hup102-feb-2-report.pdf

8/9/2019 HUP102-Feb-2-report.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hup102-feb-2-reportpdf 1/9

HUP 102 – REPORT 1

Overview of the experiments – Tweezers Dexterity Test (Akshat), Mirror Drawing

Experiment (Shreyas) and Reaction time measuring setup (Shiva).

FEBRUARY 2, 2015

SUBMITTED BY-

1 Akshat Raj (2011CH10065)

2 Shreyas Wattamwar (2011PH10880)

3 Shiva Dhawan (2011ME10727)



1

Tweezers Dexterity Test

A Tweezers Dexterity Test is used to test the manual dexterity

of a person, specifically the fine motor movements of the hand.

Dexterity typically refers to the ability of a person to use their

hands and arms to perform a task. It is an important

component of the society and collective lifestyles of every

group on the planet. For example, Surgeons operating on

patients, Dentists performing Oral Care (Surgeries), people

involved in assembly line work and so on. [2]

Such Dexterity Tests, like the O’Connor Tweezers Dexterity Test

are used extensively by employers (Human Resources and

Staffing Agencies) to test candidates for jobs which may

require high amount of hand-eye coordination like, watchrepair and lab technicians.

Apart from this, the hand dexterity tests may also be used for

various other situations. The tests are often used to identify and evaluate certain forms of brain damage

as well as a patient’s rehabilitation during therapy.

In addition, Neurological, physiological, and medical researchers use dexterity tests to understand the

human brain, hand-eye coordination, and dexterity capabilities of groups of people to advance medicine

and for educational purposes.

Various studies regarding the applicability of the test for different people, and in varying circumstances,

for example difference in dexterity between men and women, have also been carried out. [3]

The use of Tweezers helps negate the effects of the hand size, etc. which might lead to difference in

dexterity levels (for example, in that of males and females).

AIM OF THE TEST

The Subject aims to complete the test, that is minimize the time to complete placing the pins while,

making sure that they making the least errors.

The time in which a person completes the test can be used to quantify the dexterity of the person, and

can then be compared with others

PROCEDURE

1.

The board consists of a 100 hundred holes, arranged in 10 rows and 10 columns, equally spaced.

2.

Each hole is just big enough to hold a single pin.

3.

Subject picks up one pin at a time with the help of the tweezers, and places it in the hole.

4.

The aim is to complete the pattern in shortest time possible.

Figure 1 - O’Conner’s Tweezers

Dexterity Test Setup [1]



2

5.

One should make sure that the subject is in a distraction free environment and also, that he/she

is not told the result until the testing is complete, so as to remove the variable of learning (positive,

negative, or zero)

Figure 2 - Tweezers Dexterity Test Pattern Used

OBSERVATIONS

S. Number Test Subject (Person) Time Times Pins Dropped

1 Akshat Raj 5min 28sec 5

2 Shreyas Wattamwar 5min 18sec 3

Figure 3 – Subject performing Tweezers Dexterity Test



4

Mirror drawing experiment

Introduction

Mirror drawing experiment is basically based on whatpsychologist call procedural learning[2]. Procedural

memories involve memory for motor skills such a tying

your shoes or riding a bicycle. Unlike other memories,

procedural memories do not seem to be encoded in

usual manner we learn, and therefore it is hard to

explain or guide someone in form of words. These

memories seem to be stored “in the muscles”, accessible

only when we perform the task[2]. This experiment

points out how much we rely on the familiar sensory

setup to gather information of our surrounding thateven changing or disturbing it slightly can throw us out

of place and performing the simple tasks become difficult.

While performing any actions that are visually guided in

an perturbed visual feedback like in a mirror or even

video camera with lag , there is special conflict that

occurs between Visual and proprioceptive

information[3]. That is we see different from what we

feel or perceive. But thanks to our brain we learn to

decode or understand this new form of information and

we adjust to our surrounding. This experiment aims to

show that our brain learns and adapt to new

information[4].

Mirror drawing setup[1]

Aim of the Experiment

The subject tries to trace the given diagram (in this the star) by looking into mirror in minimum

amount of time and minimum errors.

Procedure

1. The setup consists of metal board with 5 point star cutout in it.

2. The metal sheet is electrocuted with +ve terminal and subject is provided tester with –ve

terminal.



5

3. The task of the subject is to trace out the star with

tester with minimum number of contact to the

edges looking into the mirror in minimum amount

of time.

