Perceptual and Motor Shills, 1975,41, 185-186. @ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1975
GENERATION OF DIFFERENT NUMBERS OF BUTTON PRESSES UNDER SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDBACK CONDITIONS BY EDUCABLE RETARDATES1 EDWARD A. HOLDEN, JR." Edward R. Johnstone Training and Research Center, Bordentozun, New Jersey Summary.-Educable retardates (10 boys and 10 girls) generated varying numbers of presses on a response key under 5 different feedback conditions. Neither time per response nor accuracy was affected by feedback condition, but time per response and magnitude of errors increased when larger numbers of responses were required.
Two conflicting reports comparing enumeration versus tracking (butcon depressions) during sequential stimulus processing in educable retardates have recently appeared. In the first of these ( 3 ) no differences were found between magnitudes of error for counting and tracking responses to a flashing light, whereas in the second study ( 2 ) tracking errors were significantly greater for a flashing light, a repetitive tone, or a recurring vibrotactile stimulus. One possible source for the discrepant: effects in these two studies is that the first ( 3 ) employed a feedback light which flashed simultaneously with each tracking response, while in the second study ( 2 ) no feedback was given. If, as Hick (1) has suggested, attention is reflexively deflected to the sensory field from which confirmation of a response is expected, then it is reasonable to conjecture that any confirmatory system faster than or supplemental to kinesthetic feedback should increase tracking speed. For the present study it was hypothesized that if external sensory system confirmation, or possibly summative confirmation, shortens the time required to register response emission, then providing a visual, auditory, or vibroractile feedback stimulus simultaneously with each key depression should reduce time for depressions below that required for sequences withouc supplementary feedback. In the present study, subjects generated button presses so that effects of feedback could be independently assessed. Ten male and 10 female institutionalized educable retardates ( M u = 15.22, S D = 1.21; MIQ= 60.35, SD = 5.71), tested individually, generated 5, 12, 19, 26, 33, and 40 depressions of a silent switch. Each numerosity was generated under five different feedback 'This research was supported in part by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Research Grant H D 07329-01. 'Requests for reprints should be sent to Edward A. Holden, Jr., Research Department, E. R. Tohnstone Trainina and Research Center, Bordentown. N.J. 08505. 'summary tables of means and the analysei of variance ma; be obtained as Document NAPS-02632 from Microfiche Publications, 440 Park Ave. South, New York, N.Y. 10016. Remit $3.00 for microfiche or 57.25 for photocopy.
186
E. A. HOLDEN, JR.
conditions: ( a ) no feedback; ( b ) visual feedback-a 50-msec. neon light stimulus; (c) auditory feedback-a 50-msec. tone delivered over headphones; ( d ) cutaneous feedback-a 50-msec. vibrotactile stimulus delivered to the wrist of S s preferred (response) hand; and ( e ) a combination of ( b ) , ( c ) , and ( d ) . The five feedback conditions were presented in blocks, with depressions increasing from 5 to 40 within each block. During the experiment instructions for each number of depressions to be generated were delivered through S s headphones, after which S repeated the number out loud before commencing to tap the response key. Magnitudes of error per numerosity under the five feedback conditions were analyzed with a treatment X treatment X subjects analysis of variance.:' An identical analysis was made for response rates, i.e., the mean time per response within each sequence of depressions. In both analyses only the main effect of number of depressions was significant, i.e., more depressions effected more errors and required more time for each response (Fs5/sso = 15.02, 9.19). Failure to obtain the predicted effects of differential feedback conditions is contrary ro the hypothesized relationship between processing time and supplementary feedback during count-tap sequences. An alternative explanation again depends upon the feedback stimulus in ( 3 ) . Rather than increasing speed of response confirmacion via summation or a faster sensory system per se, the feedback light diminished time to shift attention between the tracking stimulus and sensory confirmacion. Since the feedback stimulus was in the same modality as the tracking stimulus, less time was required to shift attention than in the second study where attention shifted between external stimuli and kinesthetic confirmation. If chis explanation is applicable, it can be predicted that a feedback stimulus of a different modality (tone) from the tracking stimulus (light) would produce more errors than when the tracking and feedback stimuli are in the same modality. REFERENCES Discontinuous functioning of the human operator in pursuit tasks. Quarterly Jot~r?zalof Experimental Psychology, 1948, 1 , 36-51. 2. HOLDEN,E. A., JR. Enumeration versus tracking during unimodal and multimodal sequential information processing in normals and retardates. Developmental Psychology, 1974, 10, 667-67 1. 3. THOR,D. H . Counting and tracking of sequential visual stimuli by EMR and intellectually average children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1973, 7 8 , 41-46. 1. HICK, W. E.
