Occasionally, an athlete’s post-test mean data may appear unchanged or even slightly worse than their pre-test data, while the Minute-on-Minute data shows clear improvement. Although this can appear contradictory at first, it occurs because summary metrics and Minute-on-Minute metrics measure different characteristics of performance.
Every summary metric within Soma, whether it is Reaction Time, Accuracy, Speed, Variation, Response Consistency Score (RCS), or another task-specific metric, represents an overall result for the assessment. These values provide a useful overview of performance, but they do not show how performance changed throughout the task.
Minute-on-Minute metrics provide this additional layer of context. Rather than reducing performance to a single value, they show how each metric evolved across the duration of the assessment. This allows practitioners to determine whether performance was maintained consistently or whether it fluctuated from one period to the next.
To understand why this matters, consider two athletes who both finish with a mean reaction time of 400ms.
The first athlete performs consistently throughout the task. Most responses remain close to 400ms from beginning to end, with only small changes between minutes.
The second athlete alternates between periods of very fast and very slow performance. Some minutes average 330ms, while others average 470ms. Despite producing the same overall mean reaction time, the performance profiles are fundamentally different.
The summary metric treats these athletes as identical. The Minute-on-Minute data does not.
Importantly, summary metrics provide no information about when performance changes occurred. Once hundreds of responses have been reduced to a single average, information about stability, fluctuations, recovery, and consistency is lost. Two assessments can produce similar summary scores while displaying very different performance patterns throughout the task.
This becomes particularly important when comparing pre- and post-testing.
In a pre-test, an athlete may display large fluctuations throughout the assessment. Performance may rise sharply during some periods and fall sharply during others. The final summary score may still appear favourable because the stronger periods offset the weaker periods when averaged together. However, the athlete is not maintaining a consistent level of performance. They are repeatedly moving between higher and lower performance states.
Following an intervention, the same athlete may produce a similar or slightly worse summary score. At first glance this may appear negative. However, when the Minute-on-Minute data is reviewed, a different picture may emerge. Rather than producing large swings throughout the assessment, performance may remain within a much narrower range from beginning to end. The highest peaks may be reduced, but the largest drops in performance may also be reduced.
As a result, the overall performance profile becomes more stable and predictable.
This concept applies to all Minute-on-Minute metrics within Soma.
Minute-on-Minute Reaction Time may show that processing speed remained more stable throughout the assessment.
Minute-on-Minute Accuracy may show fewer periods of error accumulation.
Minute-on-Minute Speed may show more consistent performance under load.
Minute-on-Minute RCS may show greater efficiency across the duration of the task.
Minute-on-Minute Variation may show fewer fluctuations and improved performance stability.
Each metric provides additional information that is not visible within the summary score alone.
From a performance perspective, this often indicates that the athlete is maintaining attentional control more consistently over time. Rather than repeatedly gaining and losing performance throughout the assessment, they are sustaining a more stable level of engagement despite fatigue, cognitive load, boredom, or task demands.
For many sporting environments, this distinction is important. Performance is rarely determined by a single exceptional response. More often it depends on the ability to sustain attention, decision-making, and execution consistently over time.
This is why improvements in Minute-on-Minute data can be meaningful even when changes in summary metrics are small or appear unfavourable. Reduced fluctuations, greater stability, and more consistent performance throughout the task often indicate improved attentional control and improved resistance to performance decline.
It is also important to recognise that a summary metric and its corresponding Minute-on-Minute profile do not always move in the same direction. A mean reaction time may become slightly slower while Minute-on-Minute reaction time becomes more stable. A variation score may remain unchanged while the pattern of variation throughout the task becomes more predictable. Similarly, accuracy may remain identical overall while Minute-on-Minute accuracy shows improved consistency throughout the assessment.
For this reason, summary metrics should never be interpreted in isolation.
Summary metrics tell you the overall outcome of the assessment.
Minute-on-Minute metrics tell you how that outcome was achieved.
Both are required to fully understand changes in cognitive performance.