REACTION TIME DIFFERENCES BEFORE AND AFTER ANAEROBIC RESPIRATION BETWEEN ATHLETES AND NON-ATHLETES

Will Fraker and Maile Mattingely

Department of Biological Science

SaddlebackCollege

Mission Viejo, CA92692

Sensory reaction is influenced by many variables including, health, surrounding stimulus and other visual and auditory inputs. In this study researchers looked at the differences in reaction times between athletes and non athletes. The athletes and non-athletes groups were tested in the same way and in the same controlled setting; averages from each test were then calculated.The hypothesis was that the reaction times would exhibit a more significant increase after aerobic exercise in the athletes group, rather than those in the non-athletic group. This hypothesis was confirmed when an ANOVA analysis was run on the two groups.It showed a significant difference between both groups and their reaction times, with P-value’sat 1.84E-05, 9.27E-05, and 4.16E-05 respectively.(This showed that reaction times increase after a mild amount for physical exertion) different font

Introduction

Reaction time differences between athletes and people who get less than 1 hour of physical exercise a week was being tested. The goal was to observe change, if any, in the reaction time of athletes and people who do not exercise, before any physical exertion, after a jog, and after a sprint. This came to the researchers’ attention when and turn it into an appropriate project. According to Welford in a 1980 study, athletes had a more significant reaction time than those who did not exercise. The study was done testing simple reaction times as was the hypothesis the investigators were testing with their experiment. In a simple reaction times study, it was determined that there was one stimulus and one response (Buchsbaum and Callaway 2008). The stimulus that was used was a visual response to the dropping of a reaction time ruler which either investigator conducted. The subjects attempted to catch the ruler as it fell as swiftly as possible. Welfordstated that the reaction time was fastest with an intermediate level of arousal, and deteriorates when the subject was either too relaxed or too tense. It was for this reason that the investigators believed that the reaction times will exhibit a more significant result after aerobic exercise. Like-wise, individuals who do not work-out would be far too tense to show a significant difference in reaction time comparatively.

Materials and Methods

A reaction time study was done using sixteen college students between the ages of nineteen and twenty-seven over the course of 4 weeks from October 14 and(through)November 12. We assigned two groups of students, those who workout and those who do not. The first contained 8 students who worked out on a regular basis of at least 2-3 times a week; the latter group consisted of 8 students who exerted themselves less than one hour a week. Both groups participated in the same process, and where(were)tested the same way. Both groups would take a set of reaction tests using a manufactured reaction time ruler. The ruler was held above eye level and out of sight of the individual as to gain a true test of their reaction timing. Each student was asked to take ten initial reaction tests prior to any physical exertion, after which there(they) were asked to lightly jog a quarter mile. Upon returning from that quarter mile they immediately took a second round of reaction tests. After each reaction measurement was taken, they then were asked to sprint another quarter mile. The data was taken on the saddleback college(SaddlebackCollege)campus track;all were taken in the late afternoon in about the same weather conditions. No outside factors played a role in the skew of our testing.(An ANOVA test was run on the workout and non-workout groups and was also run on the data collected within the two groups.(rephrase)There was a difference in the non-workout group with a p-value <1.629E-05, but in our workout group no difference was found with a p-value >.425. Then within the two groups there was a difference found in the initial, after jog, and after sprint reaction times; with the initial p-value9.27E-05, after jog p-value1.84E-05, and the after sprint p-value4.16E-05.) Report in the Results section.

Results

The average value for the initial reaction time for athletes was 104.875 ±17.06127 msec (±SEM,N=8). The average for the same group after jogging was 69.625±14.64696 msec (±SEM,N=8). The average for the same group after sprinting was 89.875±17.48207 msec (±SEM,N=8). The average value for the initial reaction time for non-athletes was 211.25±9.808433 msec (±SEM,N=8). The average for the same group after jogging was 169.625±5.882594 msec (±SEM,N=8). The average for the same group after sprinting was 210.75±10.96382 msec (±SEM,N=8). When the groups are compared by their initial tests a significant difference was shown(p = 9.27 x 10-05). When compared by their jogging results a significant difference was shown( p = 1.84 x 10-05). When compared by their sprinting results a significant difference was shown ( p = 4.16 x 10-05).

