Firstly we recorded our test buddy’s reaction times when they had a resting heart rate. So we asked them to measure their heart rate over a period of 15 seconds and the multiply it by 4 to get their resting heart rate. We held the top of the ruler between thumb and forefinger (which are about an inch apart). The ruler is then released and the test buddy’s aim is to catch the ruler as quickly as possible. This test was repeated three times.
Our test buddy was then asked to complete as many star jumps as they could in a minute. Again, heart rate was measured, this time it was faster. The reaction test was repeated again, three times.
Below are the results:
Analysis.
This graph shows the relation of our reaction time when we had a resting heart rate and an active heart rate. The black bars indicate that the reaction times were worse when we had a resting heart rate. The white bars indicate that the reaction times were better when we had a resting heart rate. I predicted that the higher your heart rate, the more alert you are going to be therefore resulting in quicker reaction times. 9 out of 12 (3/4) of my results follow my hypothesis. Trial no.2 appears to have better their reaction time the most. Their results back my data greatly.
Differences in heart rate
The average resting heart rate is 60-80 BPM; the data that I’ve collected match this figure. Heart rate is effected dependant on various different factors including age, weight and fitness. From my data, there are two large outliers; number 9 and number 12.
Trends
Looking at my data, most of the reaction times decreased as heart rate increased. As explained before, I think this is due to the fact that there is more blood being pumped around the body making you more aware, and also more adrenaline.
Maximum heart rate for those who took part in the experiment would be, 205-206 (220-age, which is 14 or 15). Our target heart rate is 60-80% of our maximum, which would be from 113bpm-163bpm (205*.6 or .8). All trials other than number 7 and number 9 are working between their target heart rates. Number 7 and 9 are working at over 80%.
Evaluation.
Safety
When carrying out our experiment, there weren’t many safety aspects to consider. However, we asked out test buddies to carry out the star jumps in a corner away from others in the class.
Limitations
One limitation of the experiment was the type of exercise we were able to carry out, which was basic star jumps; no of those tested will have actually reached their maximum heart rate. The only place we had to carry out the experiment was the classroom; we only had three lessons also to do this. We also lacked equipment, such as reaction rulers.
Technique
Our technique was the best we could do. The experiment we did isn’t accurate enough to determine how heart rate affects reaction times. If we’d have had more time I think we could have planned a much better experiment but due to the lack of time and equipment.
How I would improve the data
If I had the time, I would have carried out the same experiment when the test buddy’s heart rate was at their resting again to see if my results were reliable. I would also have dropped the ruler 20+ times to make a better average. Doing a different type of exercise such as a game of football or netball or a run of some kind, which would have got a figure closer to the maximum heart rate. I would too use a reaction ruler to get actual readings. I could also try different reaction tests; exercise may improve some reaction times...such as touch, sight or hearing and maybe not others such as sound or smell.
Outliers
The figures highlighted in red are those which seem to be outliers. Hannah’s heart rate seems to be seriously off. The experiment was carried out just as everyone else. Possibly she may have been doing some kind of activity before carrying out our experiment. I have also highlighted Hannah’s results as they are not consistent. Autumns result isn’t too consistent either. Doing more catches would have been an advantage as I would have been able to see a much clearer improvement and consistent results.
Fair Test?
Taking the limitation into consideration, I think the test was as fair as we could have made it. The exercise and heart rate was timed on the same watch. The same metal 30cm ruler was dropped. The time between when the exercise was done, heart rate measured and ruler dropped may not have been the same. Also to make it extremely fair, we should have aimed to get everyone’s heart rate to the same percentage of their resting. Some people may have been exercising and may not been at their actual resting heart rate. Also, the heart rates should have been to the same or similar percentage of their maximum potential.
Reliability
I think that my experiment was reliable because, I was the one who was running the experiment. The data may not be accurate or true; however if I repeated this experiment, I would expect to find similar results.
Can I rely on my data to back my conclusion?
I don’t think that my data could be use to prove anything major. We couldn’t actually measure the reaction times. The data I have collected doesn’t show anything scientific, for example, the reaction times collected are just were just the measurement on the ruler (in cm). Also I don’t think that there were enough trials or enough test buddies either. Also, with only 3 trials to get an average reaction time won’t really prove anything. On normal online reaction tests, there normally are about 5 trials. However, I can say that there is some kind of correlation between the two.