Finger response times to visual, auditory and tactile modality stimuli

The purpose of this paper was to investigate finger response time to visual, auditory and tactile modality stimuli in the context of man-machine-interface. A total 94 right-handed Chinese participants (11 to 60 years old) took part in the visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli tests. In the visual and auditory stimuli tests, once the visual or auditory mode of a number was shown, the participants pressed the corresponding number on the keypad with their right or left middle finger as soon as possible. In the tactile stimuli test, the stimuli were produced through a vibrator that was worn on the participants' right wrist or right leg near ankle. Once the participants detected a vibration, they pressed the number key '8' with their right middle finger as quickly as possible. The result showed that the time in response to the tactile stimuli was significantly shorter, followed by the auditory stimuli and then the visual stimuli. The response time of tactile stimuli was 28% and 34% shorter than that of auditory and visual stimuli, and the response time of auditory was 5% shorter than that of visual stimuli. The location of tactile vibrator i.e. wrist and leg did not have any significant influence on response time. Factors like age, gender, education level, time spent on computer, left/right finger, and choice alternative, however, had significant effects on the response time of an individual to visual and auditory stimuli. The response time decreased with an increase of age up to the 21-30 years, and thereafter it increased gradually with an increase of age. Females were found to respond faster than males. The response of tertiary and secondary education groups was faster than that of primary education group. Besides, the longer the time spent on computer in daily life, the shorter was the response time. In addition, the right finger response time was shorter than the left finger response time. The response on single-choice task was the fastest, followed by two-choice task and then four- and eight-choice tasks. The findings of this study provide a useful reference for engineers and designers to realize how the different modality channels could interfere the operators, so as to design a more user-friendly human-machine-interface.

[1]  R. Mcfarland,et al.  The Human Body in Equipment Design , 1966 .

[2]  Andries F. Sanders,et al.  The Foreperiod Effect Revisited , 1975 .

[3]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization , 1986 .

[4]  Errol R. Hoffmann,et al.  Concurrent manual-decision tasks , 1997 .

[5]  Jason Ivanoff,et al.  Performance Asymmetries in Computer Mouse Control of Right-Handers, and Left-Handers with Left- and Right-Handed Mouse Experience. , 1999, Journal of motor behavior.

[6]  L. Huston,et al.  Longitudinal Effects of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury and Patellar Tendon Autograft Reconstruction on Neuromuscular Performance , 2000, The American journal of sports medicine.

[7]  J.B.F. van Erp,et al.  Vibro-Tactile Information Presentation in Automobiles , 2001 .

[8]  J. Miller,et al.  Motor processes in simple, go/no-go, and choice reaction time tasks: a psychophysiological analysis. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  Victoria Gitelman,et al.  An evaluation of crosswalk warning systems: effects on pedestrian and vehicle behaviour , 2002 .

[10]  J. V. Erp Guidelines for the Use of Vibro-Tactile Displays in Human Computer Interaction , 2002 .

[11]  J.B.F. van Erp,et al.  Guidelines for the use of vibro-tactile displays in human computer interaction , 2002 .

[12]  Heath A. Ruff,et al.  Evaluation of Tactile Alerts for Control Station Operation , 2003 .

[13]  Anju Vyas Print , 2003 .

[14]  Relationship between cerebellar size and variation of reaction time during a visual cognitive task in normal subjects , 2003, Journal of Neurology.

[15]  J. Jolles,et al.  EDUCATION AND AGE-RELATED COGNITIVE DECLINE: THE CONTRIBUTION OF MENTAL WORKLOAD , 2003 .

[16]  Todd Mondor,et al.  Judging the urgency of non-verbal auditory alarms: a case study , 2004, Ergonomics.

[17]  Oscar Castillo,et al.  Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2007, IMECS 2007, March 21-23, 2007, Hong Kong, China , 2007, IMECS.

[18]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Neural processing of threat cues in social environments , 2008, Human brain mapping.

[19]  M. Lachman,et al.  Age differences in reaction time and attention in a national telephone sample of adults: education, sex, and task complexity matter. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[20]  Dorothy Bruck,et al.  Smoke Alarms for Sleeping Adults Who are Hard-of-Hearing: Comparison of Auditory, Visual, and Tactile Signals , 2009, Ear and hearing.

[21]  Timothy L. White,et al.  Effects of Unimodal and Multimodal Cues About Threat Locations on Target Acquisition and Workload , 2009 .

[22]  Alan H. S. Chan,et al.  Perceptions of implied hazard for visual and auditory alerting signals , 2009 .

[23]  Biswas Ashoke Kumar,et al.  Reaction time with respect to the nature of stimulus and age of male subjects. , 2010 .

[24]  Amardeep M. Dugar,et al.  Tangible intervention: Improving the effectiveness of lighting control systems , 2011 .

[25]  Fong-Gong Wu,et al.  The Comparison of Different Sensory Outputs on the Driving Overtake Alarm System , 2011, HCI.