Abstract
Two coactors performed simultaneously in a two-choice reaction time paradigm; one individual was the subject while the other was a confederate of the experimenter. Prior to each presentation of the symbol ⊔ or ⊓, the subject and the confederate verbally predicted which stimulus they expected, and after each presentation, the subject and the confederate identified the stimulus by pulling their own left or right reaction trigger. Following the more probable stimulus, the subject reacted faster when the confederate’s prediction was correct. Contrary to a hypothesis from expectancy theory, the subject reacted markedly faster to the less probable stimulus than the more probable alternative when the prediction outcome was correct for the subject but incorrect for the confederate.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bernstein, I. H., & Reese, C. Behavioral hypotheses and choice reaction time. Psychonomic Science, 1965, 3, 259–260.
Geller, E. S., Whitman, C. P., Wrenn, R. F., & Shipley, W. G. Expectancy and discrete reaction time in a probability reversal design. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 90, 113–119.
Laming, D. R. J. Subjective probability in choice-reaction experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1969, 6, 81–120.
Lee, W. Decision Theory and human behavior. New York: Wiley, 1971.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by the Small Grants Program of the College of Arts and Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and by Grant R03-NH-24718 from the National Institute of Mental Health. The authors thank John Farris for his assistance in collecting the data, and Charles Whitman for his assistance in designing the logic circuitry and in writing the computer programs.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Geller, E.S., Tuso, M.A. & Wellington, C.J. The outcome of a coactor’s prediction as a determinant of choice reaction time. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 5, 303–305 (1975). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03333252
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03333252