Conclusion:
The data do not support the original hypothesis. The prediction that energy drinks decrease reaction time was based on research that indicates increased heart rate produces adrenaline which prepares the body for fight or flight response and a faster response to stimuli. An assumption was made that consuming a 5-Hour Energy would increase subjects’ heart rates. This was not the case. Graph 1 shows that drinking a 5-Hour Energy results in almost no change in the average reaction times of the test subjects. Table 1 shows that there was almost no change in the subjects’ average heart rates after taking the energy drink. This could explain why the data contradict the hypothesis. Another contradiction can be seen in the average reaction times after running. They dramatically increased from resting reaction times. Even though average heart rates increased significantly, reaction times increased as well. It is possible that even though the higher blood pressure increased oxygen supply in the blood, rather than increasing oxygen level in the brain, oxygen was most likely used to decompose lactic acid build up from running.
There could be a few alternate explanations based on numerous events that hindered the data collection. Firstly, some participants proceeded with the study simultaneously thus making the data collected more variable. The participants timed themselves for five minutes after they drank a full 5-Hour Energy. sometimes participants drank the five hour energy at the same time and then had to wait thirty seconds for another to complete the test. Thus, they metabolized the energy drink for more than 5 minutes. Wiith multiple participants doing the experiment it at one time, some would have to wait before taking their heart rates or playing the game, resulting in participants’ heart rates slowing. This could be corrected by having participants proceed with the study one at a time.
In addition to the participants’ simultaneous procession, the 5-Hour Energy affected participants differently, some more energized than others. Some participants remained relatively relaxed, while others became noticeably more energized, exhibit symptoms of a sugar rush or caffeine buzz. A solution would be to select participants with roughly similar energy supplement intake to reduce differences in the effect of 5-Hour Energy.
Additionally, some participants misclicked, altering their score. The faster a participant attempted to complete the test, the more likely they were to misclick. Based on a persons ability to use a mouse, they misclicked less, and therefore operated faster. The mouse was also unreliable. when a participant clicked, the mouse would not always register it. This may have also been related to the state of the laptop. Therefore, the participant could end up rapidly clicking a red square to complete the game as quickly as possible, but then misclick because the participant did not know whether the click had been registered by the mouse. This could be fixed in the future by using better hardware in future experiments or disregard trials in which participants misclick.
The data do not support the original hypothesis. The prediction that energy drinks decrease reaction time was based on research that indicates increased heart rate produces adrenaline which prepares the body for fight or flight response and a faster response to stimuli. An assumption was made that consuming a 5-Hour Energy would increase subjects’ heart rates. This was not the case. Graph 1 shows that drinking a 5-Hour Energy results in almost no change in the average reaction times of the test subjects. Table 1 shows that there was almost no change in the subjects’ average heart rates after taking the energy drink. This could explain why the data contradict the hypothesis. Another contradiction can be seen in the average reaction times after running. They dramatically increased from resting reaction times. Even though average heart rates increased significantly, reaction times increased as well. It is possible that even though the higher blood pressure increased oxygen supply in the blood, rather than increasing oxygen level in the brain, oxygen was most likely used to decompose lactic acid build up from running.
There could be a few alternate explanations based on numerous events that hindered the data collection. Firstly, some participants proceeded with the study simultaneously thus making the data collected more variable. The participants timed themselves for five minutes after they drank a full 5-Hour Energy. sometimes participants drank the five hour energy at the same time and then had to wait thirty seconds for another to complete the test. Thus, they metabolized the energy drink for more than 5 minutes. Wiith multiple participants doing the experiment it at one time, some would have to wait before taking their heart rates or playing the game, resulting in participants’ heart rates slowing. This could be corrected by having participants proceed with the study one at a time.
In addition to the participants’ simultaneous procession, the 5-Hour Energy affected participants differently, some more energized than others. Some participants remained relatively relaxed, while others became noticeably more energized, exhibit symptoms of a sugar rush or caffeine buzz. A solution would be to select participants with roughly similar energy supplement intake to reduce differences in the effect of 5-Hour Energy.
Additionally, some participants misclicked, altering their score. The faster a participant attempted to complete the test, the more likely they were to misclick. Based on a persons ability to use a mouse, they misclicked less, and therefore operated faster. The mouse was also unreliable. when a participant clicked, the mouse would not always register it. This may have also been related to the state of the laptop. Therefore, the participant could end up rapidly clicking a red square to complete the game as quickly as possible, but then misclick because the participant did not know whether the click had been registered by the mouse. This could be fixed in the future by using better hardware in future experiments or disregard trials in which participants misclick.