z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Reaction time in differential and developmental research: A review and commentary on the problems and alternatives.
Author(s) -
Christopher Draheim,
Cody A. Mashburn,
Jessie Martin,
Randall W. Engle
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
psychological bulletin
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 10.737
H-Index - 313
eISSN - 1939-1455
pISSN - 0033-2909
DOI - 10.1037/bul0000192
Subject(s) - psycinfo , interpretability , popularity , psychology , cognitive psychology , reliability (semiconductor) , task (project management) , cognition , psychological research , empirical research , affect (linguistics) , applied psychology , computer science , medline , social psychology , artificial intelligence , statistics , power (physics) , physics , mathematics , management , communication , quantum mechanics , neuroscience , political science , law , economics
Reaction time is believed to be a good indicator of the speed and efficiency of mental processes and is a ubiquitous variable in the behavioral sciences. Despite this popularity, there are numerous issues associated with using reaction time (RT), specifically in differential and developmental research. Here, we identify and focus on two main problems-unreliability and sensitivity to speed-accuracy interactions. The use of difference scores is a primary factor that leads to many RT measures having demonstrably low reliability, and RT measures in general often do not properly account for speed-accuracy interactions. Both factors jeopardize the validity and interpretability of results based on RT. Here, we evaluate conceptually and empirically how these issues affect individual differences research. Although the empirical evidence we provide are primarily within the domains of attention control and task switching, we highlight examples from various other areas of psychological inquiry. We also discuss many of the statistical and methodological alternatives available to researchers conducting correlational studies. Ultimately, we encourage researchers comparing individuals of differing cognitive and developmental levels to strongly consider using these alternatives in lieu of RT, specifically RT difference scores. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom