{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01870748299319728, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006802721088435374, 'mean_word_length': 5.4316939890710385, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the advance preparation of discrete finger responses.

Most studies that examined the precuing of motor responses have been interpreted as indicating that response specification is a variable-order process. An apparent exception to this conclusion was obtained by Miller (1982) for the preparation of discrete finger responses. Precuing was beneficial only when the precued responses were on the same hand, suggesting that response specification occurs in a fixed order, with hand specified before other aspects of the response. Three experiments examined this discrepant finding for discrete finger responses. Experiment 1 demonstrated that with sufficient time (3 s), all combinations of responses can be equally well prepared. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that the precuing advantage for same-hand responses at shorter precuing intervals is due to strategic and decision factors, not to an ability to prepare these responses more efficiently. Preparation of finger responses, thus, also appears to be variable. This conclusion poses problems for Miller's extension of the precuing procedure to the evaluation of discrete versus continuous models of information processing.