Manual Performance and Arousal

Abstract

Oltman (1964) presented evidence suggesting that physiological arousal may cause differences in field dependence. In his test, loud white noise was used to produce arousal. Wilkinson (1963) found that white noise interacts with knowledge of results to improve performance on a five-choice test of serial reaction. Predicting from these and other studies, i t was hypothesized that white noise would p r o d ~ ~ c e arousal and increase manual performance on the Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test. Each of the 18 paid volunteers was given 300 trials on che Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test. A trial consisted of a 5-sec. period during which S was to turn over as many blocks as possible using both hands. Whi te noise (100 d b & 1 d b ) was presented during half of che trials and was counterbalanced in an ABBA fashion. S was given a 2-min. break after every 100 trials. The mean number of blocks turned over by S in 150 trials during arousal was 1,756 while the mean number of blocks n ~ r n e d over without noise was 1,711. A t test for matched groups was in the direction of the hypothesis and was significant ( t = 7.5; p < ,001) . This significant t resulted from the fact that all but one of the 18 Ss produced differences in performance which were in the direction of the hypothesis. These results are from a series of s t ~ ~ d i e s which indicate thac arousal produced by white noise is not only associated with differences in field dependence and improve~nent in serial reaction, but also with a general improvement in motor performance.