EXPERIMENT NO.

SIMPLE REACTION TIME

I. ABSTRACT

This study aimed to determine in which condition the subject

will perform better in estimating time – free association or no free
association. Variables used were trials for dependent variable and
reaction time on free association and no free association as the
independent variables. The experimenter used experimental
research design as a methodology. The results showed that the
participant performs better in estimating time in no free association
and trials do not improve the participants' reaction time. To improve
reaction time the participant should not forget the instructions given
by the experimenter. Aside from that the participant should know
how to handle distractions and interruptions to perform well.
II. INTRODUCTION

Multi-tasking was done by many people in the world. Some

people are used to it and some actually cannot do it. But it depends
on what you are performing that makes multi-task work or doesn't
work with you. Like for example, you can eat while reading, listen to
music while washing the clothes or dishes, doing requirements while
listening to music, folding clothes while watching tv, and many
more. However, when two of the tasks requires your focus that is
when multi-tasking doesn't work.

A study in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human

Perception and Performance (Vol. 27, No. 4) indicates that
multitasking may be less efficient--especially for complicated or
unfamiliar tasks--because it takes extra time to shift mental gears
every time a person switches between the two tasks. The researcher
conducted four experiments that measured the amount of time lost
when young adults repeatedly switched between two tasks. The
tasks were solving math problems or classifying geometric objects it
is either familiar or unfamiliar and simple or complex. They found
out that for all types of tasks, participants lost time when they
switched back and forth. Moreover, the time lost increased with the
complexity and the unfamiliarity of the tasks (American
Psychological Association,2001).

In the early centuries, reaction time was used as a variable in

various experiments. It is a great indicator not only by speed and
coordination but also mental processes. That is why reaction time is
also used to measure activities such as sensory, motor, and
cognitive activities. According to CogniFit, reaction time refers to the
amount of time that takes place between when we perceive
something to when we respond to it. It is the ability to detect,
process, and respond to a stimulus.
In an experiment conducted by the researchers in the
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at Johns
Hopkins Medicine (2018), researchers recruited 36 right-handed
adult volunteers, 22 of whom were women, ranging in age from 19
to 30 years. Each of the volunteers sat at a desk in front of a large
computer screen. On the desktop was a touch-responsive tablet.
When a target appeared on the screen, the volunteers were asked to
move a cursor to touch the target as quickly as possible using a
stylus on the tablet. In initial tests, the volunteers took about 215
milliseconds (each millisecond is 1/1000th of a second) to respond
and reach the changing target, no matter what direction they moved
their hands. However, after practicing moving the cursor hundreds
of times in just a single direction, the volunteers became
significantly faster at responding and moving the cursor toward the
target in that direction, even though their reaction times stayed the
same when the target appeared in other directions. They found out
that repeating the same movement over and over became
significantly faster when asked to repeat that movement on
demand—a result that occurred not because they anticipated the
movement, but because of an as yet unknown mechanism that
prepared their brains to replicate the same action.

Another experiment conducted by Gupta, entitled ' Does cell

phone usage affect mental focus and reaction time?' Mental focus
and reaction time were tested on 30 participants. The mental focus
was tested through the means of a 1-minute multiplication test. The
researcher first had the human subjects take the test without the
staged phone call. Then the researcher had the human subject take
the same test again, except, the human subject was informed to
have a conversation with the staged phone call while
taking the test. On the other hand, reaction time was tested by
dropping a meter stick. To start, the researcher measured 10 cm
above the human subject’s hand to initiate the drop test from that
starting point. This is because the drop test will start at relatively
the same point for each human subject, which will make it easier to
catch. The first time, the human subject was expected to catch the
meter stick without the staged cell phone call. The second time, the
human subject was expected to catch the meter stick while talking
on the cell phone call. The researcher found out that human
subjects' performance worsened when they participated in the
phone conversation in comparison to the performance they had
when they did not participate in the cell phone conversation.
III. METHOD

A. Objectives

To acquaint the students in organizing data into summaries

and graphs.

