University of Perpetual Help System Laguna - JONELTA

Old National High Way, Sto. Niño, Biñan Laguna

College of Arts and Science

Psychology Department

Experiment Number 1

Simple Reaction Time

Submitted by

De Guia, Czyvel Kryz L.

18-2226-688

Submitted to

Professor Mary Easter Claire S. Perez-Torres

February 13 , 2020
 Simple Reaction Time Page 1

I.Introduction

In Psychological measurement the reaction time is the interim of time between

the beginning of the subject's response to stimulus and the presentation of stimulus to a

subject. Reaction time is the time pass by among the response and onset of a stimulus.

The reaction time can be measured through variety of experimental tasks like detection,

discrimination; localization and remembering. Some categories of reaction time are

Simple reaction time (SRT) apply when there is only one possible stimulus and one type

of response. Simple reaction time (SRT) tests, where subjects respond to the

occurrence of a stimulus as fast as possible. SRTs were first studied by Francis Galton

in the late 19th century (Johnson et al., 1985) more recent studies have shown

significant relationships between Simple Reaction Time like the measures of fluid

intelligence and the latencies of processing speed and by (Deary et al., 2001; Sheppard

and Vernon, 2008). Indeed, Jensen (2011) argued that Simple Reaction Time latencies

provide one of the most objective metrics for comparing processing speed. Silver man

(2010) found that simple reaction time latencies increased substantially since Victorian

era in a recent historical analysis. However, some explanation of the obvious SRT is

slowing, the latencies reported in current studies have been inflated by software and

hardware delays in computer paradigms (Dordonova and Dordonov,2013). The other

categories are discrimination reaction time experiment wherein the subject is presented

with one or two or more different stimuli and there is one correct corresponding reaction.

And last category is Choice reaction time (CRT) wherein there are two or more possible

stimuli and different responses are required.

 Simple Reaction Time Page 2

In the forties of the last century the concept of reaction time of man appeared in

science. Hermann Von Helmholtz worked on a component of reaction time on nerve

conductive velocity; he stimulated the first one point of the nerve that far from the

muscle and another point near to the muscle. The nerve conduction velocity is the

difference between the times from the stimulation of the nerve to the muscle.

Some experiments were done to study the time taken for a particular response which

was called the reaction time. The reaction time is important to our daily lives, motor

performance and cognitive process, reaction time is a good indicator in the performance

of an individual and sensorimotor coordination. It determine the attentiveness of the

subject and lesser in firm occupations like military people, doctors, pilots, drivers,

nursing staff, security guards and sportsmen where alertness a must for them.

In this experiment there are two variation of reaction time will be used and those

are SRT or the Simple Reaction Time it will be used on the first part of the experiment

and CRT or the Choice Reaction Time that will be used on the second part of the

experiment.

Hypothesis

There is a significant relationship between the physical response of the subject

and the reaction time given.

 Simple Reaction Time Page 3

II.Method

The materials that will be used in this experiment are pencil, short bond paper,

short white folder and stopwatch.

Procedures

The experiment consists of two parts. The first part has forty five (45) trials of

simple reaction time and the second part has only ten (10) trials. The subject will be

given a total of 12.00 seconds to serve as his/her reaction time on both part of the

experiment. Part 1 first, the subject will be tasked to do pre – association. Next is the

Experimenter will record BDA observed behavior. Then the subject will discuss any

random topics he/she wants to discuss for 12 seconds each trial. They need to

complete 45 trials the experimenter will have to cover the recorded reaction time using

the short white folder to prevent the subject from being conscious about the time. And

lastly the reaction time will be recorded based on the time the subject started talking

and the time he/she finished estimating 12 seconds per statement. On the second part

of the experiment the subject will hold the stopwatch to monitor the time and the

experimenter will cover the recorded data with the short white folder. This part of the

experiment comprise of 10 trials. In each trial, subject will start the timer and stop it

once it reaches 12 seconds. The experimenter will record the reaction time of the

subject per trial.

