The Effect of Darkness on Visual Reaction Time and its Physiological Basis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Car accidents are a leading cause of death that primarily occur at night.There are many characteristics of night time driving that have been proposed to explain this phenomenon.Our group set out to determine if reaction time was one of the factors that were affected by darkness.Darkness has been known to cause stress and result in a sympathetic arousal that can enhance various physiological variables.Specifically, we predicted there would be increased heart rate, respiration rate, and sweat production while in dark conditions compared to light conditions.This increase in physiological response, we hypothesize, would result in a quicker reaction time in the dark compared to in the light.Subjects performed a reaction time test, under light and dark conditions, while their respiration rate, sweat production, and heart rate were measured.After testing twenty individuals (n=20) our results showed that there was no significant difference in the mean reaction time or any of the physiological variables when going from light to dark.Our results suggest that darkness alone is not sufficient to elevate the physiological responses associated with a sympathetic response and does not change reaction time, indicating that other factors are responsible for elevated car accidents at night.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".