Investigating the Effect of Breakfast on Reaction Time - Lab Report Example

Investigating the Effect of Breakfast on Reaction Time Schools Number and of (e.g., December 6, 2014) Investigating the Effect of Breakfast on Reaction Time Abstract Studies have shown that breakfast affects cognitive performance. Breakfast consumption is associated with various health benefits but research on the effect of breakfast on reaction time is still inconclusive because of contrasting research outcomes. The present study investigated whether breakfast has any effect on reaction time with the null hypothesis being that having breakfast does not have any effect on reaction time. Two groups were tested for reaction time in a choice reaction task. The first group had breakfast prior to testing while the second group did not. A total of 160 participants, 81 females and 79 males between 17 to 58 years of age participated. Each subject asked to press a left arrow key on a computer keyboard when red color appeared on the screen and the right arrow key when blue color appeared. Reaction time was recorded. The mean reaction time of the breakfast group was found to be faster than that of the non-breakfast group. The difference was found to be statistically significant and null hypothesis was rejected. The influence of age, gender and composition of the breakfast diet on reaction time has however not been explored in this research. This aspect will have to be further explored in future studies. Introduction This research was aimed at investigating whether consuming breakfast has any effect on reaction time of subjects. Research such as that by Veasy et al. (2013) has suggested that breakfast affects cognitive performance. In their study, Veasy et al. found that skipping breakfast improved Four Choice Reaction Time performance. On the contrary, Tuttle, Wilson and Daum (1949) showed that subjects who skipped breakfast had slower reaction times. In their experiment, five out of six females had a significant increase in choice reaction time in a no-breakfast condition. Although breakfast consumption is associated with several health benefits, research is still inconclusive on the effect of breakfast on reaction time (Smith, 2012). This is because studies have shown contrary results and suffer from limitations such as small sample size, use of subjective assessments and inconsistent findings (Smith, 2012). Evidence suggests that skipping breakfast affects short term memory, problem solving, episodic memory and attention in children (Mahoney et al., 2005). In children who consume breakfast, improvements are seen in logical reasoning, arithmetic, vigilance attention and problem solving (Mahoney et al., 2005). Wesnes, Pincock and Scholey (2012) in their internet based study on 1386 children aged between 6 and 16 years showed that breakfast does play a positive role in the maintenance of cognitive function by improving reaction time, memory and attention. However, as stated earlier, not all studies state that breakfast has positive effect on cognitive function (Mahoney et al., 2005). This study was therefore conducted to investigate whether breakfast has any effect on cognitive function, more specifically, on reaction times. Reaction time tasks are based on simple motor responses that depend on decision-making, which in turn need different processing times because of their dependence on other factors such as type or intensity of the stimulus, age, level of arousal or distraction, gender, personality type and even health status (Bunce, MacDonald and Hultsch, 2004). The research question for the present research is – Does having breakfast in the morning affect reaction time? The hypothesis assumed for this investigation is that the individuals who have breakfast are more attentive and have better focus than those who do not have any breakfast. The null hypothesis is that having breakfast does not have any effect on reaction time. H1 = Having breakfast in the morning effects reaction time. H0 = Having breakfast in the morning has no effect on reaction time. For the research, two groups were tested for choice reaction time. The first group was advised to eat breakfast prior to testing while the second group was advised not to have any breakfast prior to testing. The methodology and results are further discussed. Method For this experiment, 160 participants at XYZ University were recruited. The participants were 81 females and 79 males between 17 to 58 years of age. They were not given any monetary