 Simple Reaction Time Page 4

III.Results

Table 1. The Reaction Time of the Two Subjects in Part 1 Trial 1 to 45

TRIAL NO. REACTION TIME REACTION TIME Difference

(Subject 1) (Subject 2)
1 5.98 16.90 10.92
2 10.33 17.82 7.49
3 12.59 19.32 6.73
4 16.21 15.91 0.3
5 15.99 24.20 8.21
6 17.99 32.22 14.23
7 36.22 27.46 8.76
8 17.53 30.52 12.99
9 36.89 20.90 15.99
10 29.99 38.93 8.94
11 29.37 29.14 0.23
12 25.95 36.22 10.27
13 15.85 29.22 13.37
14 25.58 22.90 2.68
15 29.84 34.22 4.38
16 21.59 25.15 3.56
17 30.22 26.39 3.83
18 41.88 24.45 17.43
19 34.58 33.89 0.69
20 39.10 28.09 11.01
21 33.85 27.90 5.95
22 48.51 15.99 32.52
23 40.42 30.92 9.5
24 45.84 24.83 21.01
25 30.42 48.87 18.45
26 36.40 27.13 9.27
27 26.26 46.39 20.13
28 14.30 26.19 11.89
29 26.21 11.83 14.38
30 20.74 13.18 7.56
31 26.39 40.07 13.68
32 17.96 36.35 18.39
33 21.14 35.2 14.06
34 19.28 29.09 9.81
35 12.65 30.93 18.28
36 10.48 29.10 18.62
37 17.70 35.22 17.52
38 20.10 38.96 18.86
39 16.46 40.97 24.51
 Simple Reaction Time Page 5

40 21.86 13.73 8.13

41 15.73 10.10 5.63
42 13.79 22.23 8.44
43 14.88 21.62 6.74
44 12.04 22.33 10.29
45 10.74 17.85 7.11

Table 1 shows the record of the reaction time of the two subjects from trial one

(1) to forty five (45). The table also shows the forty five trials of both subject and the

reaction time that the subjects reach while discussing a random topic. It also shows the

difference of the subject one and subject two in each trial and reaction time. Subject 1

and subject 2 have a big difference results in each trial number and there are several

trials which is closely to the given time both reaction time of the subjects are far from the

reaction time needed. In this part of the experiment it seems that the subject 1 and

subject two are focusing on the discussion of random topic rather than the time needed.
 Simple Reaction Time Page 6

60

50

40
Reaction Time

30

20

10

0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45

Trial Number

Subject 1 subject 2

Figure 1.The Reaction Time of the Two Subjects in Part 1 Trial 1 to 45

Figure 1 shows the results of reaction time in forty five trials of the subject one

and subject two. Each subject was given 12.00 seconds to discuss a random topic in

each trial, in this figure it shows that subject one have more several trial numbers which

closer to the allotted time than subject two and those trail numbers that subject one

have are 2, 3, 5, 13, 28, 35, 42, 43, 44 and 45. While subject two has only have six trial

numbers that is closes to the required time and those are trial numbers 4, 22, 29, 30, 40

and 41. Figure 1 also shows that the subjects are not that conscious in the required time

each subject has many exceeding trial number than the closes trial number in the

allotted time. Differences from each trial are so obvious and far from each other and

based from this figure, most of the trials, the subjects did not respond quickly at the

occurrence their stimulus.

 Simple Reaction Time Page 7

Table 2. The Reaction Time of Subject 1 in Part 2 Trials 1 to 10

TRIAL NUMBER REACTION TIME (SEC.)

1 12.56
2 11.83
3 12.33
4 11.93
5 12.33
6 12.26
7 13.10
8 12.33
9 12.20
10 12.27

Table 2 shows the record of the experimenter in the reaction time of the subject.

The table also shows the ten trials of the subject and the reaction time in this part of the

experiment the subject will be the one to stop the time. Based on the table above, in 10

trials, most of the reaction time of the subject is closely in 12.00 seconds but not that

exact as the required time limit.

Table 3. The Reaction Time of Subject 2 in Part 2 Trials 1 to 10

TRIAL NUMBER REACTION TIME (SEC.)

1 11.97
2 11.85
3 11.98
4 12.50
 Simple Reaction Time Page 8

5 12.30
6 11.96
7 12.31
8 12.11
9 12.23
10 12.31

Table 3 shows the record of the experimenter in the reaction time of the subject.

