An informational approach to reaction times.

Simple reaction time is the minimum time required to respond to a signal such as a steady light or tone. Such a reaction time is taken to be the time required for transmission of a fixed quantity of information. delta H, from stimulus to subject. That is, information summation replaces energy summation. This information is calculated from consideration of the quantum nature of the stimulus. The theoretically derived equation for reaction time is fitted to experimental data. Piéron's empirical law for reaction time is obtained as an approximation from a proposed informational equation. The exponent in Piéron's law is found to be the same as the exponent in the power law of sensation. Threshold appears to be the smallest stimulus capable of transmitting the quantity of information delta H.

[1]  H G Vaughan,et al.  The functional relation of visual evoked response and reaction time to stimulus intensity. , 1966, Vision research.

[2]  R. Hyman.  Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[3]  Lawrence E. Marks,et al.  On scales of sensation: Prolegomena to any future psychophysics that will be able to come forth as science , 1974 .

[4]  J. M. Cattell,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF THE INTENSITY OF THE STIMULUS ON THE LENGTH OF THE REACTION TIME , 1886 .

[5]  K H Norwich,et al.  On the information received by sensory receptors. , 1977, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[6]  Takehiro Ueno.  Luminance-duration relation in reaction time to spectral stimuli , 1976, Vision Research.

[7]  R. Mansfield,et al.  Latency functions in human vision. , 1973, Vision research.

[8]  A. Welford.  Choice reaction time: Basic concepts , 1980 .

[9]  R. Chocholle,et al.  Variation des temps de réaction auditifs en fonction de l'intensité à diverses fréquences , 1940 .

[10]  K. Norwich.  Uncertainty in physiology and physics. , 1981, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[11]  P. E. Hallett,et al.  Rod-cone dependence of saccadic eye-movement latency in a foveating task , 1988, Vision Research.

[12]  K H Norwich,et al.  On the theory of Weber fractions , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  Margaret W. Matlin,et al.  Sensation and perception (2nd ed.). , 1988 .

[14]  B. Libet.  Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action , 1985, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[15]  S. Coren,et al.  In Sensation and perception , 1979 .

[16]  W. E. Hick.  Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

[17]  K. Norwich.  To perceive is to doubt: the relativity of perception. , 1983, Journal of theoretical biology.

[18]  S HELLYER.  Stimulus-response coding and amount of information as determinants of reaction time. , 1963, Journal of experimental psychology.

[19]  K. Norwich.  The magical number seven: Making a “bit” of “sense” , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  K H Norwich,et al.  The psychophysics of taste from the entropy of the stimulus , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  D. L. Kohfeld.  Effects of Ready-Signal Intensity and Intensity of the Preceding Response Signal on Simple Reaction Time , 1969 .

[22]  Stanley Coren,et al.  Sensation and perception , 1979 .