Normal Distribution and Standard Deviation

Suppose another experiment had participants say the word “now” as soon as they detected the green circle, and that the response times were between 100 and 200 milliseconds. What would you conclude about the cognitive tasks involved in these two versions of simple detection?

Previous studies produced results that show that touch is the fastest, then auditory and finally visual with the averagely slowest reaction time. This data suggests that visual stimuli cause the fastest reaction, followed by auditory, and finally touch. The average in time for visual stimuli was 0.170 seconds. Previous results have evidenced that visual stimulus is the slowest, with an average time of 0.25 seconds. This experiment contradicts these results. The second fastest reaction time was caused by an auditory stimulus. This produced an average reading of 0.176 seconds. This is similar to previous results. However, there is a small discrepancy of 0.006 seconds between the previous results and the results of this test. Finally, touch stimulus was the slowest in this experiment. This contradicts previous results. In other tests the touch stimulus was the fastest at 0.15 seconds, whereas in this experiment it was the slowest: 0.193 seconds. When gravity pulled the rulers to the mass of the earth, it took time for the subject to recognise the movement and to react to it. These results contradict previous experiments. The brain signals were processed on average more slowly than in previous experiments. However, this experiment could have been unfair and biased. When the auditory and touch tests were carried out, there was most likely a small amount of time between the call or touch and the ruler being dropped. Also, test subjects were changed throughout the experiment. This would have caused a discrepancy in the results, because different subjects may have had different personal reaction times due to several factors. Also, the age could have had an effect. In this experiment we used 13-year-old test subjects. It is unknown of the age of the previous experiments. This experiment could have been improved by conducting more tests over a range of people to calculate a more global and

The key terms and definitions that I will be using are: statistics, mean, median, mode, standard deviation, range, and population standard deviation. Statistics is the science of collecting, organizing, analyzing, and interpreting data in order to make decisions. The mean of a data set is the sum of the data entries divided by the number of entries. The median of a data set is the value that lies in the middle of the data when the data set is ordered. The mode of a data set is the data entry that occurs with the greatest frequency. Standard deviation is a quantity calculated to indicate the extent of deviation for a group as a whole. The range of a data set is the difference between the maximum and minimum data entries in the set. The population standard deviation of a population data set of N entries is the square root of the population variance (Larson & Farber, 2014).

Their hypothesis that stated athletes will have a shorter reaction time when shown an image of the ball they train with was supported in this study. The study included twenty-four participants; fourteen participants played either basketball or soccer and the other ten did not. The participants were shown images and tested their reaction time. They discovered that athletes have a stimulus response binding, which triggers a faster response even when the stimulus is seen in a different context. I asked what they would do different in the experiment, and they stated that they would include more participants. Cody stated that next year he would like to expand the experiment by exploring the exact pathways of the athlete’s vs non-athletes brain pathways for the reaction time with an EEG. I learned that certain images can help shorter one’s reaction time when playing sports. This is a topic that has never crossed my mind, but I found it to be very interesting. It made me curious how Cody Isabel will expand this study next year with the assistance of a

The aim of this experiment was to investigate the effect of conflicting stimuli on a response task (Stroop effect), the results supported that it takes approximately double the time for the participants to perform condition 2 in comparison to condition 1 which indicates that there is a distinction between controlled and automatic processing in the brain. Thus the results support the Stroop experiment. In the Stroop experiment it withstood the idea that we are able to read words faster than naming colors. In relation to this experiment in particular; participants were able to read the words faster than distinguishing the font/style of the text. This is because the mind chooses to receive specific presented stimuli before any other aspects

The aim of this experiment is to determine whether or not people can attend to more than one object at a time.

It is hypothesised that (1) English participants will be more accurate in detecting foreground changes whereas Chinese participants will be more accurate in detecting background changes and that (2) English participants will have higher reaction times to foreground changes whereas Chinese participants will have higher reaction times to background changes. The null hypothesis is that there will be no significant difference between Chinese and English participants in accuracy or reaction times, any difference will be due to

The purpose of this paper is to describe and present the replication of The Stroop effect experiment and its effects on Reaction Time (RT). Students (N-49) were given The Numbered Stroop Experiment to measure both the congruent condition and incongruent condition after completing a demographic survey. Two trials are given: both in verbal counting and out loud number recall. RT was measured with stopwatch and was distinctively slower between the two trials. We predicted that reaction time will vary from each subject, moreover RT will be slower when compared to the congruent condition. In our findings indeed, RT was significantly longer, which is consistent with the research of The Stroop Effect (Windes,

Our results agreed with our alternative hypothesis that increasing the number response alternatives would increase choice reaction time. Our data did not show a linear relationship between the number of response alternatives and choice reaction time. After three response alternatives, the choice reaction time begins to plateau. Our results do agree with Hick’s Law, which states that reaction time is a function of the number of response alternatives. Hick’s law tells us that the relationship between choice reaction time and logarithm of the number of response alternatives was linear. Since our study only went up to four response alternatives, we are not able to see if our results would have shown the same growth as the response alternatives

The error bars shown on the graph represent the standard deviation and shows how far apart the spread of data is. This is to show us how precise the data is. By looking at the table and graph it shows that there is 12.5% of data in the 10˚C range, 11.5% data in the 20˚C range, 11.2% data in the 30˚C range, 13.1% data in the 40˚C range and 9.3% data in the 50˚C range. The R2 value shows how far apart the data is to the trendline and also shows us how accurate the data is.

Reaction time, like most subjects related to the brain, has an interesting history. At first, most scientists believed that mental processes in the human brain were too fast to be measured. However, a Dutch Physiologist named F.C. Donders started to think, about whether reaction time could be measured in 1965. Donder’s thoughts were backed up by research done by a English scientist and inventor Charles Wheatstone. In 1840, Wheatstone conducted an experiment where a patient’s foot was shocked. The test subject had to press a button using the hand that was on the same side as the foot that was shocked. Some patients knew which foot would be shocked and others did not know. There was a one-fifteenth second delay between the two. The was the first record of the mind being measured (Shannon, 2012).

Histogram is approximately bell shaped and symmetric and agrees with the results predicted by the Central Limit Theorem which says that whatever the population shape, the sampling distribution is approximately normal

Subject 1’s mean reaction time for the auditory-to-foot cue was 285 ms which was faster than their visual-to-foot reaction time at 418 ms (Table 1). For subject 2, their mean reaction time to the auditory-to-foot was 281 ms, which was also much faster than their 416 ms visual-to-foot reaction time (Table 1). Subject 3 had a mean reaction time of 308 ms for the auditory-to-foot cue, which was much faster than their mean reaction time of 469 ms for the visual-to-foot cue (Table 1). Lastly, subject 4’s reaction time for the auditory-to-foot cue was 311 ms, which was faster than their visual-to-foot response at 398 ms (Table 1). For all subjects of the class, the trend was that the auditory-to-foot reaction time was faster than the visual-to-foot reaction time.

This data is depicted in a histogram Figure C2. The results show that participants between groups showed no difference in average reaction time scores.

Nerve cells carry information around the animal body using impulses. Nerve cells (neurons) have receptors that are sensitive to changes such as temperature, light and pressure. A small stimulus can be picked up by the neuron which is then transmitted to the central nervous system by the sensory neurone. The impulse is passed along relay neurons and back to a motor neurone that stimulate the movement of the muscle.