Community reaction test

Hi duders

I was listening to the bombcast a couple of weeks ago and the guys was talking about reaction times. They where curious if your reaction time fell off as you get older. It got me thinking, its was a bank holiday over the weekend in the UK so I decided to build a reaction test. Its simple but it will collect the average reaction time for a given age range. It’ll be interesting to see how the results pan out.

So if you could spare a second or two in a couple of days we can see which age range in the community has the best reaction times.

Here is the link.

http://code-creative.net/reaction/

Neat test. I got my reaction time down from .35 seconds to .32 seconds.

... Did I do good or bad?

I did it a few times. Ranges between .25 and .45

Edit: Forgot to say, I'm 32.

Seems like someone isn't playing fair so your results will be skewed. Unless the 75 year old wants to come forth and let us know they watch Giantbomb content. I'd be pretty stoked about that.

its a good question a quick search apparently 0.215

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/stats.php

but there probably not testing using a web browser and a mouse

Cool. I'm 18, got .306.

@cornbredx: i know, wasn't sure how I could stop people skewing the results.

@ianmac: Ya, unfortunately I don't know if you can really. It'll probably work itself out if enough people use their real age. The 75 year olds will be the trolls =P

Did it once got 307, im 24.

I'm 25 and on my first try I got 0.421, but got it down to 0.3 flat in a few tries.

Goddamn. I got it down to .304 on this latest run.

Someone should let the OP know that this is pretty addictive.

.204. I'm 21

I bet you a factor in how fast you can do it depends on the device you're using. I tried on my laptops built in mouse and went up to .254. When I use my ergonomic logitech gaming mouse, I consistently got the .204, even got .154 once but I couldn't consistently do it.

I just noticed, but you're also missing the 35-44 age range haha

19 - .35 consistently for 3 runs.

The thing with these is that you are sitting waiting for a stimulus and anticipating your reaction to it, which I don't think applies well to gaming where you are reacting to things that you can't always anticipate. I think your reaction speed to things you don't anticipate would be a much more meaningful in terms of measuring true reaction time. I can only speak from my personal experience, but after years of playing CS competitively I always felt my fastest reactions were not to aiming at a corner and anticipating someone coming around it, rather they happened almost unconsciously to unexpected sightings of an enemy. You get to a point where your crosshair is instantly snapping to a guy's head as he comes onto your screen, but that's not what you are consciously focusing on, it's just happening out of instinct while your mind is on something else entirely. Those reactions were always the ones that felt fast, not the anticipatory reactions. I'd actually say anticipatory reactions were much less reliable because they had no 'flow' to them.

i'm 25, went from .304ish to .252ish, couldn't get faster than that

22. Got .305.

.254 my first try. 25 years old.

0,259 - I'm 25.

pro-DMC3 player since ages.

I'm 30 and I got 0.15 as my best, 0.31 at worst. I thing in gaming my biggest enemy as far as reaction goes is my eyes (color blind etc) more than anything.

.255 on the dot pretty much every time. Once I got .235 and once 2.75, but I tried it 10 times and got .255 for 8 of them. Kinda weird, but I'll take that. I figured I'd gotten way slower than that.

+75 are crushing it!

@cale: I absolutely agree, I read zen and the art of archery once and it covered something similar. I can't for the life of me remember the specifics but it was a sort of meditative state (mindfulness). Was an interesting book.

My best effort was 0.306. I'm 25.

.303 was the lowest I managed to get as a 23 year old.

fix the 35-44 age range sorry about that, only played once got .29 my 34

.255 pretty consistently. Fastest was .204. I'm 27 (28 soon).

I'm surprised... I would have pegged myself as slower than average.

Woohoo! 34 and clicking as fast as a 70 year old (0.301)! Woohoo!

Wait, what?

18-24 and I got 0.25

I can't get below .250

I got .253 like, three times in a row.

18-24

I can get .1's (my best was .101) but that's when I'm forcing myself to hyper-expect it, so I don't consider that to be a fair assessment.

wow, .03. 75 year old super man.

18-24 .256

Daaamn, Grandma!

age 27, got .301 secs

Age 23. Got 0.20 twice in a row. Not too shabby.

Age 17, 0.307

24 years old, did it about ten times and was as low as .25 and topped out at .305

52, and I had a high of .33 and a low of .20 (edited to reflect actual times, reaction is good, but memory of where the decimal should be is... fading...)...

.35 when I was disctracted wondering if it meant I was supposed to click rapid fire or something, .25 when I actually concentrated like I was playing a fighting game.

Yep, I'm twenty and got about .38 on my first try when I was considering if it would recognize track pad taps as a click.

Got around .27 when I knew that was coming.

Did it a few more times because bored, .25 consistently.

Neat, but it seems to register when you lift your finger from the button rather than the start of the click.

Either way, I'm 28 and seemed to get pretty consistent 0.4's, though I did get down to 0.32 at one time.

.25 like ten times in a row. I'm 29 I got shit reactions, my biggest weakness in fighting games.

46 years old AND a woman (who supposedly have slower reaction times across the board (and, yes, I don't care if you know how old I am)), my best was 0.152. Granted, this was after several trials, but my average was around 0.30ish, and my initial trial was 0.206. And just to prove how small the test pool is for my age group, in about five minutes I managed to skew the group average by -0.03 seconds. I would puff up more about my time, but I suspect that it has more to do with my optimized gaming mouse than my actual reflexes. Mouse lag, as it turns out, has a big effect on your reported reaction times; Tested had an article about just this topic.

That's terrific, haha. Also a good article. I should've known the Tested would have something like this in the archives.

0.101

Is the time from start to click a static value? My first try I pulled a .303, and the two following were .304, .302. Then I tried clicking when I thought it would be, rather than reacting to what was on screen, and was able to get 0.05 a few times in a row (that is, no spam clicking, just one single click). Finally I went back to trying the regular reaction method and set a 0.151. Age 20.

I'm 28 and I got 0.3

.3 On my second try.

I'm in my mid-thirties. I should get my parents to try this.