Results:
The results of our experiment were interesting in that different parts of our subjects’ bodies reacted significantly differently to the dermatome test. Our team noticed that parts of the test subjects’ bodies that had fattier tissue reacted required for the dermatome to be spread out more before dual-point touch recognition was achieved. For example, as this graph shows, the cheek and back of lower leg, parts of the body that contain more fat, required a wider dermatome distanced (on average 8.5 mm) in order for the subjects to distinguish dual-point feeling. Parts of our subjects’ bodies with less fat content, such as the tip of index finger and tip of thumb recognized dual-point touch almost immediately.
Showing posts with label results. Show all posts
Showing posts with label results. Show all posts
Friday, April 15, 2011
Observations: People Holding the Door for Each Other, Results
Results:
The data showed that the frequency of men to hold the door for women was the same as women who held the door for men. Traditional stereotype, especially in the southern United States, holds that men should hold the door open for women, however our data showed that it is just as likely for women to hold the door open for men. It is important to note, however, that in most instances of door holding, the first party to reach the door held it for the person behind them, regardless of sex. Our team noticed a large number of instances of men holding the door for men, however only four instances in which a woman held the door for another woman. Our team did not collect data on whether or not people refused to hold the door for one another, now the frequency of sex of people entering and leaving the library (i.e. how many men/women in total entered or exited).
A B C D E
1 Lab Data
2
3 Condition
4 W/W M/W W/M M/M
5
6 Frequency 4 13 13 18
The data showed that the frequency of men to hold the door for women was the same as women who held the door for men. Traditional stereotype, especially in the southern United States, holds that men should hold the door open for women, however our data showed that it is just as likely for women to hold the door open for men. It is important to note, however, that in most instances of door holding, the first party to reach the door held it for the person behind them, regardless of sex. Our team noticed a large number of instances of men holding the door for men, however only four instances in which a woman held the door for another woman. Our team did not collect data on whether or not people refused to hold the door for one another, now the frequency of sex of people entering and leaving the library (i.e. how many men/women in total entered or exited).
A B C D E
1 Lab Data
2
3 Condition
4 W/W M/W W/M M/M
5
6 Frequency 4 13 13 18
Depth Perception Obstruction, Results
Results:
The results of our experiment were interesting in that different test subjects showed significantly different abilities in distinguishing proper depth perception, despite one eye being obstructed in some cases. The graph below summarizes the findings of this study quite accurately in very clearly stating that test subjects were able to much more accurately perform the depth perception test while using two eyes (binocular vision) than while using just one eye (monocular vision). For the tests where subjects were allowed to use both eyes to determine depth perception, they were able to determine where the vertical bars met to within 0.83 cm on average. On the other hand, when one eye was obstructed, the average distance away from actual that the test subjects were able to determine where the vertical bars met grew to over 1.64 cm on average. This striking fact indicates that binocular vision was much more successful at aiding subjects in determining correct depth perception than was monocular vision.
In performing a statistical analysis of the data, we opted to perform a two-tailed t-test. This test was chosen because it was the most appropriate given the hypothesis that expected binocular vision to be more effective than monocular vision in depth perception testing. The p-value resulting from this test was 0.013. Because our alpha value for this experiment was 0.05, this p-value indicates statistical significance in our findings. In the context of our experiment, this indicates that an unobstructed while determining depth perception, for humans, is more accurate than an obstructed one.
The results of our experiment were interesting in that different test subjects showed significantly different abilities in distinguishing proper depth perception, despite one eye being obstructed in some cases. The graph below summarizes the findings of this study quite accurately in very clearly stating that test subjects were able to much more accurately perform the depth perception test while using two eyes (binocular vision) than while using just one eye (monocular vision). For the tests where subjects were allowed to use both eyes to determine depth perception, they were able to determine where the vertical bars met to within 0.83 cm on average. On the other hand, when one eye was obstructed, the average distance away from actual that the test subjects were able to determine where the vertical bars met grew to over 1.64 cm on average. This striking fact indicates that binocular vision was much more successful at aiding subjects in determining correct depth perception than was monocular vision.
