A two-state model of simple reaction time
A two-state model of simple reaction time
A two-state model of simple reaction time
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
- 16 -<br />
linear function <strong>of</strong> p - p when intense stimuli are used, but<br />
c e<br />
the former is an accelerated function <strong>of</strong> the latter when weak<br />
signals are used. The meaning <strong>of</strong> eq.(1-15) is obvious.<br />
According to eq. 0-16), Pc 'MRT c - Pe' MRT c is an accelerated<br />
function <strong>of</strong> Pc - Pe' because Pc - Pe increase with E. Green<br />
and Luce(1974) concluded that the timing <strong>model</strong> is generally more<br />
plausible except in situations when it is distinctly to the<br />
subject's advantage to employ the counting mechanism.<br />
G. Preparation Model.<br />
Falmagne(1965)(also cf.,Falmagne(1968), Theios and Smith<br />
(1972), Lupker and Theios(1977)) proposed a <strong>two</strong>-<strong>state</strong> <strong>model</strong>.<br />
According to this <strong>two</strong>-<strong>state</strong> <strong>model</strong>, the subject is either prepared<br />
or unprepared for each possible stimulus on any trial. If the<br />
subject is prepared (or unprepared) for the stimulus to be presented,<br />
his latency is shorter (or longer). The probability <strong>of</strong> the<br />
preparation for a particular stimulus depends on the events on<br />
the previous trial. From these assumptions, Falmagne(1965)<br />
derived many equations, which describe the sequential effects or
Change language