Accepted July 1 , 1975.
GENERATION OF DIFFERENT NUMBERS OF BUTTON PRESSES UNDER SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDBACK CONDITIONS BY EDUCABLE RETARDATES1 EDWARD A. HOLDEN, JR." Edward R. Johnstone Training and Research Center, Bordentozun, New Jersey Summary.-Educable retardates (10 boys and 10 girls) generated varying numbers of presses on a response key under 5 different feedback conditions. Neither time per response nor accuracy was affected by feedback condition, but time per response and magnitude of errors increased when larger numbers of responses were required.
Two conflicting reports comparing enumeration versus tracking (butcon depressions) during sequential stimulus processing in educable retardates have recently appeared. In the first of these ( 3 ) no differences were found between magnitudes of error for counting and tracking responses to a flashing light, whereas in the second study ( 2 ) tracking errors were significantly greater for a flashing light, a repetitive tone, or a recurring vibrotactile stimulus. One possible source for the discrepant: effects in these two studies is that the first ( 3 ) employed a feedback light which flashed simultaneously with each tracking response, while in the second study ( 2 ) no feedback was given. If, as Hick (1) has suggested, attention is reflexively deflected to the sensory field from which confirmation of a response is expected, then it is reasonable to conjecture that any confirmatory system faster than or supplemental to kinesthetic feedback should increase tracking speed. For the present study it was hypothesized that if external sensory system confirmation, or possibly summative confirmation, shortens the time required to register response emission, then providing a visual, auditory, or vibroractile feedback stimulus simultaneously with each key depression should reduce time for depressions below that required for sequences withouc supplementary feedback. In the present study, subjects generated button presses so that effects of feedback could be independently assessed. Ten male and 10 female institutionalized educable retardates ( M u = 15.22, S D = 1.21; MIQ= 60.35, SD = 5.71), tested individually, generated 5, 12, 19, 26, 33, and 40 depressions of a silent switch. Each numerosity was generated under five different feedback 'This research was supported in part by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Research Grant H D 07329-01. 'Requests for reprints should be sent to Edward A. Holden, Jr., Research Department, E. R. Tohnstone Trainina and Research Center, Bordentown. N.J. 08505. 'summary tables of means and the analysei of variance ma; be obtained as Document NAPS-02632 from Microfiche Publications, 440 Park Ave. South, New York, N.Y. 10016. Remit $3.00 for microfiche or 57.25 for photocopy.
186
E. A. HOLDEN, JR.
conditions: ( a ) no feedback; ( b ) visual feedback-a 50-msec. neon light stimulus; (c) auditory feedback-a 50-msec. tone delivered over headphones; ( d ) cutaneous feedback-a 50-msec. vibrotactile stimulus delivered to the wrist of S s preferred (response) hand; and ( e ) a combination of ( b ) , ( c ) , and ( d ) . The five feedback conditions were presented in blocks, with depressions increasing from 5 to 40 within each block. During the experiment instructions for each number of depressions to be generated were delivered through S s headphones, after which S repeated the number out loud before commencing to tap the response key. Magnitudes of error per numerosity under the five feedback conditions were analyzed with a treatment X treatment X subjects analysis of variance.:' An identical analysis was made for response rates, i.e., the mean time per response within each sequence of depressions. In both analyses only the main effect of number of depressions was significant, i.e., more depressions effected more errors and required more time for each response (Fs5/sso = 15.02, 9.19). Failure to obtain the predicted effects of differential feedback conditions is contrary ro the hypothesized relationship between processing time and supplementary feedback during count-tap sequences. An alternative explanation again depends upon the feedback stimulus in ( 3 ) . Rather than increasing speed of response confirmacion via summation or a faster sensory system per se, the feedback light diminished time to shift attention between the tracking stimulus and sensory confirmacion. Since the feedback stimulus was in the same modality as the tracking stimulus, less time was required to shift attention than in the second study where attention shifted between external stimuli and kinesthetic confirmation. If chis explanation is applicable, it can be predicted that a feedback stimulus of a different modality (tone) from the tracking stimulus (light) would produce more errors than when the tracking and feedback stimuli are in the same modality. REFERENCES Discontinuous functioning of the human operator in pursuit tasks. Quarterly Jot~r?zalof Experimental Psychology, 1948, 1 , 36-51. 2. HOLDEN,E. A., JR. Enumeration versus tracking during unimodal and multimodal sequential information processing in normals and retardates. Developmental Psychology, 1974, 10, 667-67 1. 3. THOR,D. H . Counting and tracking of sequential visual stimuli by EMR and intellectually average children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1973, 7 8 , 41-46. 1. HICK, W. E.
Accepted July 1 , 1975.
