September 2024
Volume 24, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2024
When does response duration track performance?
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Hanbei Zhou
    Johns Hopkins University
  • Rui Zhe Goh
    Johns Hopkins University
  • Ian Phillips
    Johns Hopkins University
  • Chaz Firestone
    Johns Hopkins University
  • Footnotes
    Acknowledgements  This work is supported by NSF BCS #2021053 awarded to C.F., and a JHU PURA awarded to H.Z.
Journal of Vision September 2024, Vol.24, 1377. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.1377
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Hanbei Zhou, Rui Zhe Goh, Ian Phillips, Chaz Firestone; When does response duration track performance?. Journal of Vision 2024;24(10):1377. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.1377.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

A founding insight of psychophysics was to link internal mental processes to the timing of the behaviors they produce. Perhaps the most obvious and well-characterized example is the relationship between performance and response time, as when salient targets are found faster in visual search or when more confident perceptual decisions are made more quickly. But what is “response time”? Whereas nearly all psychophysical studies that measure the timing of behavior focus on the time taken to initiate a response, another potentially relevant magnitude is the duration of the response itself — e.g., not just how long it takes between the appearance of a stimulus and the onset of a keypress, but also how long one holds down the key before letting it go. Recent work makes a theoretical case that response duration may be a neglected source of data about visual processing (Pfister et al., 2023); here, 4 experiments provide empirical support for this proposal. Subjects completed a detection task in which a field of white noise either contained or didn’t contain a face, with difficulty manipulated by varying the face’s opacity. Subjects responded with a keypress (with both keyUp and keyDown events recorded separately). Remarkably, on more difficult trials, subjects not only took longer to initiate a response but also held down the response key for longer, as if answering in a tentative fashion. Response duration also tracked accuracy, with subjects holding down the response key for longer on incorrect as opposed to correct trials. These effects emerged again in a direct replication, but not in follow-up experiments using easier tasks. Overall, our results suggest that response duration may be an untapped source of information about performance — especially in tasks with high uncertainty — raising a wealth of avenues for future investigation.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×