B. Problem

To determine in which condition the subject will perform

better in estimating time – free association or no free
association.

C. Materials

• Stopwatch
• Record Notebook
• Calculator

D. Design and Procedure

1. The participant was invited in messenger one day

before the experiment.
2. The participant agreed to participate in the experiment
online.
3. The experimenter created a Google meet and sends it
to the participant.
4. The experimenter explained the nature of the
experiment.
5. The experimenter sends the informed consent through
messenger and asked the participant to send a picture
of the participant's signature.
6. The experimenter asked the participant to put the
cellphone on top of the table and covered the rest of
the timer except for the start button.
7. As the Experimenter’s go signal, the participant
started the timer and talked of free association with
the Experimenter while estimating 12 seconds.
8. Experimenter recorded the estimate in table 1 column
2 and performed 15 trials.
9. After the first part, the experimenter and the
participant proceeded to the second part.
10. The experimenter asked the participant to repeat
the above procedure but this time with the participant
facing the timer and no free association is required.
11. Experimenter records it in table 1 column 3 and
performed 15 trials.

E. Subject

The participant is a female 20 years old student of Ilocos Sur

Polytechnic State College and doesn't have any experiment
being a participant in any experiments.
IV. RESULTS

Table 1
Reaction Time of Individual Participant in Free Association and No
Free Association

Trials Free Association No Free Association

(Reaction Time) (Reaction Time)
1 12.99 12.48
2 14.05 12.48
3 19.48 12.57
4 38. 42 12.60
5 19.23 12.13
6 29.86 12.16
7 26.21 12.11
8 25.45 11.81
9 19.99 12.48
10 43.04 12.52
11 23.53 12.41
12 28.16 12.64
13 32.14 12.16
14 18.01 12.49
15 16.41 12.61
Mean 24.46 12.38

Table 2
Mean Reaction Time of Group Data in Free Association and No
Free Association

Participants Free Association No Free Association

(Mean Reaction (Mean Reaction
Time) Time)

1 18.96 12.20
2 10.33 11.90
3 16.18 12.05
4 13.69 12.26
5 14.19 12.29
6 24.32 12.35
7 46.20 10.50
8 49.90 36.86
9 20.29 11.97
10 29.56 12.36
11 20.41 11.99
12 12.35 11.94
13 12.56 12.07
14 14.51 12.30
15 9.30 11.98
16 15.90 12.03
17 27.09 12.56
18 12.26 12.40
19 35.26 15.37
20 11.79 12.01
21 37.48 11.83
22 24.46 12.38
23 12.30 12.20
24 158.40 13.29
25 21.20 12.08
26 10.75 12.14
27 15.05 11.96
28 29.81 12.72
Overall Mean 25.88 13.14

Figure 1
Graphical Presentation of Individual Participant in Free
Association

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Figure 2
Graphical Presentation of Mean Reaction Time of Group Data in
Free Association and No Free Association

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
V. DISCUSSION

Table 1 presents the different reaction times of individual

participants in free association and no free association.12.99 is the
fastest reaction time of individual participants while 43.04 is the
slowest reaction time of individual participants in free association.
After trial 1 the reaction time of the individual participant in free
association slip away to 12 seconds not until in trial 5 when the
reaction time is getting near to 12 seconds but again in the next trial
it getting away from 12 seconds. Then in trial 9, again the reaction
time of the individual participant is getting near to 12 seconds and
in the next trial, the reaction time is getting far away to 12 seconds.
Not until trial 14 when the reaction time of individual participants
is getting closer to 12 seconds and participant reaction time to trial
15 improves. While every reaction time of an individual participant
in no free association is just within 12 seconds the difference of each
reaction time is just the milliseconds. It shows that individual
participant has a slower reaction time in free association than in no
free association. Moreover, the overall mean of an individual
participant in the free association is closer to 12 seconds which is
12.38 compared to no free association which is 24.46.

