• Emg Sell Good Quality Reducer
  • Emg Sell Good Quality Reducer
  • Emg Sell Good Quality Reducer
  • Emg Sell Good Quality Reducer
  • Emg Sell Good Quality Reducer
  • Emg Sell Good Quality Reducer

Emg Sell Good Quality Reducer

Application: Motor
Hardness: Soft Tooth Surface
Installation: Vertical Type
Layout: Shunting
Gear Shape: Conical - Cylindrical Gear
Step: Stepless
Customization:
Diamond Member Since 2011

Suppliers with verified business licenses

Manufacturer/Factory, Trading Company

Basic Info.

Model NO.
EMG
Type
Gear Reducer
Color
Blue
Transport Package
Plywood
Specification
30kg
Trademark
emg
Origin
China
HS Code
8501109990
Production Capacity
50000PCS/Year

Product Description

EMG reducer
Type: Other
Brand: EMG
Product Name: Reducer
Product Name: Reducer
Brand: EMG
Emg Sell Good Quality ReducerAccording to reducer/augmenter theory, augmenters are assumed to react to sensory stimuli with enhanced responsiveness, whereas reducers respond to the same stimuli with dampened responsiveness.
An augmenter is someone who amplifies or increases incoming sensory stimulation, whereas a reducer dampens or decreases such sensory stimulation.
Reducers, as the name suggests, take in two things: previous state and an action. Then they reduce it (read it return) to one entity: the new updated instance of state. So reducers are basically pure JS functions which 
take in the previous state and an action and return the newly updated state.
Reducers: As we already know, actions only tell what to do, but they don't tell how to do, so reducers are 
the pure functions that take the current state and action and return the new state and tell the store how to do
Augmenting-reducing theory describes temperament-related differences in the modulation of stimulation. Reducers are supposed to need more stimulation than augmenters because of a cortical attenuation of incoming stimuli. The study investigated differences between augmenters and reducers (classified by questionnaire) in performance and information processing strategies in a simple reaction time task. Fifty-two subjects (27 augmenters, 25 reducers) took part in a visual reaction time task with go- and catch-trials (30%). Reaction times, commission errors, and psychophysiological indicators of information processing (N1, P300, EMG) were recorded. Reducers were faster and exhibited more commission errors than augmenters. Moreover, reducers exhibited higher N1-amplitudes, faster EMG-onsets and higher EMG-amplitudes than augmenters. An additional pain tolerance test revealed that male reducers were more pain tolerant than the other participants. These results are consistent with the proposition that reducers have a higher need for stimulation than augmenters. Probably, they utilize locomotor activity in order to compensate for their attenuated arousal.

Send your message to this supplier

*From:
*To:
*Message:

Enter between 20 to 4,000 characters.

This is not what you are looking for? Post a Sourcing Request Now