1964
DOI: 10.1080/00140136408930752
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Digram Keying Times for Typists

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
12
0

Year Published

1971
1971
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
2
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If digraphs have been overlearned and are against a ceiling, then there should be little or no effect of digraph frequency on performance. These studies have, in fact, found either no effect (Fox & Stansfield, 1964;Sternberg, Knoll, & Wright, 1978) or a small effect (Grudin & Larochelle, 1982).3 It should be emphasized, however, that this explanation is essentially a restatement of the fact that the effectorindependent hypothesis is not able to account for the result, and it does not provide independent evidence for the existence of particular effector-specific mechanisms.…”
Section: Digraph Frequencymentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…If digraphs have been overlearned and are against a ceiling, then there should be little or no effect of digraph frequency on performance. These studies have, in fact, found either no effect (Fox & Stansfield, 1964;Sternberg, Knoll, & Wright, 1978) or a small effect (Grudin & Larochelle, 1982).3 It should be emphasized, however, that this explanation is essentially a restatement of the fact that the effectorindependent hypothesis is not able to account for the result, and it does not provide independent evidence for the existence of particular effector-specific mechanisms.…”
Section: Digraph Frequencymentioning
confidence: 89%
“…As Fox and Stansfield (1964) noted, "The absence of any difference between the keying times for common and uncommon digrams reflects the typing experience of the subjects: their level of practice had apparently reached its asymptote even with less common letter sequences" (p. 319).…”
Section: Notesmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…It is important to recognize that the issue of whether response times increase when a switch of hands is required, itself has been a topic of debate. While some studies reported that inter-response times were shorter when hand switches were required and longer when responses involved different fingers of the same hand (Rabbitt, 1968 ; Miller, 1982 ), some other studies have found the opposite (Fox and Stansfield, 1964 ; Salthouse, 1986 ). Interestingly, our results about the timing of successive key presses were mixed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is known from previous work that the speeds of successive responses varies largely in the course of a given task, but this has not generally bcen examined in respect of the group structure of response patterns. Fox and Stansfield (1964), for instance, recorded a 500 per cent range of variations (0,05 to 0·22 sec) for the successive intervals between adjacent letters typed by typists of 'average' ability. Similar variations have long been known to exist among discrete reaction times, e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%