(Too much space at least center graph and put spacing before and after the graph)

Figure 1.Average results for the intial, after jog and after sprint(p = .425).

Figure 2. These individuals who get less than an hour of physical exertion a week did show a significant change in reaction times with a (p = 1.629 x 10-05).

Figure 3. Average initial results for both groups (p = 9.27 x 10-05)

Figure 4. Average results after jogging (p = 1.84 x 10-05)

Figure 5.Average results after sprinting (p = 4.16 x 10-05)

Discussion

Reaction time is the elapsed time between the presentation of a sensory stimulus and the subsequent behavioral response. This behavioral response was the subject of our study and the basis for our hypothesis. Reaction times are subject to direct and indirect stimuli (Welford, 2000). With these stimuli under control, we were able to test the effect of different levels of intensity of respiration on reaction time. Lactate production can also have a significant effect on reaction time (Kashihara, 2005). Our stated hypothesis was that increased aerobic respiration, through jogging, would increase the subject’s reaction time and significantly differ from his initial reaction time test.Along with this,thesecondary hypothesis was that individuals who play a sport and orparticipatedin physical activity would also have a better reaction time than those individuals that are not as physically fit. After obtaining the results between the two groups, both initial and secondary hypothesis were confirmed. Individuals in the athletic group showed a quicker reaction time than those in the non-athletic group. Furthermore, individuals within each group showed increased differences after their first quarter mile run. All participating subjects showed an increase thus supporting the hypothesis. Non-athletes also showed a significant difference in their reaction times after their first test. Following the first test,individuals in both groups were asked to sprint the same distance and the resultsthat followed showed a decrease in their reaction times, seemingly close to their initial times taken. The researchers believe the reasons for these results are because after brief aerobic respiration the body produces endorphins that allow for heightened sensory states. Increased blood flow to the extremities, dilated pupils, and the brains raised awareness are all factors when testing reaction time. The results gathered by the researchers assimilate bodily reactions. Contrary to the latter, after a sustained amount of intense physical activity the body goes into anaerobic respiration, in where the body does not have enough oxygen to allow pyruvate to enter the mitochondria. When this happens lactate is produced and can have a negative effect on the body including painful muscle contraction. This fact correlates well with the results recorded by the researchers. Future experiments should test the time it would take for the body, during intense physical activity, turn lactate production into useful energy production, this process is commonly referred to as a runners high. I believe that these results would similarly relate to our results gathered after jogging.

Figure 6. This shows how the researchers conducted this experiment, minus the chair.

Acknowledgements
We would like to give a special thanks to all of those who were involved in our project; the Saddleback Biology department for providing the reaction ruler, and those of our friends and colleagues who were gracious enough to be our subjects.

(No literature cited)

Review Form

Department of Biological Sciences

SaddlebackCollege, Mission Viejo, CA92692

Author (s): Will Fraker and Maile Mattingely

Title: REACTION TIME DIFFERENCES BEFORE AND AFTER ANAEROBIC RESPIRATION BETWEEN ATHLETES AND NON-ATHLETES

Summary

Summarize the paper succinctly and dispassionately. Do not criticize here, just show that you understood the paper.

The researchers did a study on anaerobic respiration of athletes and non-athletes. They were tested ten times prior to their first quarter run. After that they were tested and they ran again for another quarter mile. Their test supported their hypothesis of where athletes had a larger significant difference than the non-athletes.

General Comments

Generally explain the paper’s strengths and weaknesses and whether they are serious, or important to our current state of knowledge.

Paper was good overall but little grammatical errors here and there. Researchers did not keep a constant font or size throughout the paper

Technical Criticism

Review technical issues, organization and clarity. Provide a table of typographical errors, grammatical errors, and minor textual problems. It's not the reviewer's job to copy Edit the paper, mark the manuscript.

This paper was a final versionX This paper was a rough draft