2015
DOI: 10.1590/s1980-65742015000100004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A robot for verifying the precision of total reaction time measurement

Abstract: The level of variability in psychomotor behavior and the use of several distinct sets of equipments in Reaction Time (RT) assessments might jeopardize the validity and reliability of such measures. This study presents the development and verification of Emboici Robot-a robot capable of performing accurate RT assessments consisting of response to a visual stimulus by pressing a button-whose purpose is to measure the accuracy of RT assessments. We evaluated the accuracy and precision on four different days, each… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

2
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(50 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An important finding of the current study relates to application development across mobile platforms, and that differences in hardware have the potential to significantly sway results dependent on temporal measures such as RT. Such alterations are expected to arise not only from differences in hardware and peripheral capabilities ( 35 ) but also background computing tasks ( 36 ) and even the method a user chooses to touch the screen ( 37 ). Due to such temporal differences observed across devices, feature selection for our mental acuity metric utilized features least likely to exhibit variability across devices.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An important finding of the current study relates to application development across mobile platforms, and that differences in hardware have the potential to significantly sway results dependent on temporal measures such as RT. Such alterations are expected to arise not only from differences in hardware and peripheral capabilities ( 35 ) but also background computing tasks ( 36 ) and even the method a user chooses to touch the screen ( 37 ). Due to such temporal differences observed across devices, feature selection for our mental acuity metric utilized features least likely to exhibit variability across devices.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Building a robot similar to that proposed by Neath et al 8 , Crocetta et al 9 validated the measurements obtained by the robot called Emboici DOI: dx.doi.org/10.7322/jhdg.88963 Robot: 46.95 ms (±6.04) at 1200 measures of TRT. The purpose of this robot was to react by pressing a button when a light stimulus was identified by a photodiode.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…Constructed and validated by Crocetta et al 9 , this robot is composed of a photodiode that detects the change of brightness on the monitor (color stimulus generated by the software), triggering a digital servo motor that pushes a button (the space bar of the computer keyboard or the response panel button). This set is managed by an Arduino board (Figure 1-D Computer.…”
Section: Equipmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The software records the time between the appearance of the stimulus and the press of the space bar as a simple TRT with visual stimulus. The software was used by Crocetta et al, 26 Crocetta et al, 27 Antunes et al, 28 Herrero et al, 29 and validated by Crocetta et al 30 in a sample of 216 young adults, together with a mechanical validation using a robotic arm Crocetta et al, 31 with satisfactory validity and reliability.…”
Section: Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%