Main evidence and numbers
| Number | Where e come from | Wetin e no prove |
|---|---|---|
| Below 100 ms | The score wey dem dey question | Say the signal cause the response |
| 110 ms | Lower response time wey one visual study allow | One limit wey apply to every human response |
| 231 ms | Average simple visual reaction time wey dem measure for the study | Target or percentile for your browser |
Woods and im colleagues use signal timing wey no dey predictable, practice trials, and response time limit to decide which events count. These choices help dem measure response to the signal, instead of response wey happen too early or for wrong time. The paper still correct the results for equipment delays, wey show why software timestamp no be the same thing as wetin happen for body. Woods et al., 2015
Reaction and prediction no be the same thing
If you fit predict the next event, you fit prepare your movement before e happen. So response fit happen near the time wey you expect, even though you no start am after you detect the event. This no be the same question as simple reaction time to new signal wey no dey predictable. The task instructions and when dem show the signal matter well-well to understand unusually small time interval. Woods et al., 2015 Woods et al., 2015
Choice response mean say you still need choose wetin to do. The old research on different response options show say how dem arrange the task fit affect response time; you no suppose carry the minimum wey person claim for simple visual game go use for game wey need you choose between plenty actions. Hick, 1952
Why one shocking score no be strong evidence
The fastest result na one value from the far end. If you repeat task plenty times, you get more chances to see unusual result, response wey start before signal, or measurement mistake. Research on unusual reaction-time results explain why researchers set rules for handling extreme responses, instead of treating every number wey show as equally useful. Ratcliff, 1993
Wetin dey affect am?
Device precision no mean say body response don validate
Browsers fit record time with plenty detail, but how small the timestamp fit be no mean say e accurate for when physical signal start or when input happen. Comparisons between platforms show both time difference and variation. Score wey get plenty decimal places no necessarily estimate your response to the visible signal more accurately. Anwyl-Irvine et al., 2020 Bridges et al., 2020
E no make sense to use equipment correction from another setup to save or disprove one particular result. Calibration apply to the equipment wey dem measure. If dem no calibrate am, nobody sure the direction and size of all timing errors for your own setup. Woods et al., 2015 Anwyl-Irvine et al., 2020
Wetin to do if your result unusually fast
Look at the whole run and the rules: you respond too early? The time intervals dey predictable? The number na the minimum or the average? Compare the same kind of result across one fixed number of attempts. No increase the number of tries and then treat the new minimum like the method never change. Research on number of trials show say how dem collect data and the question wey dem ask fit affect the measurement. Miller, 2023 Ratcliff, 1993
One score by itself no tell you much about person quality wey stay the same. Researchers need show say the test give reliable results, especially if dem use am rank people. The correct conclusion na say one unusual event happen for this game; to confirm exceptional human response, dem need controlled measurement. Hedge et al., 2017
Nothing here show say anybody dey cheat, diagnose any problem, or set one hard minimum wey apply to everybody. The main difference na between time interval wey show for screen and evidence say new sensory event really trigger the response. Woods et al., 2015 Bridges et al., 2020
Try the free test wey connect to this one
Test for how quick you dey react
Try the test for how quick you dey react, and follow the instruction about waiting for the signal. Understand the full run, including responses wey happen too early; no treat one minimum like certificate of how fast you dey react.
Common questions
Every score below 100 ms no possible?
These sources no establish one absolute limit for every kind of response. Dem show why one browser score by itself no be enough evidence of reaction to visual signal wey no dey predictable. Woods et al., 2015
Why studies dey reject very fast responses?
Dem set valid response time limits to reduce other events wey no represent the response process dem intend to measure. The particular time limit depend on the experiment. Woods et al., 2015 Ratcliff, 1993
I fit compare visual score with sports starting rule?
Only if you consider say the signal, movement, and measurement system different. Rule for one setting no be calibrated standard for another one. Woods et al., 2015 Anwyl-Irvine et al., 2020
Sources
- Woods et al. (2015). Things wey affect simple reaction time.
- Woods et al. (2015). How age slow response choice and action for visual choice reaction time task.
- Hick (1952). How fast information gain dey happen.
- Ratcliff (1993). Methods for handling unusual reaction time results.
- Anwyl-Irvine et al. (2020). Realistic precision and accuracy of online experiment platforms, web browsers, and devices.
- Bridges et al. (2020). The timing mega-study: comparing different experiment generators, for lab and online.
- Miller (2023). How many participants? How many trials? Make reaction time studies more powerful.
- Hedge et al. (2017). The reliability paradox: why strong thinking tasks no dey give reliable difference between people.
Cite dis page: Person fit react in less than 100 milliseconds?. Helibrain. 2026. https://helibrain.com/pcm/answers/reaction-time-under-100-ms. CC BY 4.0.
← Check more ansa dem