. Child. 2000. Performance of a psychomotor skill
following rest, exercise at the plasma epinephrine threshold and maximal intensity exercise.
Perceptual and Motor Skills 91(2): 553-563.
Miller, C. A. and G. H. Poll. 2009. Response time in adults with a history of language difficulties.
Journal of Communication Disorders 42(5): 365-379.
Miller, J. O. and K. Low. 2001. Motor processes in simple, go/no-go, and choice reaction time
tasks: a psychophysiological analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception
and Performance 27: 266.
Miller, J. and F. Van Nes. 2007. Effects of response task and accessory stimuli on reduncancy
gain: tests of the hemispheric coactivation model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance 33(4): 829-845.
Mitchell, C. J., S. G. Wardle, P. F. Lovibond, G. Weidemann and Betty P.I. Chang. 2010. Do
reaction times in the Perruchet effect reflect variations in the strength of an associative link?
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 36(2): 567-573.
Page 19
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Mogg, K., A. Holmes, M. Garner, and B. P. Bradley. 2008. Effects of threat cues on attentional
shifting, disengagement and response slowing in anxious individuals. Behavior Research and
Therapy 46(5): 656-558.
Moskowitz, H. and Fiorentino, D. 2000. A Review of the Literature on the Effects of Low Doses
of Alcohol on Driving-Related Skills, Report DOT HS 809 028, Washington: National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation.
Myerson, J. S. Robertson, and S. Hale. 2007. Aging and intraindiviual variability in performance:
Analysis of respone time distributions. Journal of the Experimental Anlysis of Behavior 88(3):
319-337.
Nakamoto, H. and S. Mori. 2008. Sport-specific decision-making in a go/no go reaction task:
difference among nonathletes and baseball and basketball players. Perceptual and Motor Skills
106(1): 163-171.
Nettelbeck, T. 1973. Individual differences in noise and associated perceptual indices of
performance. Perception 2: 11-21.
Nettelbeck, T. 1980. Factors affecting reaction time: Mental retardation, brain damage, and
other psychopathologies. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times. Academic Press, New York, pp.
355-401.
Nickerson, R. S. 1972. Binary-classification reaction times: A review of some studies of human
information-processing capabilities. Psychonomic Monograph Supplements 4: 275-318.
Noble, C. E., B. L. Baker, and T. A. Jones. 1964. Age and sex parameters in psychomotor
learning. Perceptual and Motor Skills 19: 935-945.
O'Neill, M. and V. J. Brown. 2007. Amphetamine and the adenosine A2A antagonist KW-6002
enahance the effects of conditional temporal probability of a stimulus in rats. Behavioral
Neuroscience 121(3): 535-543.
Panayiotou, G. and S. R. Vrana. 2004. The role of self-focus, task difficulty, task self-relevance,
and evaluation anxiety in reaction time performance. Motivation and Emotion 28(2): 171-196.
Patston, L. M., S. L. Hogg, and L. J. Tippett. 2007. Attention in muscians is more bilateral than in
non-muscians. Laterality 12(3): 262-272.
Page 20
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Perruchet, P., A. Cleeremans and A. Destrebecqz. 2006. Dissociating the effects of automatic
activation and explicit expectancy on reaction times in a simple associative learning task.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 32(5): 955-966.
Pesce, C., A. Tessitore, R. Casella, M. Pirritano and L. Capranica. 2007. Focusing on visual
attention at rest and during physical exericise in soccer players. Journal of Sports Sciences
25(11): 1259-1271.
Peters, M. and J. Ivanoff. 1999. Performance asymmetries in computer mouse control of righthanders,
and left handers with left- and right-handed mouse experience. Journal of Motor
Behavior 31(1): 86-94.
Philip, P., J. Taillard, P. Sagaspe, C. Valtat, M. Sanchez-Ortuno, N. Moore, A. Charles, and B.
Bioulac. 2004. Age, performance, and sleep deprivation. Journal of Sleep Research 13(2): 105-
110.
Piéron, H. 1920. Nouvelles recherches sur l'analyse du temps de latence sensorielle et sur la loi
qui relie ce temps a l'intensité de l'excitation. Année Psychologique 22: 58-142.
Redfern, M. S., M. Muller, J. R. Jennings, J. M. Furman. 2002. Attentional dynamics in postural
control during perturbations in young and older adults. The Journals of Gerontology, Series A
57(8): B298.
Reed, P. and M. Antonova. 2007. Interference with judgments of control and attentional shift as
a result of prior exposure to controllable and uncontrollable feedback. Learning and Motivation
38(3): 229-242.
Richard, C. M., R. D. Wright, C. Ee, S. L. Prime, U. Shimizu, and J. Vavrik. 2002. Effect of a
concurrent auditory task on visual search performance in a driving-related image-flicker task.
Human Factors44(2): 108.
Robinson, E. S. 1934. Work of the integrated organism. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of
General Experimental Psychology, Clark University Press, Worcester, MA.
Robinson, M. C. and M. Tamir. 2005. Neuroticism as mental noise: a relation between
neuroticism and reaction time standard deviations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
89(1): 107-115.
