Here a high amount of selective attention is needed as the receiver needs to focus solely on the orange ball and block the other information they will be receiving regarding the yellow balls.
Experiment B: Here all the throwers bowl the ball at the same speed, time and direction. This time however all the balls are yellow and the scorer names one of the throwers. Consequently the catcher aims to all catch the ball from which the scorer named and block all other balls that are approaching them. Again repeat 10 times and record results.
This involved a higher amount of concentration and reaction time was a key factor, to be able to hear who’s you should catch and then identify the line their ball was occupying.
Experiment C: Only one person now releases a ball dependent on the name that the scorer calls. The receiver therefore has to catch the one ball the scorer named. Repeat 10 times with each person and record the results.
This was the easiest of all our three experiments it required virtually no selective attention and was basically combining basic motor skills and reaction time.
The catcher’s selective attention and therefore motor skills were affected by:
-
Reaction time: The amount of time between the presentation of an unanticipated stimulus and the start of a response. It has been found that reaction time gradually increase as the number of possible alternatives increases, this forms the basis of Hicks Law.
-
Hicks Law: There is a linear relationship between reaction time and the amount of information to be processed. A greater number of stimuli results in more choices to be made and therefore the reaction time increases. Consequently, if there is a low number of an alternative stimulus, the easier and faster one can react.
-
Psychological refractory Period: Wellford explained that there is merely a single channel in the brain, which all information must pass through. Subsequently delays occur when there are a multiple number of stimuli. The time between the 1st stimulus digestion and the 2nd is known as the Psychological Refractory Period. `
-
Gender: Males have quicker reactions than females, but this also deteriorates faster.
-
Temporal Anticipation: Predicting an event of a set of stimuli causing a readiness of the necessary movements. If this is done correctly there is a reduced time taken to respond to the stimulus, however if someone interprets wrongly it extends the reaction time.
-
Age: Reaction time is quicker up to an optimum age where it then deteriorates after.
Once completing all experiments the results that we obtained are:
*BOYS*
It is evident from the results that boys did not fluctuate much on any of the experiments, however experiment A showed a slight range. This therefore emphasises that A was heavily dependant on ones selective attention level and therefore fundamental motor skills. Daniel therefore may either merely have better coordination due to the development and regular practise of his fundamental motor skills. On the other hand he may have a higher level of selective attention, therefore a greater ability to block our irrelevant stimuli. Anticipation may additionally have had an important role to play, if he anticipated correctly it will have worked to his advantage. Therefore to get a more accurate result the experiment should be repeated more than 10 times. Edward may have scored lightly lower on A either merely by chance or the fact that his FMS weren’t developed to their full potential in the crucial years. Furthermore his Psychological refractory Period may be quite low. Some people are able to absorb information faster due to faster nerve impulses and greater rate at which the brain can absorb information.
*GIRLS*
Girls showed a larger range of results in each experiment which were all generically low (was this because ours weren’t made up?) Does this suggest that:
- Females generally have a lower reaction?
- Females struggle to absorb multiple piece of information?
- However the average of C suggests that females have better FMS, as this experiment was mainly dependant on these.
Natalie scored lower in A therefore implying her selective attention is lower, this may have been due to her temporal interpretation being incorrect or that her FMS were not fully developed at a younger age. Becky had the highest result suggesting that her selective attention capability is very high and she is able to concentrate on the desired stimuli. In experiment B there was little fluctuation representing that the catchers ability of FMS, reaction time and selective attention is all of an equal level and the small ranges could merely be due to the environment (the strength and direction the ball was thrown or the loudness of the scorers voice could all have made an impact) Experiment C gave almost completely 100% which accentuates that all the participants had equal levels of FMS and therefore good coordination and reaction as this experiment didn’t require much else. Jessica may have scored low in comparism the other catchers because she could either not concentrate, had a low reaction time or has weak FMS. However it could be external factors that are causing peoples low scores. For instance if they were feeling ill, they won’t be able to think and therefore react as efficiently, if they have problems at home then there Psychological refractory Period will have multiple stimuli.
However the reasoning for everyone’s flaws or peaks cannot be determined with a specific reason especially considering such a low amount of trials were completed. If the experiment was repeated a greater number of times and more observation were recorded the reasoning for ones strength and weaknesses could be more justifiable and therefore accurate. For instance if one continually dropped the ball in experiment C it would be clear there FMS were lacking due to insufficient practice during the crucial years.
As emphasised by the graphs it is evident that boys have a much higher rounded regular strength in all the necessary components; selective attention, reaction time and FMS demonstrating little fluctuation. Girls however expressed a much greater range in the in each experiment although consistently showing a particular strength with FMS due to their high percentage in experiment C. However the conclusion that man are more frequent all the areas can not be completely true due to the factors mentioned above. Therefore only with a fairer experiment would it be possible to obtain true trends between genders.
After completing all experiments it is evident that each required and analysed a different component of ones psychological and physical ability. Therefore ones strength and weaknesses determined the results they achieved.
