|
On March 29 2011 05:13 whatthefat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 04:16 TimeSpiral wrote:On March 29 2011 03:33 whatthefat wrote:On March 29 2011 02:30 TimeSpiral wrote:140 ish to 165 ish is AVG for me. Of course, I saved the first one I did which is now logged as 176, or something :/ Screenshot of the 140 session+ Show Spoiler +Techniques: (1) Use your peripheral vision. Sensitivity to "movement" or "sudden changes" in your surroundings is higher in your peripheral vision. (2) Program a reaction, not a command. Feedback into your routine, "click on change," and your body will react automatically. (3) Don't sit down and say, "okay, when is it going to change, oh! there it is! I should click ..." Your score will be bad. (4) To avoid concentration, blur your eyes a tiny bit out of focus. (5) Mitigate unnecessary resistance and setup a little "tension." Make sure the pivot of your wrist is not touching anything, but is "floating." This will allow you to snap-release the tension for a faster (read: more accurate) reaction. Looking at your profile there, you have at least one pre-emptive score. http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/userstats.php?uid=2138266Given what is known in the reaction time literature, I'd be very surprised if you could achieve the same average over > 20 trials without at least one click before a stimulus appears, i.e., the "don't click until you see green again" message. Yeah, anything less than 100ms is referred to by that site as "preemptive," or "lucky." And for the most part, I agree, but I do not rule out the possibility of those instances being largely pre-conscious reactions. I can tell you that those super low scores, like "50" or so were me "trusting," in the reaction and just letting it happen. It was not me spamming the button and getting lucky. To elaborate, when you look at the color green there is a series of pre-conscious routines triggered. Your brain grabs all the relevant data pertaining the the environmental signal, examines the array of values, and then informs your consciousness which allows for the cognition of green, or; you being aware of green. To put it in simpler terms; your brain perceives and processes green before you are aware that you are seeing green. You can absolutely react prior to conscious awareness. You do it every day, all day. I'm using the perception of green as an example because it is directly relative to the reaction speed test, however, you can really use anything you are familiar with; tree, car, sign, word, name, whatever ... I've done the test four or five times, typically averaging 140 - 165 ish. I'd say the number of "preemptive" scores is roughly 50/50 with the "don't click until you see green again" response. If you're regularly getting a "don't click until you see green again" then you're guessing to some extent, whether consciously or not. There have been a bazillion studies on human reaction times, and what you're describing is regularly seen. Without any guessing, it's not possible for humans to respond much more quickly than 200ms.
Well ...
Your last sentence is just not correct. But, I get what you're saying.
Many researchers have confirmed that reaction to sound is faster than reaction to light, with mean auditory reaction times being 140-160 msec and visual reaction times being 180-200 msec (Galton, 1899; Woodworth and Schlosberg, 1954; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980). Perhaps this is because an auditory stimulus only takes 8-10 msec to reach the brain (Kemp et al., 1973), but a visual stimulus takes 20-40 msec (Marshall et al., 1943). Reaction time to touch is intermediate, at 155 msec (Robinson, 1934). Differences in reaction time between these types of stimuli persist whether the subject is asked to make a simple response or a complex response (Sanders, 1998, p. 114).
For about 120 years, the accepted figures for mean simple reaction times for college-age individuals have been about 190 ms (0.19 sec) for light stimuli and about 160 ms for sound stimuli (Galton, 1899; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980). However, Eckner et al. (2010) reported that the reaction times of NCAA football players averaged 0.203 sec when determined with a simple falling meter stick but 0.268 sec when measured with a computer. Reaction times measured at Clemson are usually closer to 0.268 sec for a simple visual stimulus.
|
|
Wow, 281 after 5 clicks. Well, kinda expected, I never had much of a reaction.
