Millisecond precision psychological research in a world of commodity computers: New hardware, new problems?
Since the publication of Plant, Hammond, and Turner (2004), which highlighted a pressing need for researchers to pay more attention to sources of error in computer-based experiments, the landscape has undoubtedly changed, but not necessarily for the better. Readily available hardware has improved in terms of raw speed; multicore processors abound; graphics cards now have hundreds of megabytes of RAM; main memory is measured in gigabytes; drive space is measured in terabytes; ever larger thin film transistor displays capable of single-digit response times, together with newer Digital Light Processing multimedia projectors, enable much greater graphic complexity; and new 64-bit operating systems, such as Microsoft Vista, are now commonplace. However, have millisecond-accurate presentation and response timing improved, and will they ever be available in commodity computers and peripherals? In the present article, we used a Black Box ToolKit to measure the variability in timing characteristics of hardware used commonly in psychological research.
KeywordsRapid Serial Visual Presentation Onset Delay Display Duration Parallel Port Digital Light Processing
- Accuracy versus precision, the target analogy (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2008, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/accuracy_and_precision#accuracy_versus_precision.3B_the_target_analogy.Google Scholar
- Beringer, J. (1992). Timing accuracy of mouse response registration on the IBM microcomputer family. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 24, 486–490.Google Scholar
- Krantz, J. H. (2000). Tell me, what did you see? The stimulus on computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 221–229.Google Scholar
- Plant, R. R., Hammond, N., & Turner, G. (2004). Self-validating presentation and response timing in cognitive paradigms: How and why? Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 291–303.Google Scholar
- Plant, R. R., Hammond, N., & Whitehouse, T. (2002). Toward an experimental timing standards lab: Benchmarking precision in the real world. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 218–226.Google Scholar
- Plant, R. R., Hammond, N., & Whitehouse, T. (2003). How choice of mouse may affect response timing in psychological studies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 276–284.Google Scholar
- Russinovich, M. (2007, August 27). Vista Multimedia playback and network throughput. Article posted to http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2007/08/27/1833290.aspxGoogle Scholar
- Schmidt, W. C. (2001). Presentation accuracy of Web animation methods. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 33, 187–200.Google Scholar
- Ulrich, R., & Giray, M. (1989). Time resolution of clocks: Effects on reaction time measurement: Good news for bad clocks. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 42, 1–12.Google Scholar
- White, N. (2007, October 29). An overview of Windows sound and music ‘glitching’ issues. Article posted to http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/10/29/an-overview-of-windows-sound-and-music-glitching-issues.aspx.Google Scholar