The table also shows the ten trials of the subject and the reaction time, in this part of the

experiment the subject will be the one to stop the time and the experimenter will record

the time. Based on the table above, in 10 trials, most of the reaction time of the subject

is closely in 12.00 seconds but not that exact as the required time limit.

13.5

13
Reaction Time

12.5

12

11.5

11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Trial Number

Subject 1 Subject 2

Figure 2.The Reaction Time of the Two Subjects in Part 2 Trial 1 to 10

Figure 2 shows the results of reaction time in ten trials of the subject one and

subject two. Each subject was given 12.00 seconds to monitor and stop the stopwatch
 Simple Reaction Time Page 9

when it reaches the allotted time. It also shows that both subjects gets the reaction time

closely to the required time which is 12.00 seconds. Subject 1 gets the trial numbers 1,

3, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10 very close to the required time also trial number 2 and 4 is nearly

close while the trial number 13 is the one who is exceed in the 12.00 seconds reaction

time. While subject 2 the result of all trial number is very close to the required time there

is no trial number which exceed in the 12.00 seconds reaction time. In this figure, it

obviously shows that the subject one and subject two is conscious in the time and has a

systematic and quicker reaction time.

Table 4. Part 1 and Part 2 Average Reaction Time and Standard Deviation of subject 1

and subject 2.

SUBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2

PART 1 (De Guia) (Natal)

AVERAGE REACTION TIME 27.35 23.73
STANDARD DEVIATION 9.052 10.512

SUBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2

PART 2 (De Guia) (Natal)

AVERAGE REACTION TIME 12.15 12.314
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.209 1.214

Table 4 shows the result of the average reaction time and standard deviation of

the two subjects in part 1 and part 2 of the experiment. In part 1 the results of average
 Simple Reaction Time Page 10

time of the two subjects shows that subject 1 is more closely to the allotted time than

subject 2 and the standard deviation of subject 1 is 10.512 while the subject two is

9.052. On the second part it shows that the result of both subjects is closely to the

allotted time but when we compared the two subject two is more closely to 12.00

seconds than subject one.

IV. Discussion

(BDA)

Before the experiment begins the experimenter makes an observation to the

subject and she observed that the subject cannot make an eye contact, the subject are

not sitting properly she is sited the way she is comfortable, the subject has some hand

and body gestures and the experimenter felt that the subject is a little bit shy to the topic

she can open when the experiment begins. The observation of the experimenter to the

subject did not stop during the experiment she also observed the subject. During the

first five trials the subject would often look down on the floor while she is talking and

glancing up occasionally to make an eye contact, the subject sitting position is

changeable there are times she crosses her legs while speaking and sometimes she is

sitting in slouch position, the subject has some hand and body gestures like flipping her

hair, holding her finger and sometimes holding a pencil and phone while speaking. As

the time pass by the subject is no longer shy, she is talking freely and comfortable in

discussing some topics about her personal life. That is the observation on the first part
 Simple Reaction Time Page 11

of the experiment while on the second part of the experiment the subject is really focus

and her eyes is in the stopwatch only to stop the time and reach the 12.00 seconds.

When the subject stops the time and sees her reaction time she keeps saying “ay” and

sometimes smiles when her time is 12 point something seconds. The second part of the

experiment the subject is quiet and sitting properly while waiting the 12.00 seconds.

A simple reaction time is a task wherein it measures the basic cognitive

processes of response execution and perception. It requires the subject to make one

specific response or reaction. The difference between the simple reaction time and

choice reaction time is in simple reaction time it requires one specific response because

there is only one possible stimulus unlike the choice reaction time there are two or more

possible stimuli which requires different responses the reaction must be correspond to

the stimulus. In the first part of the experiment it shows simple reaction time wherein the

subject cannot see the stopwatch and not conscious about the time, the subject will

discuss random topic and will just go with the flow and don't mind the time and can

result in his/her reaction time far from the given time and there is only one response

which is the word “stop” to end the stopwatch or time. In the second part, it shows

choice reaction time in a cause that the subject is consciously aware on what his/her

