China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Functional Neurology
Published in James Crossley, Functional Exercise and Rehabilitation, 2021
Hick (1952) discovered that reaction times increase proportionally to the number of possible responses, what is now known as Hick’s Law. In complex scenarios, it takes roughly 80 milliseconds for the brain to process information, and a further 150 milliseconds to make a ‘conscious’ decision. To be effective, athletes have to reduce the time it takes for them to make decisions.
Cross-Cultural Differences on Cognitive Task Performance: The Influence of Stimulus Familiarity
Published in Walter J. Lonner, Dale L. Dinnel, Deborah K. Forgays, Susanna A. Hayes, Merging Past, Present, and Future in Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2020
Corine J. Sonke, Ype H. Poortinga, Jan H. J. De Kuijer
Despite observed differences in absolute score levels, it should be noted that patterns of CRTs are very much the same cross-culturally. For example, an increase in the number of stimuli leads to longer RTs as predicted by Hick’s law (1952), and training on the task to shorter RTs (Poortinga, 1971; Van de Langenberg, 1989). This makes it implausible to argue that different cognitive processes are involved in CRT tasks cross-culturally. Therefore, it appears that cross-cultural differences have to be explained in a way that leaves the cross-cultural invariance of cognitive processing unchallenged.
What is motor control?
Published in Andrea Utley, Motor Control, Learning and Development, 2018
Hick (1952) looked at the relationship between reaction time and the number of response alternatives. He found that choice reaction time is linearly related to the log of the number of stimulus–response alternatives. Therefore, Hick’s law states that reaction time (RT) increases by a linear amount (about 150 ms) each time the number of response alternatives doubles.
Polar and Cartesian Structure in the Data of Fitts’s (1954) Classic Experiments—with a Criterion for Distinguishing a Strong and a Weak Version of Fitts’ Law
Published in Journal of Motor Behavior, 2020
Apparently confident in the received description of the published data, the literature on Fitts’ law has been primarily concerned with the substantive-theoretical explanation issue. As he explained at length in an early writing (Fitts, 1953), Fitts’s mind was inhabited by Shannon’s (1948) then extraordinarily popular communication theory. Inspired by Hick’s law of choice reaction time (Hick, 1952), he interpreted his findings as a further illustration, in the case of overt movement, of the limited information-transmission capacity of the human motor system.
The Effects of Attentional Focus Instructions and Task Difficulty in a Paced Fine Motor Skill
Published in Journal of Motor Behavior, 2020
L. D. Raisbeck, M. Yamada, J. A. Diekfuss, N. A. Kuznetsov
Although the task difficulty interaction was not evident in the present study, we do not deny the task difficulty as an important factor in the attentional focus paradigm. The interaction was not present in the present study because the attentional focus effect was already present in the low ID condition. Defining task difficulty is complex as motor skill difficulty can be defined by the type of skill (open or closed), the number of joints and degrees of freedom required to coordinate (Magill, 2007), number of choices in a reaction time task (i.e., Hick’s law; Hick, 1952), or the interaction of action function and environmental contexts (Gentile, 2000). In addition, the same skill can be easy or difficult dependent upon the performer due to the changes in the cognitive processes as one becomes more proficient by practice (Fitts & Peterson, 1964). Although manipulations of task difficulty are understudied in the external/internal focus paradigm (Landers et al., 2005; Wulf, Töllner, et al., 2007), the evidence that task difficulty affects the attentional foci by manipulating the performers’ skill level is paramount (Beilock, Carr, MacMahon, & Starkes, 2002; Porter & Sims, 2013; Wulf, 2008). These studies showed attentional focus may not be effective for well-learned skills (i.e., easy) (Beilock et al., 2002; Porter & Sims, 2013; Wulf, 2008). However, inconsistent findings exist in that an external focus is still beneficial in a well-learned skills (Freudenheim, Wulf, Madureira, Pasetto, & Corrěa, 2010; Marchant, Greig, Bullough, & Hitchen, 2011; Marchant et al., 2009; Stoate & Wulf, 2011; Wulf & Su, 2007). Thus, it is still unclear and important to pursue what factor of task difficulty manipulations is susceptible by attentional focus instructions. In the present study, we expected the low ID condition to be easy, and thus no attentional focus effect to emerge. However, the results showed external focus benefits existed in both low and high ID conditions. Although the exact mechanism is not clear (i.e., the absence of tolerance, speed movement constraint, or the novelty of the skill), we consider the attentional focus effect is sensitive to the distance manipulations with a movement speed constraint.