Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,021

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Errors and error correction in choice-response tasks.

Rabbitt, P. M.·1966·Journal of Experimental Psychology

Abstract

The latencies of responses preceding errors, of errors, of responses made to correct errors, and of responses following error correction were examined in a 4-choice and in 2 10-choice continuous-performance choice-response tasks. Latencies of responses preceding errors were not different from the mean latency for all correct responses. Errors and responses correcting errors were 100-150 msec. faster than equivalent correct responses (p <.01). The 1st correct response following error correction was slower than other, equivalent, correct responses. No other aftereffects of committing an error upon response rate were observed. An attempt was made to classify errors into different, causally related types. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved). © 1966 American Psychological Association.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/h0022853

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rabbitt, P. M.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology
Published
1966
Volume
71
Issue
2
Pages
264-272
ISSN
0022-1015 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2095576699
Cited by
1,021
References
0
FWCI
4.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.