incentives for participation in the experiment. Circulars were distributed at the university inviting voluntary participation. The circular had details of the tasks they will need to carry out and the subject being investigated. A total of 187 applicants had turned up of which only 160 arrived at the experiment venue. Participants were asked to come to the venue without breakfast. The 160 participants involved in the experiment were made to sign a consent form. They were then randomly divided into two groups. One group was given a 1 hour interval for breakfast while the other was asked not to have breakfast. Each subject was then made to sit in front of a computer with different colors appearing on the monitor screen. He/she was asked to press a left arrow key when red color appeared and the right arrow key when blue color appeared. Reaction time was recorded using a software installed in the system. The experiment presented visual stimuli, i.e. red and blue color, and the participants were asked to make a key press response (by pressing left and right arrow keys) after seeing the target stimuli. The experiment used a one-way experimental design with a choice reaction time task in which participants respond differentially to two stimuli by pressing one key for event A (red color) and a separate key for event B (blue color). The dependant variable in the experiment is the time from the onset of the stimuli to the key-press reaction (measured to nearest millisecond). In addition, the responses were also scored on correctness and reaction times for the right answers were only considered. A repeated-measures ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) was performed using the Ms Excel ToolPak. Results are presented in table 1 and 2. The participants were debriefed after the experiment with explanations as to the significance of their contribution to the research and the value of the results. This experiment involved minimal risk to participants and confidentiality of the participants’ data was maintained by asking them to remain anonymous. No personal details except age and gender were recorded and each participant was assigned a user ID to avoid the use of names and personal identifiers. A significant limitation of this study is its small sample size and the inability to account for variables such as age and gender. The only variable considered here is the breakfast status (Breakfast/no breakfast). Age and gender were not included in the analysis although these do have significant impact on reaction times (Fozard et al., 1994; Rudolph and Hammen, 1999). Table 1 has data for two groups, the breakfast group and the no-breakfast group. Each group has 80 subjects. The average reaction time across trials for detection of a block of color for each subject is given. Results The mean reaction time for the group with breakfast was found to be 0.43285 milliseconds with a standard deviation of 0.132542. In case of the group without breakfast, the mean reaction time was found to be 0.68945 with a standard deviation of 0.83843. Therefore, the mean reaction time of the breakfast group is found to be lesser than that of the non-breakfast group. This implies that the reaction time of the breakfast group is faster than that of the non-breakfast group. The average age of the breakfast group was 26 years, ranging from a minimum of 17 years to a maximum of 58 years. The average age of the non-breakfast group was 32 years, ranging between 17 to 55 years. Therefore, the average age of the breakfast group is lesser than the non-breakfast group and this could also have affected the reaction time, as reaction time is faster in youth (Rudolph and Hammen, 1999). ANOVA test was performed on the data to validate its statistical significance. The test yielded an F value of 7.219, a p value of 0.0079 and an Fcrit value of 3.900. Since the F value is higher than Fcrit value, the null-hypothesis is rejected. This implies that the difference in mean value of the two groups is statistically significant and that having breakfast does affect the reaction time. The hypothesis H1 is thus accepted. It is concluded from these results that having breakfast affects reaction time. The reaction time for choice based task is found to be higher in those who do not have breakfast. Therefore, subjects who did not have breakfast were slower in reacting. The influence of age and gender on reaction time in breakfast and non-breakfast status has however not been tested in this experiment. Discussion This