A theory of power laws in human reaction times: insights from an information-processing approach

Human reaction time (RT) can be defined as the time elapsed from stimulus presentation until a reaction/response occurs (e.g., manual, verbal, saccadic, etc.). RT has been a fundamental measure of the sensory-motor latency at suprathreshold conditions for more than a century and is one of the hallmarks of human performance in everyday tasks (Luce, 1986; Meyer et al., 1988). Some examples are the measurement of RTs in sports science, driving safety or in aging. Under repeated experimental conditions the RT is not a constant value but fluctuates irregularly over time. Stochastic fluctuations of RTs are considered a benchmark for modeling neural latency mechanisms at a macroscopic scale (Luce, 1986; Smith and Ratcliff, 2004). Power-law behavior has been reported in at least three major types of experiments

Auditory-Visual Object Recognition Time Suggests Specific Processing for Animal Sounds

cote interne IRCAM: Suied09bNone / NoneNational audienceAuditory-visual object recognition time suggests specific processing for animal sound

Effect of ethanol and of noise on reaction time in the monkey: Variation with stimulus level

To determine whether the latency-increasing effects of ethanol were differential with respect to the intensity of the stimulus that initiated the response, three rhesus monkeys were trained on a behavioral task in which the latency of a simple motor response was measured following the onset of a pure tone stimulus. Following training, the animals were tested at a number of different tone intensities and functions relating latency to tone intensity were constructed. When these were stable, the animals were given ethanol in doses of 1.0–2.5 g/kg and the effects on response latencies to different tone intensities were determined. It was found that, for all except the lowest stimulus levels, the effect of ethanol was dose-related, while for a given dose the effect was equal across intensity. These results indicate that the effects of ethanol in this situation are on response execution rather than stimulus detection. The effects of ethanol were compared to those of exposure to high intensity noise. This treatment, which affects primarily the inner ear, resulted in substantial increases in latency to low intensity tones, but little, if any, shift at high intensities.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/46413/1/213_2004_Article_BF00426520.pd

L\u27audition et le bruit

Razlikovanje zvuka od buke je potpuno subjektivno. Svaki zvuk koji nam je efektivno neprihvatljiv. neugodan, nazivamo bukom; nasuprot tome, ako nam je on ugodan ili jednostavno prihvatljiv, pa čak i samo indiferentan, govorimo o zvuku. Te razlike između zvuka i buke su općenito uzevši vrlo istančane i nas sud o tome da li se radi o zvuku ili o buci može varirati u funkciji mnogih faktora; razliku nije moguće pripisati nekom određenom fizikalnom faktoru. Posljedice djelovanja buke na organizam vrlu su različite. Medu njima najprije možemo navesti izravne posljedice djelovanja buke na slušni sistem; neke su normalne, fiziološke, kao npr. efekt prikrivanja, slušna akomodacija, slušni umor. Druge su patološke; to su traume izazvane zvukom vezane uz oštećenja na razini cilijarnih stanica u unutarnjem uhu. Druga štetna posljedica djelovanja buke jesu smetnje što ih ona izaziva: smetnje na psihičkom planu, ali isto tako na razini općih fizioloških mehanizama.La distinction entre un son et un bruit est purement subjective. Tout son qui prend pour nous un caractère affectif inacceptable, désagréable, est appelé bruit: au contraire, on parle de son lorsque le caractère est agréable, ou simplement acceptable, voire même seulement indifférent. Cette distinction entre sons et bruits est fort subtile en général, et notre appréciation pourra varier en fonction de nombreux facteurs; elle ne peut être mise en relation avec un facteur physique déterminé. Les effets des bruits sur notre organisme sont fort divers. Parmi ces effets, on peut reconnaître d\u27abord les effets directs sur notre système auditif; certains sont normaux, physiologiques, tels que les effets de masque, l\u27accommodation auditive, la Fatigue auditive. D\u27autres sont pathologiques; ce sont les traumatismes sonores, liés à des lésions au niveau des cellules ciliées de l\u27oreille interne. Un autre aspect nocif des bruits qu\u27il ne faut pas oublier est leur nuisance: les bruits peuvent avoir des effets perturbateurs au niveau psychique, mais aussi au niveau de mécanismes physiologiques généraux

2° Audition

Chocholle R. 2° Audition. In: L'année psychologique. 1956 vol. 56, n°1. pp. 145-160

2° Audition

Chocholle R. 2° Audition. In: L'année psychologique. 1954 vol. 54, n°2. pp. 494-499

2° Audition

Chocholle R. 2° Audition. In: L'année psychologique. 1956 vol. 56, n°1. pp. 145-160

Variation des temps de réaction auditifs en fonction de l'intensité à diverses fréquences

Chocholle R. Variation des temps de réaction auditifs en fonction de l'intensité à diverses fréquences. In: L'année psychologique. 1940 vol. 41-42. pp. 65-124

Étude de la psychophysiologie de l'audition par la méthode des temps de réaction

Chocholle R. Étude de la psychophysiologie de l'audition par la méthode des temps de réaction. In: L'année psychologique. 1944 vol. 45-46. pp. 90-131