Loudness and reaction time: II Identification of detection components at different intensities and frequencies

Abstract

Equal-loudness contours were first obtained for five stimulus frequencies at four stimulus intensities. These 20 stimuli were then presented as reaction-time signals in a Donders C paradigm. The Z.transform method of convolution, as applied in linear systems identification, was used to deconvolve an empirically generated response (or "residual") distribution (T'R) from each of the 20 reaction-time (RT) distributions obtained at different intensities and frequencies. The resulting sensory-detection (tel) models formed exponential densities at strong intensities (60 and 80 phons), but their shapes were either gamma or normal at relatively weak intensities (20 and 40 phons). Our analyses support the idea that the simple reactiontime process (RT) is a convolution (or sum) of two component stages: stimulus detection (tell, followed by response evocation (tr). Based on the shapes of td, a neural-impulse theory is offered to account for the detection of simple auditory RT signals.In two previous papers (Kohfeld, Santee, & Wallace, 1981;Santee& Kohfeld, 1977), we reported that equally loud stimuli across five frequencies produced equal reaction times at 80-and 6O-phon intensities, but at the 40 and 20-phon levels the latencies were longer at 1,000 Hz than at the higher and lower stimulus frequencies. In order to provide a rigorous evaluation of these results, our present intent is to analyze the observed RT distributions generated from 100-, 500-, 1,000-,5,000-, and lO,OOO-Hz signals at intensities of 20, 40, 60, and 80 phons. Any dissimilarities among the shapes of these RT distributions, especially at the 20-and 4O-phon levels, should provide some insights as to whether the components of the RT process are different across stimulus frequencies when equivalently weak signals are employed.One basic premise in this paper is that signal detection and response initiation are the two component stages in the simple reaction time (RT) process. This notion is not new, as Green and Luce (1971), Hohle (1965), and McGill (1963 the RT process which begin with the assumption that observed RT distributions represent a convolution of the densities of two component random variables, one of which reflects the detection, or decision process (ld), and the other having to do with the response or "residual" latency (t r ) . The forms of these component densities have been open to controversy; for example, McGill (1963) assumed that td is normally distributed and t r is exponentially distributed, whereas Hohle (1965) argued for the exact opposite interpretation. More recently, Green and Luce (1971) attempted to find the shape of t r by constructing td theoretically (based on a Poisson pulse model of sensory detection), and then deconvolving ld from the empirical RT distribution. Although somewhat successful, Green and Luce were unable to identify a completely realistic model of t r , thus leading them to conclude that their initial model of ld would require further revision.In view of the difficulties encountered by Green and Luce in t...

A formal analysis of stressor and stress‐proneness effects on simple information processing

“…The distribution of course affords mathematical tractability of predictions. As for its validity, the distribution appears to be fairly ubiquitous with respect to memory and visual search processes (Ashby, Tein & Balakrishnan, 1993;Kohfeld, Santee & Wallace, 1981;Townsend & Ashby, 1983). Moreover, the behaviour of the distribution in several ways is representative of other latency distributions (Ratcliff, 1988;Snodgrass & Townsend, 1980;Townsend, 1976;Townsend & Ashby, 1978).…”

Distribution Inequalities for Parallel Models of Reaction Time with an Application to Auditory Profile Analysis

“…With the exception of a few applications to loudness and intensity discrimination (e.g., Kohfeld et al, 1981;Burbeck 6 Luce, 1982), there are hardly any studies in psychoacoustics that have used reaction time in order to reveal mechanisms of auditory processing. However, several paradigms in hearing research lend themselves to such analysis, and the one we chose to investigate is auditory profile analysis (Green, 1988(Green, , 1992.…”

Loudness, but not shot power, influences simple reaction times to soccer penalty sounds

“…In Experiment 1, we aimed at replicating a well-known effect in literature, namely that louder stimuli promote faster reaction times (e.g., Kohfeld et al, 1981a;1981b). The main difference of the present experiment compared to previous studies is that we used the sound of the foot-ball impact of a soccer penalty kick instead of pure tones.…”

“…The research on simple reaction times in response to auditory stimuli has a long tradition. Over the years, a general phenomenon has been repeatedly observed, namely, that an increase of stimuli loudness promotes a decrease of reaction times (Chocholle, 1940;Florentine, Buus, & Rosenberg, 2004;Humes & Ahlstrom, 1984;Kohfeld, Santee, & Wallace, 1981a;Kohfeld, Santee, & Wallace, 1981b;Marshall & Brandt, 1980;Pfingst, Hienz, Kimm, & Miller, 1975;Piéron, 1920;Scharf, 1978;Wagner, Florentine, Buus, & McCormack, 2004;Wundt, 1874). Typically, the stimuli used in literature are pure tonesnamely, tones constituted of a single frequency -which are easily manipulable and for this reason are often used in laboratory research.…”