Age and simple reaction time.
Abstract
Although simple reaction time (RT) to a tone showed a statistically significant increase between 18 and 93 years of age in a sample of 220 men and women, the amount of increase was slight, less than 2 msec/decade. Consequently, the appreciable slowing of more typical behavior with age does not seen attributable to some general process in the central nervous system as has been argued. This degree of stability found for simple RT with age, unexpected from the body of previous work, may reflect equivalence of age groups and use of optimal RT technique. In a second study eight old participants (73 to 84 years) matched on the optimal technique with eight young participants (18 to 24 years) were markedly slower with a long constant preparatory interval but not with elimination of timing cues. Together, the two studies show that simple high level of preparation was either easy of impossible to attain. Behavioral slowing with age can result from ineffective control processes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Other studies have failed to find significant sex differences.
“However, other studies have failed to find significant sex differences (Annett and Annett, 1979; Gottsdanker, 1982; Der and Deary, 2006).”
From Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time (2015) · cites this paper as Gottsdanker, 1982
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time
Woods, D. L., Wyma, J. M., Yund, E. W., Herron, T. J., & Reed, B. (2015) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00131 · Cited by 336 · see citing works
“However, other studies have failed to find significant sex differences (Annett and Annett, 1979; Gottsdanker, 1982; Der and Deary, 2006).”
Background
- Authors
- Gottsdanker, R.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gottsdanker, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Gerontology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1982-05-01
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 342-348
- ISSN
- 0022-1422 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2095820092
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 3.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Gerontology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Keywords
- simple reaction time, aging, age differences, reaction time slowing, preparatory period, central nervous system aging, older adults
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aging, Analysis of Variance, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Reaction Time
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