|
On March 29 2011 05:57 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 05:13 whatthefat wrote:On March 29 2011 04:16 TimeSpiral wrote:On March 29 2011 03:33 whatthefat wrote:On March 29 2011 02:30 TimeSpiral wrote:140 ish to 165 ish is AVG for me. Of course, I saved the first one I did which is now logged as 176, or something :/ Screenshot of the 140 session+ Show Spoiler +Techniques: (1) Use your peripheral vision. Sensitivity to "movement" or "sudden changes" in your surroundings is higher in your peripheral vision. (2) Program a reaction, not a command. Feedback into your routine, "click on change," and your body will react automatically. (3) Don't sit down and say, "okay, when is it going to change, oh! there it is! I should click ..." Your score will be bad. (4) To avoid concentration, blur your eyes a tiny bit out of focus. (5) Mitigate unnecessary resistance and setup a little "tension." Make sure the pivot of your wrist is not touching anything, but is "floating." This will allow you to snap-release the tension for a faster (read: more accurate) reaction. Looking at your profile there, you have at least one pre-emptive score. http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/userstats.php?uid=2138266Given what is known in the reaction time literature, I'd be very surprised if you could achieve the same average over > 20 trials without at least one click before a stimulus appears, i.e., the "don't click until you see green again" message. Yeah, anything less than 100ms is referred to by that site as "preemptive," or "lucky." And for the most part, I agree, but I do not rule out the possibility of those instances being largely pre-conscious reactions. I can tell you that those super low scores, like "50" or so were me "trusting," in the reaction and just letting it happen. It was not me spamming the button and getting lucky. To elaborate, when you look at the color green there is a series of pre-conscious routines triggered. Your brain grabs all the relevant data pertaining the the environmental signal, examines the array of values, and then informs your consciousness which allows for the cognition of green, or; you being aware of green. To put it in simpler terms; your brain perceives and processes green before you are aware that you are seeing green. You can absolutely react prior to conscious awareness. You do it every day, all day. I'm using the perception of green as an example because it is directly relative to the reaction speed test, however, you can really use anything you are familiar with; tree, car, sign, word, name, whatever ... I've done the test four or five times, typically averaging 140 - 165 ish. I'd say the number of "preemptive" scores is roughly 50/50 with the "don't click until you see green again" response. If you're regularly getting a "don't click until you see green again" then you're guessing to some extent, whether consciously or not. There have been a bazillion studies on human reaction times, and what you're describing is regularly seen. Without any guessing, it's not possible for humans to respond much more quickly than 200ms. Well ... Your last sentence is just not correct. But, I get what you're saying. Show nested quote +Many researchers have confirmed that reaction to sound is faster than reaction to light, with mean auditory reaction times being 140-160 msec and visual reaction times being 180-200 msec (Galton, 1899; Woodworth and Schlosberg, 1954; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980). Perhaps this is because an auditory stimulus only takes 8-10 msec to reach the brain (Kemp et al., 1973), but a visual stimulus takes 20-40 msec (Marshall et al., 1943). Reaction time to touch is intermediate, at 155 msec (Robinson, 1934). Differences in reaction time between these types of stimuli persist whether the subject is asked to make a simple response or a complex response (Sanders, 1998, p. 114). Show nested quote +For about 120 years, the accepted figures for mean simple reaction times for college-age individuals have been about 190 ms (0.19 sec) for light stimuli and about 160 ms for sound stimuli (Galton, 1899; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980). However, Eckner et al. (2010) reported that the reaction times of NCAA football players averaged 0.203 sec when determined with a simple falling meter stick but 0.268 sec when measured with a computer. Reaction times measured at Clemson are usually closer to 0.268 sec for a simple visual stimulus.
I said "Without any guessing, it's not possible for humans to respond much more quickly than 200ms". This is correct and your sources corroborate this exactly (see bolded statements).
|
107th with a 202 average, mid diamond...if that means anything
|
I'm about 280-290ms average and Bronze 1v1. Go figure.
Although this really is more of an explanation why I keep losing at the Jack Attack in YDKJ rather than why I'm bad at SC2. =P
EDIT: I did get a 3ms on one of my first couple attempts because my trigger finger twitched and I happened to get lucky. But I'm not counting that.
|
I'm around 240. I really see no correlation between SCII and reaction time; Starcraft isn't an FPS, it's more calculated.
|
Apparently I have slow-ass reflexes.
|
175ms average. I was getting 158-162ms on the ones I was really foced on, but then I blink or something and get 210ms.
Average stuff - Make sure to put your eyes to the scree nas close as possible to reduce travel time of light into your eyes.
|
My fastest out of first 5 tries was 210... meh.
Cool stuff though
|
Anyone else notice the guy in #2 is oGsMC with 107ms? If that's real it would explain a lot.
|
I dunno if it has something to do with my monitor or it requires some technique w/e but its just impossible to get below 220 for me with an average of 250. I used to be a pretty good Q3A player and consider my reaction pretty fast.
|
5 tries average: 181.6
#43 on leader board
this isn't realistic to in-game reaction time at all.
---
edit:
second time doing it attempts: 5 average: 147.2
|
246.8 first try - low Platinum
|
On March 29 2011 06:16 Skillz_Man wrote: 175ms average. I was getting 158-162ms on the ones I was really foced on, but then I blink or something and get 210ms.
Average stuff - Make sure to put your eyes to the scree nas close as possible to reduce travel time of light into your eyes.
what? You know light travels at 300 000km/s right? (about) not like 1 meter will change anything...
|
On March 29 2011 07:21 Patrio wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 06:16 Skillz_Man wrote: 175ms average. I was getting 158-162ms on the ones I was really foced on, but then I blink or something and get 210ms.
Average stuff - Make sure to put your eyes to the scree nas close as possible to reduce travel time of light into your eyes. what? You know light travels at 300 000km/s right? (about) not like 1 meter will change anything... You never know, if you move from 0.4 m to 8 cm, that extra 0.00000107 ms (1.07 ns) might just give you the edge.
|
|
254 after 5 clicks
3100+ dia
|
lol 250 - diamond - razer deathadder
|
On March 29 2011 07:21 Patrio wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 06:16 Skillz_Man wrote: 175ms average. I was getting 158-162ms on the ones I was really foced on, but then I blink or something and get 210ms.
Average stuff - Make sure to put your eyes to the scree nas close as possible to reduce travel time of light into your eyes. what? You know light travels at 300 000km/s right? (about) not like 1 meter will change anything...
Lol it was sarcasm ... But listen to the poster below you
|
|
|
|