Faculty Articles

Title

An Evaluation of Remotely Administered Reaction Time Subtests

Document Type

Poster

Publication Date

9-2021

Publication Title

Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology

ISSN or ISBN

0887-6177

Volume

36

Issue/Number

6

Abstract/Excerpt

Objective

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many services attempted to quickly transition to a remote format. A need to incorporate and evaluate a remote delivery of neuropsychological measures arose. TestMyBrain (TMB) from the Many Brains Project has been utilizing teleneuropsychology in research since 2017.

Method

Volunteer research participants (N = 176, Mage = 29, Medu = 15 years, 64.7% white, 54.2% female, 83.2% right-handed) were administered TMB Simple Reaction Time and Choice Reaction Time subtest as part of a larger battery via zoom. Participants were able to choose between completing these measures using a keyboard, mouse, or a touch screen. There were no significant differences among demographic variables across the different completion methods.

Results

An ANCOVA indicated there was not a significant difference in simple reaction time across the different response F(2,168) = 0.482, p = 0.618, ηp2 = 0.006. There was however a significant difference in choice reaction time across the different response methods F(2,168) = 11.486, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.120.

Conclusion

Results suggest different response methods maybe suitable for simpler tasks, yet there lacks consistency in response methods for more complex tasks. This medium effect size may have occurred as a result of the lack of sensitivity for devices to detect taps on different portions of the screen as effectively as various keys on a keyboard. Administrators must be aware of the limitations response methods may introduce into results. Limitation to this analysis include limited samples and not controlling for other factors that may potentially influence reaction time such as internet connection. Future research should focus on creating a standardized method for teleneuro-psychology administration.

DOI

10.1093/arclin/acab062.189

Peer Reviewed

Share

COinS