In performing a statistical analysis of the data, we opted to perform a two-tailed t-test. This test was chosen because it was the most appropriate given the hypothesis that expected binocular vision to be more effective than monocular vision in depth perception testing. The p-value resulting from this test was 0.013. Because our alpha value for this experiment was 0.05, this p-value indicates statistical significance in our findings. In the context of our experiment, this indicates that an unobstructed while determining depth perception, for humans, is more accurate than an obstructed one.
Mirror Hand Tracing Experiment, Results
Results:
The data of this experiment seem to have experienced a complementary balance in that one test subject performed the task terribly while another performed it with greater efficiency. The third test subject fell between the two. The data obtained from this experiment are summarized in the following graphs, and they suggest that practice effects definitely played a role in test subjects’ performance. The “Time of Completion” graph displays the difficulty test subjects had initially with navigating the test placed before them. Yet, after these subjects performed 14 tests with the opposite hand, and returned to their non-dominant hand, their performance was greatly improved. This suggests that the 14 dominant-hand tests improved the subjects’ ability to more quickly navigate the non-dominant tests later on.
The errors graph shows similar yet intriguingly different results. It appears that the subjects made many errors in their first 3 attempts at completing the trial with their non-dominant hand. When attempted with their dominant hand, the number of errors committed in their trials revealed an gradual decline of errors. When subjects returned to testing with their non-dominant hand, their testing error frequency began a rise back to previously attained non-dominant hand testing levels. While this result could be a confounding condition of test subject attrition, the data suggest that practice effects played less a role in error reduction than in time reduction.
In performing a statistical analysis of the data, the two-tailed t-test was chosen because its appropriateness, given the hypothesis that practice effects would not be observed with any statistical significance. The p-value for the “Time of Completion” data calculated to 0.2295. This p-value exceeds the alpha value of 0.05. What this means is that hand-to-hand transferable practice effects did not play a statistically significant role in improving test subjects’ abilities to complete the star-tracing task any quicker.
The p-value for the “Errors” data was 0.0007. This p-value undercuts the set alpha value of 0.05, indicating statistical significance in that dominant-hand to non-dominant-hand transferable practice effects were present.
The data of this experiment seem to have experienced a complementary balance in that one test subject performed the task terribly while another performed it with greater efficiency. The third test subject fell between the two. The data obtained from this experiment are summarized in the following graphs, and they suggest that practice effects definitely played a role in test subjects’ performance. The “Time of Completion” graph displays the difficulty test subjects had initially with navigating the test placed before them. Yet, after these subjects performed 14 tests with the opposite hand, and returned to their non-dominant hand, their performance was greatly improved. This suggests that the 14 dominant-hand tests improved the subjects’ ability to more quickly navigate the non-dominant tests later on.
The errors graph shows similar yet intriguingly different results. It appears that the subjects made many errors in their first 3 attempts at completing the trial with their non-dominant hand. When attempted with their dominant hand, the number of errors committed in their trials revealed an gradual decline of errors. When subjects returned to testing with their non-dominant hand, their testing error frequency began a rise back to previously attained non-dominant hand testing levels. While this result could be a confounding condition of test subject attrition, the data suggest that practice effects played less a role in error reduction than in time reduction.
In performing a statistical analysis of the data, the two-tailed t-test was chosen because its appropriateness, given the hypothesis that practice effects would not be observed with any statistical significance. The p-value for the “Time of Completion” data calculated to 0.2295. This p-value exceeds the alpha value of 0.05. What this means is that hand-to-hand transferable practice effects did not play a statistically significant role in improving test subjects’ abilities to complete the star-tracing task any quicker.
The p-value for the “Errors” data was 0.0007. This p-value undercuts the set alpha value of 0.05, indicating statistical significance in that dominant-hand to non-dominant-hand transferable practice effects were present.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)