Human PrecisionKeep the claims smaller than the evidence.
Human Precision is a game, not a lab instrument. These notes retain the useful ideas from the earlier site while removing the old test-first framing.
Precision under pressure
What the game measures, what changes a run, and what the score cannot prove.
Mouse and touchscreen scores are not equivalent
Why hardware is part of the measurement.
Your display is part of the loop
Refresh rate matters, but it is only one part of end-to-end latency.
Reaction time is only one part of fast play
Prediction, positioning, and continuous control matter too.
Sports reactions happen inside a richer environment
Why browser control and sport performance overlap only partially.
Cursor control is one narrow form of hand-eye coordination
What the game captures and what real-world movement adds.
Simple reaction is not the same as choosing
Why continuous control is more than one stimulus and one response.
Fast response is not a complete measure of processing speed
Why the terms should not be treated as interchangeable.
An average is not your baseline
Why task and device context matter before comparing numbers.
Age is one variable among many
Why Human Precision does not use age-adjusted game scores.
The field is designed to compete for your attention
How choosing what matters next can reduce wasted movement.
Improve the run by reducing wasted movement
Practical ways to get better at this specific game.
Getting better at the game is real, but narrow
Practice effects matter before making broad claims about cognition.
Sleep changes the conditions of a run
Why tiredness can affect sustained attention without making the score diagnostic.
Caffeine can change the feel of a run
Why alertness and fine control are not the same thing.