experiment showed that having breakfast influences the reaction time in choice based tasks. It is seen that the reaction time increases in individuals who do not have breakfast. This finding is in contrast with that of Veasy et al. (2013) who found that skipping breakfast actually reduced Four Choice Reaction Time performance. However, it should be noted here that their research also investigated exercise as another variable, which must have had an influence on the reaction time. On the other hand, various other researches such as those by Tuttle, Wilson and Daum (1949) did show that breakfast improved reaction times. However, their study had a small sample size. The present study however has a larger sample size, which is its strength. This study does have certain limitations. Firstly, the effect of other variables such as age and gender has not been taken into account in the present study although research suggests that these do influence cognitive function and reaction. Furthermore, this study does not explore in depth the constituents of the breakfast. Studies have shown that meals influence neurotransmitter synthesis in the brain, which could further influence the reaction time (Mahoney et al., 2005). For instance, a meal rich in carbohydrates would increase the levels of tryptophan in brain, resulting in an increase in serotonin synthesis. When protein rich meals are consumed, there is an increase in the levels of tyrosine that further leads to an increase in synthesis of dopamine and norepinephrine. Both tyrosine and tryptophan influence alertness and therefore affect cognitive performance (Mahoney et al., 2005). This aspect will have to be further explored in future studies. Future study on the role of breakfast in reaction time improvement will have to take into account the age and gender of participants and also the composition of the diets they had for breakfast. References Bunce, D., MacDonald, S. W. S., & Hultsch, D. F. (2004). Inconsistency in serial choice decision and motor reaction times dissociate in younger and older adults. Brain & Cognition, 56, pp. 320-327. Fozard, J. L., Vercryssen, M., Reynolds, S. L., Hancock, P. A., & Quilter, R. E. (1994). Age Differences and Changes in Reaction Time: The Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. Journal of Gerontology, 49(4), pp. 179-189. Mahoney, C. R., Taylor, H. A., Kanarek, R. B., & Samuel, P. (2005). Effect of breakfast composition on cognitive processes in elementary school children. Physiology & Behavior, 85(5), pp. 635-45. Rudolph, K. D., & Hammen, C. (1999). Age and Gender as Determinants of Stress Exposure, Generation, and Reactions in Youngsters: A Transactional Perspective. Child Development, 70(3), 660–677. Smith, A. P. (2012). Breakfast and Adult’s and Children’s Behavior. In R.B.Kanarek & H.R. Lieberman (Eds.), Diet, Brain, Behavior: Practical implications. New York: Taylor & Francis. Wesnes, K. A., Pincock, C., & Scholey, A. (2012). Breakfast is associated with enhanced cognitive function in schoolchildren. An internet based study. Appetite, 59(3), pp. 646–649. Appendix with IRB Form Table 1: Breakfast Group No Breakfast Group Gender Age Time In Experiment Choice Reaction Time Gender Age Time In Experiment Choice Reaction Time M 20 313.73 0.331 F 33 528.17 0.68 M 19 160.13 0.265 M 43 71.13 0.586 M 27 449.84 0.292 M 25 396.3 0.416 F 19 225.62 0.442 F 26 440.31 0.295 M 19 124.02 0.295 F 25 418.26 0.247 F 17 1052.4 0.508 F 27 374.3 0.38 F 26 1053.5 0.29 M 31 570.4 0.619 F 18 403.72 0.282 M 41 764.9 0.378 M 20 55.787 0.325 F 55 101.06 0.472 F 25 398.08 0.451 M 31 423.53 0.493 F 17 421 0.372 F 37 97.995 0.475 F 19 400.94 0.314 M 23 362.13 0.406 F 25 65.518 0.387 M 56 399.51 0.429 M 20 410.5 0.351 F 17 554.11 0.413 M 18 50.014 0.314 M 37 442.37 0.347 M 21 967.9 0.389 F 17 493.34 0.325 F 27 1009.8 0.34 F 55 128.55 0.36 M 22 436.63 0.366 M 23 443.37 0.581 M 58 109.57 0.656 M 49 101.31 0.418 M 20 302.03 0.389 M 17 63.862 0.427 M 30 205.92 0.463 M 50 101.92 0.915 M 17 438.23 0.375 F 17 466.59 0.473 F 25 64.162 0.346 M 31 572.5 0.489 M 44 951.13 0.408 M 21 361.15 0.587 F 23 131.52 0.368 F 24 184.78 0.458 M 18 54.522 0.375 F 20 447.5 0.349 F 21 349.12 0.359 F 21 451.67 0.518 M 22 93.294 0.362 M 54 392.04 0.467 M 27 328.23 0.396 F 31 243.14 0.807 F 20 345.54 0.387 M 48 339.81 0.53 F 17 364.27 0.532 M 26 379.37 0.504 M 44 389.09 0.479 F 21 277.09 0.476 M 17 387.26 0.351 M 43 319.03 0.485 F 19 469.16 0.34 M 54 77.673 0.537 M 27 554.61 0.824 F 20 363 0.478 M 30 85.602 0.346 F 25 125.76 0.467 F 