Reaction Time Investigation

[SirDeadly]

Hello everyone, for my maths investigation I am comparing the reaction times of gamers to non-gamers between the ages of 16-18. What I would like for you to do is take this test http://www.mathsisfun.com/games/reaction-time.html and tell me your average time. To count as a gamer you need to play for atleast 10 hours a week. Please comment below with your average time and if you are a gamer or non-gamer (kinda pointless on this site I know).

EDIT: Make sure it is your first result. Thx

If anyone was interested my time was .217

 

[Bon_Clay]

0.22 and I'd consider myself a gamer.

 

[jultub]

0.248 gamer

 

[BlindMessiah94]

.237 and I play SC2 1000 hours a day

 

[hittite]

.24

I barely count as a gamer. I don't really have the time for it in college and I generally suck at shooters.

Also, the first time I tried it the big one was my worst time. I guess it just caught me by surprise.

Now, I'm gonna go see if i can beat that time.
edit: yes! .216 (whoo, adrenaline)

edit2: aww, I didn't remember my first try. it was probably around .27-.3

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Hello everyone, for my maths investigation I am comparing the reaction times of gamers to non-gamers between the ages of 16-18. What I would like for you to do is take this test http://www.mathsisfun.com/games/reaction-time.html and tell me your average time. To count as a gamer you need to play for atleast 10 hours a week. Please comment below with your average time and if you are a gamer or non-gamer (kinda pointless on this site I know).

EDIT: Make sure it is your first result. Thx

I've done this study previously, just so's you know in advance. I found little to no difference.

Mine is 0.228

 

[Arcticflame]

0.21 And I play fps heavily.

 

[SirDeadly]

I've done this study previously, just so's you know in advance. I found little to no difference.

Mine is 0.228

So far I have about a .02 - .03 difference in time. Fastest gamer is 0.191, slowest is .246. Fastest non-gamer is .209 (complete fluke), slowest is .318.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I've done this study previously, just so's you know in advance. I found little to no difference.

Mine is 0.228

So far I have about a .02 - .03 difference in time. Fastest gamer is 0.191, slowest is .246. Fastest non-gamer is .209 (complete fluke), slowest is .318.

Weird... I think might be less that games make your reaction speeds better (as almost all studies in this try to prove that) but more that people with these reaction times just play more games.

 

[Tharwen]

0.297, but I'm kind of tired and I only just put in my contacts, so... I'm excused...?

 

[SirDeadly]

I've done this study previously, just so's you know in advance. I found little to no difference.

Mine is 0.228

So far I have about a .02 - .03 difference in time. Fastest gamer is 0.191, slowest is .246. Fastest non-gamer is .209 (complete fluke), slowest is .318.

Weird... I think might be less that games make your reaction speeds better (as almost all studies in this try to prove that) but more that people with these reaction times just play more games.

Isn't that pretty much the same thing?

 

[Karlosdj86]

0.189 and yes, i'm a gamer. Mainly play dawn of war, call of duty and half life

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

0.29, I consider myself a player of video games.

[sub][sub]The big dot scared me more than it had any right too....[/sub][/sub]

 

[ffxfriek]

.236 and im a gamer

 

[olendvcook]

.318 and i consider myself a gamer

i guess im a slow gamer

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I've done this study previously, just so's you know in advance. I found little to no difference.

Mine is 0.228

So far I have about a .02 - .03 difference in time. Fastest gamer is 0.191, slowest is .246. Fastest non-gamer is .209 (complete fluke), slowest is .318.

Weird... I think might be less that games make your reaction speeds better (as almost all studies in this try to prove that) but more that people with these reaction times just play more games.

Isn't that pretty much the same thing?

No. Those are very different things. One is saying that games cause the better reaction times. The other is stating that people with better reaction times are more likely to play games. Very different things.

 

[Blackadder51]

0.24 I game a lot.

 

[SomeLameStuff]

0.201, and yes, I am a gamer.

 

[SirDeadly]

I've done this study previously, just so's you know in advance. I found little to no difference.

Mine is 0.228

So far I have about a .02 - .03 difference in time. Fastest gamer is 0.191, slowest is .246. Fastest non-gamer is .209 (complete fluke), slowest is .318.

Weird... I think might be less that games make your reaction speeds better (as almost all studies in this try to prove that) but more that people with these reaction times just play more games.

Isn't that pretty much the same thing?

No. Those are very different things. One is saying that games cause the better reaction times. The other is stating that people with better reaction times are more likely to play games. Very different things.

Well that makes more sense when said like that, I'm tired atm =P