Auditory Response Time Lab Report
The purpose of this experiment is to determine the response time for dominant and non-dominant hand for visual stimuli, and using only dominant hand to test auditory and tactile response. Also, to test involuntary the response time for the reflex of the knee from calculating the distance. Based on my group hypothesis, we said that visual stimulus dominant hand had a faster response time than non-dominant hand because the dominant hand is use more often thus repetition creates stronger connection. For only dominant we said that auditory response has the fastest reaction time because the auditory stimuli gets process faster compare to tactile and visual that has to travel longer to reach frontal lobe for response decision. For involuntary response,
…show more content…
We said that reflex achieved greater intensity with Jendraksisk Manoever perform than without. We also said that greater stimulus from tapping the knee generates more distance from the knee. An investigation done from Tham et al (2011), stated that different strike forces done to the knee affected the amount of reflex obtained therefore, saying with low strike force generated no action potential compare to higher striking forces which generated higher reflex action potential. Our hypothesis correspond to the study done because with higher stimulus input the greater the reflex but our assumption didn't not agree with the result. The class average had a higher reflex distance without the Jendrassik maneover perform. This might state that the class made an error in striking force which many could have tapping with low force that generated less distance reflexion of the knee. The study goes on to say that using Jendrassik menauever when tapping increase the amount of sensitivity to the afferent fibres of the knee and removes the "presynaptic inhibition which thereby suppresses the motor neuron leading to an increase in reflex response" (Zehr & Stein, cited in Tham et. al., 2011). Additionally, with Jendrassik maneuver activates the motor neuron instead of the afferent fiber p410. This result supports the third hypothesis with tapping higher generated more reflex
We said that reflex achieved greater intensity with Jendraksisk Manoever perform than without. We also said that greater stimulus from tapping the knee generates more distance from the knee. An investigation done from Tham et al (2011), stated that different strike forces done to the knee affected the amount of reflex obtained therefore, saying with low strike force generated no action potential compare to higher striking forces which generated higher reflex action potential. Our hypothesis correspond to the study done because with higher stimulus input the greater the reflex but our assumption didn't not agree with the result. The class average had a higher reflex distance without the Jendrassik maneover perform. This might state that the class made an error in striking force which many could have tapping with low force that generated less distance reflexion of the knee. The study goes on to say that using Jendrassik menauever when tapping increase the amount of sensitivity to the afferent fibres of the knee and removes the "presynaptic inhibition which thereby suppresses the motor neuron leading to an increase in reflex response" (Zehr & Stein, cited in Tham et. al., 2011). Additionally, with Jendrassik maneuver activates the motor neuron instead of the afferent fiber p410. This result supports the third hypothesis with tapping higher generated more reflex