Table 2 presents the different mean reaction times of group

data in free association and no free association. It shows that 11.79
is the fastest mean reaction time under the participant of
experimenter 20 while the slowest mean reaction time is 158. 40
under the participant of experimenter 26 in free association. On the
other hand, two participants in the group data score to have 0.01
milliseconds difference with 12 seconds which clearly shows as the
fastest mean reaction time. Participant of experimenter 11 reaction
time is 11.99 and the participant of experimenter 20 reaction time
is 12.01. While 36. 86 is the slowest mean reaction time in no free
association in group data. Furthermore, the overall mean reaction
time in free association in group data is 25.88 while the overall mean
reaction time in no free association is 13.14.
Figure 1 illustrates that the free association line fluctuates
and the slowest reaction time is in trial 10 followed by trial 4 and 13
and the fastest reaction time is in trial 1. While in the no free
association line, it almost forms like a straight line below the free
association line. Moreover, it clearly shows that there is an ample
gap between the reaction time in free association and no free
association except for trials 1 and 2.

Figure 2 shows the lowest mean reaction time in the free

association is under the participant of experimenter 24 followed by
the participant of experimenter 8. While the free association line has
multiple slowest mean reaction times from the group data, the free
association has only one slowest time under the participant of
experimenter 8 and the rest mean reaction time manage to be at the
place and form like a straight line. Additionally, the mean reaction
time of the participant of experimenters 2 and 15 in the free
association is slower compare to their mean reaction time in no free
association.

The individual participant didn't perform well in estimating

time in free association because the participant is talking with the
experimenter on the phone that distracts the participant focus in
estimating time compare to no free association wherein the
participant is free from any distractions and the participant only
focus is to estimates time. This is similar to Gupta's findings that
human subject's performance worsened when they participated in
the phone conversation in comparison to the performance they had
when they did not participate in the cell phone conversation.
Additionally, the individual participant did well in the first trial of
the free association because the experimenter just asked basic
questions that make the participant more focused in estimating 12
seconds but on the succeeding trials the participant lost her focus
in estimating 12 seconds since the experimenter already asked
about participant's opinions about some trending news and issues
in our country. The experimenter can say that the participant loss
focuses on one task when performing two tasks that make the
participant ineffective in one task which is estimating time and this
finding prove the findings of the study in the journal of experimental
psychology about human perception and performance (Vol. 27, No.
4) of the American Psychological Association (2001), that
multitasking may be less efficient especially for complicated or
unfamiliar tasks because it takes extra time to shift mental gears
every time a person switches between the two tasks.

Moreover, the reaction time of the individual participant in the

free association as well as in no free association is not consistent.
There are times wherein the participant reaction time is getting
closer to 12 seconds and after the next trial, it becomes far from 12
seconds. This only means that trials don't help the participant in
estimating 12 seconds as the participant reaction time. This finding
is opposite to the findings of the experiment conducted by the
researchers in the Department of Physical Medicine and
Rehabilitation at Johns Hopkins Medicine we're in they found out
that repeating the same movement over and over became
significantly faster when asked to repeat that movement on demand.

To improve reaction time the participant should not forget the

instructions given by the experimenter so that even though the
participant is already immersed in the conversation the participant
can still remember the task given. Aside from that the participant
should how to handle distractions and interruptions to perform well.
VI. CONCLUSIONS

The experimenter concludes that;

1. The participant perform better in no free association in
estimating 12 seconds than in free association where in participant
doesn't experience any distractions and interruptions in the no free
association.
2.The participant cannot handle doing two tasks at the same
time and loss focus in one task while immerse in doing the other
task.
VII. REFERENCES

American Psychological Association (2001). Multitasking

undermines our efficiency, study suggest.

CogniFit (2021). Reaction Time

Gupta, S. Does cellphone use affect mental focus and reaction

time?

Johns Hopkins Medicine (2018). Brain Response Study Upends

Thinking About Why Practice Speeds Up Motor Reaction Times
VIII. APPENDIX

Appendix 1
Informed Consent