reaction time will be, the subject personally monitor the stopwatch and has a choice to

stop it or not when it reaches the given time. When the subjects are aware on the time it

has a big possibility to reach the given time unlike when the subject are not aware the

reaction time might be far from the given time. The discrimination reaction time is there

is only one correct response and the subject must ignore the other stimuli. One of the

example of this is the rats will be trained to discriminate two static visual images
 Simple Reaction Time Page 12

between self –paced and two alternative forced or choice reaction time task. The trial

was initiated to the rats and the two images persisted and presented simultaneously

until the rat responded with no limit. Reaction times were recorded in correct trials than

in error trials. In randomly interleaved trials the rats took more time to respond in trials in

which they had to discriminate stimuli.

The factors that may affect a person’s reaction time are state of attention reaction

time or the arousal which involves muscular tension. When the subject is tense or too

relaxed it might cause a slower response of the subject. The other one is the

importance of the stimulus to survival it can also affect, a possibly threatening life

situation can provoke a quick response. Another factor affecting reaction time is age it

can decrease slowly with age. When the persons reach their seventieth year the

reaction time weakens as a person, older people generally taking more and care in their

decisions. In some factors, if the stimulus is visual, directly or in peripheral vision it also

affects how fast you respond. The stimulus that can see directly will get the quicker or

fast reaction than stimulus only seen in the peripheral vision.

 Simple Reaction Time Page 13

V. Conclusion

Based from the experiment, it shows that there is a big difference in reaction time

of a person if he/she is conscious and unconscious to the required time there are also

factors that may affect person’s reaction time, from the first part of the experiment the

results showed that the subject 1 and subject 2 responses in each trial are slow and

uncertain. There are times that the subjects will response quickly and later on will

response and exceed to the time limit. Base from the observation of the experimenter in

table 1 and table 2 both subject talks too much about random topics and focus on what

their saying .From the second part of the experiment, the subjects obviously conscious

and sure about her reaction time because of the awareness and attention she gave in

stopping the time in 12.00 seconds. There is also a difference in the physical response

of the subject and the reaction time given, based on the discussion of the experimenter

the physical response of the subject changes when she is unconscious. When the

subject is unconscious there is a lot of physical response she made and did not bother

the reaction time while when she is conscious the physical response is quiet and the

subject are focusing only in the reaction time.

 Simple Reaction Time Page 14

Appendix
 Simple Reaction Time Page 15

Reference

A. Batra, S. Vyas, J. Gupta, K. Gupta, and R. Hada, “A comparative study between

young and elderly indian males on audio-visual reaction time,” Indian Journal of

Scientific Research and Technology, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 25–29, 2014.View at: Google

Scholar

Am Psychol. Galton's data a century later.1985 Aug; 40(8):875-92.[PubMed] [Ref

list]Johnson RC, McClearn GE, Yuen S, Nagoshi CT, Ahern FM, Cole RE

Dordonova, Y. A., and Dordonov, Y.S. (2013). Is there any evidence of historical

slowing of reaction time? No, unless we compare apples and oranges. Intelligence 41,

674-687.doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2013.09.001[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] 

Deary I. J., Der G., Ford G. (2001). Reaction times and intelligence differences: a

population-based cohort study. Intelligence 29 389–399 10.1016/S0160-

2896(01)00062-9 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Ref list]

 Simple Reaction Time Page 16

Jensen A. R. (2011). The theory of intelligence and its

measurement. Intelligence 39 171–177 10.1016/j.intell.2011.03.004 [CrossRef] [Google

Scholar] [Ref list]

J. Obrenović, V. Nešić, and M. Nešić, “The reaction time in relation to the modality of

stimulation,” Physical Education, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 85–90, 1996.View at: Google Scholar

Silverman, I. W. (2006). Sex differences in simple visual reaction time: a historical mta-

analysis. Sex Roles 54, 58-68. Doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-8869-6[CrossRef] [Google

Scholar] 

Sheppard L., Vernon P. A. (2008). Intelligence and speed of information-processing: a

review of 50 years of research. Pers. Individ. Dif. 44 535–551

10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.015 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Ref list]