Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 25, 2025
Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats
Published on: March 17, 2019
Influential Factors and Preliminary Reference Data for a Clinically Feasible, Functional Reaction Time Assessment:
Landon B Lempke1,2, Jessie R Oldham3, Scott Passalugo1,2
1Division of Sports Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, MA.
Context:
Clinical reaction-time (RT) measures are frequently used when examining patients with concussion but do not correlate with functional movement RT. We developed the Standardized Assessment of RT (StART) to emulate the rapid cognitive demands and whole-body movement needed in sport.
Objective:
To assess StART differences across 6 cognitive-motor combinations, examine potential demographic and health history confounders, and provide preliminary reference data for healthy collegiate student-athletes.
Design:
Prospective, cross-sectional study.
Setting:
Clinical medicine facilities.
Patients Or Other Participants:
A total of 89 student-athletes (56 [62.9%] men, 33 [37.1%] women; age = 19.5 ± 0.9 years, height = 178.2 ± 21.7 cm, mass = 80.4 ± 24 kg; no concussion history = 64 [71.9%]).
Main Outcome Measure(S):
Student-athletes completed health history questionnaires and StART during preseason testing. The StART consisted of 3 movements (standing, single-legged balance, and cutting) under 2 cognitive states (single task and dual task [subtracting by 6's or 7's]) for 3 trials under each condition. The StART trials were calculated as milliseconds between penlight illumination and initial movement. We used a 3 × 2 repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc t tests and 95% CIs to assess StART cognitive and movement differences, conducted univariable linear regressions to examine StART performance associations, and reported StART performance as percentiles.
Results:
All StART conditions differed (P ≤ .03), except single-task standing versus single-task single-legged balance (P = .36). Every 1-year age increase was associated with an 18-millisecond (95% CI = 8, 27 milliseconds) slower single-task cutting RT (P < .001). Female athletes had slower single-task (15 milliseconds; 95% CI = 2, 28 milliseconds; P = .02) and dual-task (28 milliseconds; 95% CI = 2, 55 milliseconds; P = .03) standing RT than male athletes. No other demographic or health history factors were associated with any StART condition (P ≥ .056).
Conclusions:
The StART outcomes were unique across each cognitive-motor combination, suggesting minimal subtest redundancy. Only age and sex were associated with select outcomes. The StART composite scores may minimize confounding factors, but future researchers should consider age and sex when providing normative data.
