This is true - I remember this occurring at the Olympics in Atlanta. False
starts can occur AFTER the gun shot (I am trying to recall the time). The
English 100 meter runner was disqualified from running a race for 2 false
starts (one of which occurred .08 sec after the gun shot). False starts are
called at less than 1/10 sec. For most track races, this probably doesn't
matter much, but for the 100 meter sprint, it obviously is a big issue. I
believe that this is not limited just to track, but also to speed skating
as well.
>
>Are you suggesting something _other than_ a rule such as, "Any reaction
>time (or time to start) less than zero indicates a false start--leaving
>before the starting gun has sounded. Any reaction time of zero or greater
>seconds is accepted as a valid start."? For example, "Since it is
>impossible to respond faster than .10 seconds, any start time faster than
>that is considered a false start."?
>
>I checked my old copy of Underwood's (1966) _Experimental Psychology_, in
>which an experiment by Raab (1962) is described. Looking at simple RT, the
>lower limits of RT appear to be about 116 msec, though the RT varies as a
>function of stimulus duration (the shortest RT in this study occurred with
>50 msec stimulus duration), and stimulus intensity (faster with 60 dB
>stimulus than 40 dB stimulus) (p. 254). Underwood also goes on to discuss
>the potential problem with "false reactions:" E may also occasionally
>insert a false trial by giving the ready signal but not giving the RT
>stimulus. Or, as another technique, E may discard all responses which are
>apparently too fast on the grounds that these could not have been initiated
>by the RT stimulus. For example, Drazin (1961) discarded all responses to
>a visual stimulus if the response--the RT--was 100 msec. or less, or if
>they occurred before the RT stimulus" (p. 255). Woodworth and Scholsberg
>(1954) discuss "RT as being composed of [an] "irreducible minimum," plus a
>remainder...a "reducible margin" (p. 21). In subsequent calculations they
>select "105 msec as a likely limit in this instance" (p. 21), which they
>say was "chosen as a fair estimate."
>
>Do we DQ runners 'cause their start times are "too short" to have been
>initiated by the starting gun (though still above zero)? Consider two
>runners: A has a start time of .09 sec and an elapsed time of 10.09 (for a
>_run_ time of 10.0 sec), and B has a start time of .11 sec and an elapsed
>time of 10.15 (for a _run_ time of 10.04 sec). Both left the starting line
>after the gun sounded, A got there sooner, and actually was running faster.
>But do we DQ runner A because he/she left the blocks before some
>"irreducible minimum" time of 105 msec (.105 sec), reasoning that A must
>have jumped the gun?
>
>Frankly, I don't want to be the official at _that_ track meet! Might make
>some psychological sense, but it'd be tough to explain it to runner A.
>
>Bob (whose time for getting to his office door following a knock might
>approach 10.04 sec, but only with a tailwind)
>
>=======================================================================
>Robert T. Herdegen III
>Department of Psychology
>Hampden-Sydney College
>Hampden-Sydney, VA 23943
>=======================================================================
>
>
>
>
Deb
Deborah S. Briihl There are as many
Dept. of Psychology and Counseling ways to live as
Valdosta State University there are people in
Valdosta, GA 31698-0100 this world and each
[EMAIL PROTECTED] deserve a closer
Now in new Assoc. size! look..
http://chiron.valdosta.edu/dbriihl
You got so many dreams you don't know where to put them, so you better turn
a few of them loose... Fire