Page 21
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Rogers, M. W., M. E. Johnson, K. M. Martinez, M-L Mille, and L. D. Hedman. 2003. Step training
improves the speed of voluntary step initiation in aging. The Journals of Gerontology, Series A
58(1): 46-52.
Rose, S. A., J. F. Feldman, J. J. Jankowski, and D. M. Caro. 2002. A longitudinal study of visual
expectation and reaction time in the first year of life. Child Development 73(1): 47.
Sanders, A. F. 1998. Elements of Human Performance: Reaction Processes and Attention in
Human Skill. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey. 575 pages.
Schweitzer, K. 2001. Preattentive processing and cognitive ability. Intelligence 29 i2: p. 169.
Silverman, I. W. 2006. Sex differences in simple visual reaction time: a historical meta-analysis
(sports events). Sex Roles: A Journal of Research 54(1-2): 57-69.
Simen, P. D. Contreras, C. Buck, P. Hu, P. Holmes and J. D. Cohen. 2009. Reward rate
optimization in two-alternative decision making: empirical tests of theoretical predictions.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 35(6): 1865-1898.
Singleton, W. T. 1953. Deterioration of performance on a short-term perceptual-motor task. In
W. F. Floyd and A. T. Welford (Eds.), Symposium on Fatigue. H. K. Lewis and Co., London, pp.
163-172.
Sjoberg, H. 1975. Relations between heart rate, reaction speed, and subjective effort at
different work loads on a bicycle ergometer. Journal of Human Stress 1: 21-27.
Smith, A., C. Brice, A. Leach, M. Tilley, and S. Williamson. 2004. Effects of upper respiratory tract
illnesses in a working population. Ergonomics 47(4): 363-369.
Spencer, S. V., L. W. Hawk, Jr., J. B. Richards, K. Shiels, W. E. Pelham, Jr., and J. G. Waxmonsky.
2009. Stimulant treatment reduces lapses in attention among children with ADHD: The effects
of methylphenidate on intra-individual response time distributions. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology 37(6): 805-816.
Spierer, D. K., R. A. Petersen, K. Duffy, B. M. Corcoran and T. Rawls-Martin. 2010. Gender
influence on response time to sensory stimuli. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
24(4) (20: 957-964.
Page 22
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Sternberg, S. 1969. Memory scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction time
experiments. American Scientist 57: 421-457.
Surwillo, W. W. 1973. Choice reaction time and speed of information processing in old age.
Perceptual and Motor Skills 36: 321-322.
Szinnai, G. H. Schachinger, M. J. Arnaud, L. Linder, and U. Keller. 2005. Effect of water
deprivation on cognitive-motor performance in healthy men and women. The American Journal
of Physiology 289(1): R275-280.
Takahashi, M., A. Nakata, T. Haratani, Y. Ogawa, and H. Arito. 2004. Post-lunch nap as a
worksite intervention to promote alertness on the job. Ergonomics 47(9) 1003-1013.
Teichner, W. H. and M. J. Krebs. 1974. Laws of visual choice reaction time. Psychological Review
81: 75-98.
Tomporowski, P. D. 2003. Effects of acute bouts of exercise on cognition. Acta Psychologica
112: 297-324.
Trimmel, M., and G. Poelzl. 2006. Impact of background noise on reaction time and brain DC
potential changes of VDT-based spatial attention. Ergonomics 49(2): 202-209.
Tuch, A. N., J. A. Bargas-Avila, K. Opwis, and F. H. Wilhelm. 2009. Visual complexity of websites:
Effects on users' experience, physiology, performance, and memory. International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies 67(9): 703-715.
Vasterling, J. J. 2006. Neuropsychological outcomes of Army personnel following deployment to
the Iraq War. JAMA, The Journal of the American Medical Association 296(5): 519-530.
van den Berg, J., and G. Neely. 2006. Performance on a simple reaction time task while sleepdeprived.
Perceptual and Motor Skills 102(2): 589-6
VaevMousavi, S. M., R. J. Barry, and A. R. Clarke. 2009. Individual differences in task-related
activation and performance. Physiology and Behavior 98(3): 326-330.
Visser, I., M. E. J. Raijmakers, and P. C. M. Molenaar. 2007. Characterizing sequence knowledge
using online measures and hidden Markov models. Memory and Cognition 35(6): 1502-1518.
Page 23
California Training Institute, 1831 Quail Court, St. Helena, CA 94574
www.CTI-home.com info@CTI-home.com (707)9685109
Weiss, A. D. 1965. The locus of reaction time change with set, motivation, and age. Journal of
Gerontology 20: 60-64.
Welford, A. T. 1968. Fundamentals of Skill. Methuen, London.
Welford, A. T. 1977. Motor performance. In J. E. Birren and K. W. Schaie (Eds.), Handbook of the
Psychology of Aging. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 450-496.
Welford, A. T. 1980. Choice reaction time: Basic concepts. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction Times.
Academic Press, New York, pp. 73-128.
Wells, G. R. 1913. The influence of stimulus duration on RT. Psychological Monographs 15:
1066.
Whelan, R. 2008. Effective analysis of reaction time data. The Psychological Record 58(3): 475-
483.
Woodworth, R. S. and H. Schlosberg. 1954. Experimental Psychology. Henry Holt, New York.