{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02617801047120419, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012434554973821989, 'mean_word_length': 5.266393442622951, '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}}
Response Timing Accuracy as a Function of Movement Velocity and Distance.

In two experiments, patterns of response error during a timing accuracy task were investigated. In Experiment 1, these patterns were examined across a full range of movement velocities, which provided a test of the hypothesis that as movement velocity increases, constant error (CE) shifts from a negative to a positive response bias, with the zero CE point occurring at approximately 50% of maximum movement velocity (Hancock & Newell, 1985). Additionally, by examining variable error (VE), timing error variability patterns over a full range of movement velocities were established. Subjects (N = 6) performed a series of forearm flexion movements requiring 19 different movement velocities. Results corroborated previous observations that variability of timing error primarily decreased as movement velocity increased from 6 to 42% of maximum velocity. Additionally, CE data across the velocity spectrum did not support the proposed timing error function. In Experiment 2, the effect(s) of responding at 3 movement distances with 6 movement velocities on response timing error were investigated. VE was significantly lower for the 3 high-velocity movements than for the 3 low-velocity movements. Additionally, when MT was mathematically factored out, VE was less at the long movement distance than at the short distance. As in Experiment 1, CE was unaffected by distance or velocity effects and the predicted CE timing error function was not evident.