23 103.83 0.876 F 17 458.07 0.369 F 53 80.301 0.393 F 18 568.23 0.385 M 27 302.34 0.412 F 35 523.02 0.547 F 33 96.402 0.697 M 39 427.23 0.533 F 34 380.1 0.434 M 44 315.16 0.545 M 17 77.953 0.377 F 45 137.35 0.712 M 18 55.438 0.361 M 34 146.06 0.613 F 30 109.81 0.421 F 41 104.47 0.421 F 40 339.86 0.371 F 30 646.82 0.479 F 19 349.3 0.375 M 45 360.73 0.551 M 28 935.1 0.408 M 20 87.232 0.906 F 21 598.29 0.341 M 30 301.95 0.515 M 23 76.886 0.436 M 32 452.92 1.261 M 32 90.465 0.541 F 32 407.49 0.696 M 20 393.03 0.443 M 37 253.31 0.564 M 20 310.9 0.513 F 50 135.55 7.234 F 41 418.55 0.653 M 37 1145.7 0.532 M 34 101.41 0.496 M 20 494.54 0.481 M 17 329.55 0.428 M 23 435.46 0.837 M 24 423.04 0.367 M 19 50.095 0.485 F 28 307.19 0.489 F 34 575.44 0.509 F 46 70.954 0.544 F 37 83.701 0.47 M 36 379.34 0.398 M 23 197.17 0.552 M 18 399.84 0.405 M 46 90.933 1.046 M 40 324.75 0.509 F 19 377.96 0.483 F 20 657.39 0.499 F 43 371.57 0.537 F 22 798.71 0.952 F 45 127.49 0.459 F 31 140.59 0.793 F 31 471.95 0.533 M 22 440.83 0.457 F 26 412.47 0.341 F 20 351.88 0.372 F 49 91.29 3.334 M 24 402.59 0.38 F 43 230.58 0.628 M 24 297.33 0.379 F 39 67.835 0.515 F 20 386.39 0.548 M 38 88.722 0.413 F 23 89.676 0.349 M 35 94.281 0.77 F 18 365.55 0.335 M 25 72.887 0.695 F 41 112.04 0.442 F 20 328.54 0.423 M 32 107.7 0.376 F 24 505.51 0.259 M 17 414.57 0.306 F 39 109.26 1.798 F 18 328.25 0.374 F 36 75.004 0.766 F 53 66.504 0.703 M 25 165 1.548 M 19 359.98 0.382 F 21 373.9 0.446 F 39 496.77 0.382 F 43 445.29 1.028 M 17 310 0.389 F 36 353.62 1.165 F 42 475.71 0.452 F 30 173.78 0.485 Mean 0.43285 Mean 0.68945 SD 0.132542 SD 0.83843 Table 2 Anova: Single Factor SUMMARY Groups Count Sum Average Variance Column 1 80 34.628 0.43285 0.01779 Column 2 80 55.156 0.68945 0.711864 ANOVA Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit Between Groups 2.633742 1 2.633742 7.21916 0.007985 3.900989 Within Groups 57.64262 158 0.364827 Total 60.27636 159         Review Board Form You will use this form to get permission from the Review Board to conduct your study. You may not begin collecting data until you receive a signed copy of your form. The purpose of this form is to enable the Board to verify both the safety and confidentiality of all participants. It should also help you to think more about your study and to plan it before beginning. Title of Experiment _____Investigating the Effect of Breakfast on Reaction Time Name(s) of Researchers_____________________________________________________________ 1. Briefly describe the purpose of the experiment. The aim of the experiment is to investigate whether breakfast has any effect on reaction times. 2. Who will be the participants? How will they be chosen? The participants will be students and faculty at the University. No specific inclusion or exclusion criteria have been established. Any participant who voluntarily participates in the research will be chosen. 3. How will confidentiality be maintained? How will you identify data associated with each participant? Confidentiality of participants’ data will be maintained by asking them to remain anonymous. No personal details except age and gender will be recorded and each participant will be assigned a user ID to avoid the use of names and personal identifiers. 4. Are there any potential risks, physical or psychological, to participants? If so, what? How will you, as the researcher, minimize these risks? There are no potential risks of this experiment on the participants. 5. Describe your debriefing procedures. The participants will be debriefed after the experiment with explanations as to the significance of their contribution to the research and the value of the results. The experiment does not involve exposure to any traumatic event and therefore, the debriefing will be basic. 6. Describe the procedures of the study. Give enough detail so that the Board can make a judgment about your study. Participants will be randomly divided into two groups. One group will be given a 1 hour interval for breakfast while the other will be asked not to have breakfast. Each subject will then be made to sit in front of a computer with different colors appearing on the monitor screen. He/she will be asked to press a left arrow key when red color appears and the right arrow key when blue color appears. Reaction time will be recorded using a software installed in the system. Include copies of any instruments as well as your consent form. _______________________________ ___________ Researchers Signatures (may be electronic) Date Read More