Abstract
Three experiments examined whether temporal uncertainty about the delivery of a response stimulus affects response force in a simple reaction time (RT) situation. All experiments manipulated the foreperiod; that is, the interval between a warning signal and the response stimulus. In the constant condition, foreperiod length was kept constant over a block of trials but changed from block to block. In the variable condition, foreperiod length varied randomly from trial to trial. A visual warning and response stimulus were used in Experiment 1; response force decreased with foreperiod length in the variable condition, but increased in the constant condition. This result is consistent with the hypothesis that responses are less forceful when the temporal occurrence of the response stimulus is predictable. In a second experiment with an auditory warning signal and a response stimulus, response force was less sensitive to foreperiod manipulations. The third experiment manipulated both the modality and the intensity of the response signal and employed a tactile warning signal. This experiment indicated that neither the modality nor the intensity of the response signal affects the relation between response force and foreperiod length. An extension of Näätänen’s (1971) motor-readiness model accounts for the main results.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrams, R. A., &Balota, D. A. (1991). Mental chronometry: Beyond reaction time.Psychological Science,2, 153–157.
Angel, A. (1973). Input-output relations in simple reaction time experiments.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,25, 193–200.
Bernstein, I. H., Chu, P. K., &Briggs, P. (1973). Stimulus intensity and foreperiod effects in intersensory facilitation.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,25, 171–181.
Bertelson, P., &Tisseyre, F. (1969). The time-course of preparation: Confirmatory results with visual and auditory warning signals.Acta Psychologica,30, 145–154.
Coles, M. G. H., Gratton, G., Bashore, T. R., Eriksen, C. W., &Donchin, E. (1985). A psychophysiological investigation of the continuous flow model of human information processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 529–553.
Giray, M. (1990).Über die Aktivierung der menschlichen Motorik: Theoretische und experimentelle Analysen bei Reaktionsaufgaben [On the activation of the human motor system: Theoretical and experimental analysis of reaction time tasks]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Eberhard-Karls-Universität, Tübingen.
Giray, M., &Ulrich, R. (1993). Motor coactivation revealed by response force in divided and focused attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 1278–1291.
Hohle, R. H. (1965). Inferred components of reaction times as functions of foreperiod durations.Journal of Experimental Psychology,69, 382–386.
Jaśkowski, P., Rybarczyk, K., Jaroszyk, F., &Lemański, D. (1995). The effect of stimulus intensity on force output in simple reaction time in humans.Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis,55, 57–64.
Jaśkowski, P., &Verleger, R. (1993). A clock paradigm to study the relationship between expectancy and response force.Perceptual & Motor Skills,77, 163–174.
Kantowitz, B. H. (1973). Response force as an indicant of conflict in double stimulation.Journal of Experimental Psychology,100, 302–309.
Loftus, G. R., &Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 476–490.
Luce, R. D. (1986).Response times: Their role in inferring elementary mental organization. New York: Oxford University Press.
Manning, J. J., &Hammond, G. R. (1990). The effect of motor preparation on changes in H reflex amplitude during the response latency of a warned reaction time task.Journal of Motor Behavior,22, 292–314.
Meyer, D. E., Osman, A. M., Irwin, D. E., &Yantis, S. (1988). Modern mental chronometry.Biological Psychology,26, 3–67.
Miller, J. O., Franz, V., & Ulrich, R. (1997).Effects of auditory stimulus intensity on response force in simple, go-no-go, and choice RT. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Molenaar, P. C. M., &van der Molen, M. W. (1986). Steps to a formal analysis of the cognitive-energetic model of stress and human performance.Acta Psychologica,62, 237–261.
Mordkoff, J. T., Miller, J. O., &Roch, A. C. (1996). Absence of coactivation in the motor component: Evidence from psychophysiological measures of target detection.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 24–41.
Näätänen, R. (1971). Non-aging fore-periods and simple reaction time.Acta Psychologica,35, 316–327.
Niemi, P. (1979). Stimulus intensity effects on auditory and visual reaction processes.Acta Psychologica,43, 299–312.
Niemi, P., &Lethonen, E. (1982). Foreperiod and visual stimulus intensity: A reappraisal.Acta Psychologica,50, 73–82.
Niemi, P., &Näätänen, R. (1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction time.Psychological Bulletin,89, 133–162.
Nissen, M. J. (1977). Stimulus intensity and information processing.Perception & Psychophysics,22, 338–352.
Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J., &Klein, R. M. (1976). Visual dominance: An information-processing account of its origins and significance.Psychological Review,83, 157–171.
Requin, J., Brener, J., &Ring, C. (1991). Preparation of action. In J. R. Jennings & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.),Handbook of cognitive psychophysiology: Central and autonomic nervous system approaches (pp. 357–448). New York: Wiley.
Sanders, A. F. (1975). The foreperiod effect revisitEd.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,27, 591–598.
Sanders, A. F. (1977). Structural and functional aspects of the reaction process. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VI (pp. 3–25). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sanders, A. F. (1983). Towards a model of stress and human performance.Acta Psychologica,53, 61–97.
Sanders, A. F. (1990). Issues and trends in the debate on discrete vs. continuous processing of information.Acta Psychologica,53, 61–97.
Sanders, A. F., &Wertheim, A. H. (1973). The relation between physical stimulus properties and the effect of foreperiod duration on reaction time.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,25, 201–206.
Stevens, S. S. (1955, October). Decibels of light and sound.Physics Today,8, 12–17.
Ulrich, R., &Mattes, S. (1996). Does immediate arousal enhance response force in simple reaction time?Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,49A, 972–990.
Ulrich, R., &Miller, J. O. (1994). Effects of truncation on reaction time analysis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 34–80.
Ulrich, R., &Stapf, K. H. (1984). A double-response paradigm to study stimulus intensity effects upon the motor system in simple reaction time experiments.Perception & Psychophysics,36, 545–558.
Ulrich, R., &Wing, A. M. (1991). A recruitment theory of force-time relations in the production of brief force pulses: The parallel force unit model.Psychological Review,98, 268–294.
Winer, B. J. (1971).Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Woodrow, H. (1914). The measurement of attention.Psychological Monographs,17(5, Whole No. 76).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (UL 88/103).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mattes, S., Ulrich, R. Response force is sensitive to the temporal uncertainty of response stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics 59, 1089–1097 (1997). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205523
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205523