4. Whenever the tester touches the edge the counter

of increase which is accounted as error.

5.

The first run is considered as Control trial and

eventual observations are noted with time taken

and number of errors.

Observations

Test Subject: Akshat

Time taken(sec) Error

Control 51 34

Run 1 29 13

Run 2 32 22

Run 3 27 9

Run 4 25 7

Test Subject: Shreyas

Time taken(sec) Error

Control 51 31

Run 1 45 21

Run 2 41 15

Run 3 41 10

Run 4 47 13

Conclusion

Based on the observation table we see that there is procedural learning process going on. The

control runoff both the test subject has been same but it decrease in consequent trials. There ispossibility of saturation of learning when the number of errors and time taken don’t change much

and we get same results later on.



6

REFERENCES

1. http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/practical-biology/practice-makes-perfect

2. http://faculty.knox.edu/fmcandre/Mirror_Drawing_Lab.pdf

3. Daniela Balslev, Lars O. D. Christensen, Enhanced Accuracy in Novel Mirror Drawing after

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-Induced Proprioceptive Deafferentation.

Journal of neuroscience,2004

4. http://students.washington.edu/nbout/LessonPlans/mirrordrawing.pdf

http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/practical-biology/practice-makes-perfect


http://faculty.knox.edu/fmcandre/Mirror_Drawing_Lab.pdf


http://students.washington.edu/nbout/LessonPlans/mirrordrawing.pdf







7

REACTION TIME EXPERIMENT

INTRODUCTION

A quote by Joseph Jastrow in 1890 demonstrates the importance of studying time relations of

mental phenomena. He says: "The study of the time relations of mental phenomena is important

from several points of view: it serves as an index of mental complexity, giving the sanction of

objective demonstration to the results of subjective observation; it indicates a mode of analysis

of the simpler mental acts, as well as the relation of these laboratory products to the processes

of daily life; it demonstrates the close inter-relation of psychological with physiological facts, an

analysis of the former being indispensable to the right comprehension of the latter; it suggests

means of lightening and shortening mental operations, and thus offers a mode of improving

educational methods; and it promises in various directions to deepen and widen our knowledge

of those processes by the complication and elaboration of which our mental life is so wonderfully

built up.”

There are 2 basic kind of reaction time experiments:

In simple reaction time experiments, there is only one stimulus and one response. 'X at a known location,'

'spot the dot,' and 'reaction to sound' all measure simple reaction time.

In complex reaction time experiments, the user must give a response that corresponds to the stimulus,

such as pressing a key corresponding to a letter if the letter appears on the screen.

Reaction Time Apparatus



8

AIM: To determine the reaction time of the subject in various processes

PROCEDURE:

1. We took a total of 4 types of reading on 2 different subjects. The 4 types were: Visual simple, visual

complex, audio simple and audio complex.

2. There is a subject and a person who is taking the test. The subject has to press one button on the

apparatus till he sees a light. His reaction time is calculated thus. A similar thing happens in visual complex,

the only difference being that in this case he has to old 2 buttons instead of 1.

3. A similar thing is done for audio simple and audio complex, the only difference being that the signal is

an audio tune and not a visual.

OBSERVATION

Visual RT (s) Audio RT (s) Akshat

Simple Complex Simple Complex0.135 0.185 0.165 0.225

0.131 0.131 0.194 0.226

0.129 0.159 0.242 0.205

0.14 0.192 0.176 0.159

0.194 0.182 0.264 0.233

0.131 0.191 0.181 0.201

Visual RT (s) Audio RT (s) Shiva

Simple Complex Simple Complex

0.158 0.203 0.159 0.4640.181 0.203 0.133 0.252

0.195 0.19 0.196 0.242

0.202 0.277 0.214 0.239

0.34 0.302 0.206 0.306

0.175 0.372 0.191 0.491

CONCLUSION:

1. The reaction time in majority cases of subject 2 (Shiva) is more than subject 1 (Akshat)

2. When the reaction time of the complex case is compared to the simple one, it is observed

to be higher.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~saul/rt.experimentation.pdf

2. http://homepage.univie.ac.at/andreas.franz.reichelt/intro2cogsci2/data/literature_revi

ew_reaction_time.pdf

http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~saul/rt.experimentation.pdf



hup102-feb-2-report.pdf

Documents