A Comparative Study Of Choice Reaction Time In Young Males And Females
A Comparative Study Of Choice Reaction Time
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70284/njirm.v3i5.2106Keywords:
Choice-reaction time, constant fore-period, gender, variable fore-periodAbstract
Background and objectives: The reaction time has been known as an important psychophysical method useful for relating mental events to physical measures. Also it has been utilized as an index of sensory, motor and cognitive processes since the inception of the study of behaviour as a laboratory science. So the present study was undertaken to observe and compare the responses of young males and females in predictable and unpredictable environmental setting by employing choice reaction time tasks with constant fore-period of 2 seconds and randomly occurring variable fore-periods of 0.6, 2, 4, 6 seconds. Methods: The choice reaction time tasks were performed for visual and auditory stimuli with constant and variable fore-periods using “Techno Digital Response Time†apparatus. The data were analyzed by Z test. P< 0.05 was considered significant. Results: It was observed that choice reaction times to visual as well as auditory stimuli were lesser in males than in females (p < 0.001) in both constant and variable fore-periods. It was also observed that auditory choice reaction time was shorter than visual choice reaction time. Conclusions: In conclusion, males have shorter reaction time than females. Males react faster than females to changes in the external environment and males are quicker in responding to the unpredictable situations. Choice reaction time (CRT) to auditory stimulus is shorter than that to visual stimulus in both males and females.
References
2. Welford AT. Choice reaction time: Basic concepts. In Reaction Times. Welford AT (Ed.), New York: Academic press, 1980: 73-128.
3. Woodworth RS. and Schlosberg H. Experimental Psychology. 1954; Oxford and IBH Publishing Company (Indian Edition).1971: 8-39.
4. Elias JW, Watson W. and Elias ML. Reaction time and ageing. In Encyclopedia of Psychiatry, Psychology, Psychoanalysis and Neurology. Benjamin B. Wolman (Ed.); New York: Van Nostrandt Reinhold Co. 1977: 375-380.5. Welford AT. An historical background sketch in reaction time. In Reaction Times. Welford AT (Ed.); New York: Academic Press.1980: 1-24
6. Szinnai GH, Schachinger MJ, Arnaud LL and Keller U. Effect of water deprivation on cognitive-motor performance in healthy men and women. Am J Physiol 2005; 289(1): R275-280.
7. Adam JJ, Paas FG, Buekers MJ, Wuyts IJ, Spijkers WA and Wallmeyer P. Gender differences in choice reaction time: Evidence for differential strategies. Ergonomics 1999; 42(2): 327-335.
8. Welsh TN and Elliott D. Gender differences in a dichotic listening and movement task: Lateralization or strategy? Neuropsychologia 2001; 39(1): 25-35.
9. Barral J. and Debu B. Aiming in adults: Sex and laterality effects. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body. Brain Cogn 2004; 9(3): 299-312.
10. Elliot R. Simple visual and simple auditory reaction times: A comparison. Psychonomic Science 1968; 10: 334-336.
11. Goldstone S. Reaction times to onset and termination of lights and sounds. Perceptual and Motor Skills 1974; 27: 1023-1029.
12. Green David M. and Susane M. Von Gierke. Visual and auditory choice reaction time. Acta Psychologica 1984; 55: 231-247.
13. Techner WH. Recent studies of simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin 1954; 51: 128-149.
14. Shenvi D. and Balasubramanian P. Comparative study of visual and auditory reaction times in males and females. Ind J Physiol Pharmacol 1994; 38(3): 229-231.
15. Best and Taylor’s. Physiological basis of medical practice. 11th ed. Baltimore/London: Williams and Wilkins Company. 1985: 984.
