Maths Investigation Reaction Time

Introduction

Reaction time is a measure of the quickness of a person’s response to a stimulus. It is the time
between when a stimulus is exposed to a person to when the person completes the correct
voluntary response. The aim of the investigation is to use statistics to figure out which student and
gender in the class had the best reaction time at timing one second. Students will conduct and
record their reaction time using the stopwatch timer on Google for 30 trials. Then, statistics of the
data values would be collected and then compared. The investigation will be carried out by
comparing the results with another student, then comparing to the entire class by gender.

Hypothesis:

If students in a class were asked to attempt to stop at 1 second on a stopwatch to determine which
gender had a better reaction time, it is hypothesised that the male students would have the better
reaction time.

Aim:
To find out which student and gender has the best reaction time in the class.

Investigation and Analysis

Initially, the first task was to record oneself stopping the stopwatch timer at exactly one second. The
times were recorded for 30 successive attempts. Here are the results:

Table 1 (Myself)

Attempt (Trying to stop the stopwatch at exactly Time (seconds)

1 second)
1 0.9
2 1.07
3 1.08
4 1.22
5 0.93
6 1
7 0.92
8 0.94
9 1.11
10 1.17
11 1.03
12 0.81
13 1.09
14 0.96
15 1.04
16 1
17 0.97
18 0.97
19 1
20 1
21 1.08
22 1.01
23 1.06
 24 1.05
25 1
26 1.10
27 0.98
28 1
29 1.02
30 1.01

In ascending order:

Median

Q1

Q3

0.81, 0.9, 0.92, 0.93, 0.94, 0.96, 0.97, 0.97, 0.98, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1.01, 1.01, 1.02, 1.03, 1.04, 1.05,
1.06, 1.07, 1.08, 1.08, 1.09, 1.10, 1.11, 1.17, 1.22

Here are the following statistics for the above data values:

Mean:
( 0.9+1.07+ 1.08+ 1.22+ 0.93+1+0.92+0.94+1.11+1.17+ 1.03+0.81+1.09+0.96+1.04 +1+0.97+0.97+ 1+ 1+
n+1 31
Median: = =15.5 . 15 th∧16 th values are the median .
2 2
1+ 1.01 2.01
Median = =1.005
2 2
Mode: 1 (Occurs 6 times)

Standard Deviation: The standard deviation is a statistical quantity describing how the data differs
and varies from the mean. For example, a low standard deviation highlights that most of the data
values are grouped near to the mean, whereas a large standard deviation denotes that most of the
data values are spread away from the mean. The standard deviation provides information about the
variance of the data. The standard deviation for the aforementioned data values is 0.08.

Range: 1.22 – 0.81 = 0.4

15+1
Q1: =8 thdata value .Q 1=0.97
2
Q3: number of data values∈second quartile+8=15+ 8=23rd data value. Q 3=1.07

IQR = Q3 – Q1

=1.07−0.97=0.1

Next, the task was to swap data with a classmate and compare and describe who had the better
reaction time. The classmate that was swapped with was Christos.

Ahnaf Christos
Mean 1.02 0.96
Median 1.005 0.98
 Standard Deviation 0.08 0.067
Range 0.41 0.29
Lower Quartile 0.97 0.93
Upper Quartile 1.07 1.01
Interquartile Range 0.1 0.08

According to the table above, the difference of Ahnaf’s mean from the target time of 1 second was
only 0.02 seconds whereas Christos’ mean difference was 0.04 seconds. Therefore, Ahnaf, on
average, had a more accurate reaction time.

Additionally, the median difference of Ahnaf from the target time was 0.005 seconds while Christos’
median difference was 0.02 seconds. As a lower median difference suggests better accuracy, Ahnaf
had the better accuracy in Christos’ case.

However, Ahnaf’s reaction times had a standard deviation of 0.08 seconds, indicating variability in
accuracy. Christos' reaction times had a lower standard deviation of 0.067 seconds. As a result,
Christos was more consistent in reaching the target time of 1 second across the 30 trials,

Moreover, Ahnaf had a range of 0.41 for all 30 trials of the reaction times while Christos had a range
of 0.29. A smaller range indicates a narrower spread of differences from the target time. Christos
had a smaller range, suggesting better precision in getting closer to the target time.

Ahnaf's IQR was 0.1 seconds, and Christos' IQR was 0.08 seconds. The IQR represents the range that
contains the middle 50% of the data. In this case, Christos had a smaller IQR, suggesting that a higher
concentration of Christos’ reaction times fell within a narrower range around 1 second.

Overall, considering all the statistics, while Ahnaf had a slightly better mean and median difference,
Christos had a better standard deviation, better quartile statistics and a smaller range. Therefore,
Christos generally performed better in terms of being closest to exactly 1 second and had a slightly
greater reaction time.

Part 2: Comparing Data to the Class

Table of the Class

Student mean s.d. preferred gender

Ruby Adley 0.99 0.11 F
Hazel Bell 1.04 0.09 F
Era Bunjaku 1.05 0.09 F
Pia Davoli 1.01 0.07 F
Fariha Haq 1.09 0.14 F
Jai Harkin-Noack 1.05 0.2 M
Linh Hoang 1.08 0.22 F
Ryan Huang 1.03 0.33 M
Keyu Ju 0.97 0.19 F
Helena Kantzavelos 0.97 0.11 F
Nicholas Kostakis 0.98 0.09 M
Sohan Latchman 0.92 0.09 M
Lucy Macgregor-Bowen 0.99 0.06 F
D'Arcie McCrone 1.01 0.12 F
Muntaha Muntaha 1.03 0.16 F
 Amber Nie 1.07 0.12 F
Ahnaf Rahman 1.02 0.08 M
George Rozaklis 1.01 0.05 M
Preeti Saroa 0.96 0.08 F
Karam Singh 0.97 0.01 M
Lachie Tanner 1.001 0.11 M
Marcus Trantopoulos 0.99 0.08 M
Fatih Valiyff 0.99 0.04 M
Christos Vlahos 0.96 0.07 M
Hugo Weston 1.01 0.12 M

Based on the mean, the students with the best reaction times are Ruby, Marcus and Fatih as the
means of their 30 trials were the closest to 1 second at 0.99 seconds. However, the standard
deviation also plays a key role in determining which student has the best reaction time in the class
because a student with low standard deviation means there was less variation from the mean and
that they were consistent with their results throughout the 30 trials.

The student with the lowest standard deviation is Karamveer Singh with 0.01; Karam also had the
second closest mean with 0.97. Karam’s low standard deviation means the spread between the data
values, and the mean is very low. Since Karam’s mean is very close to 1 second, the standard
deviation suggests that Karam had more attempts close to 1 second than anybody else in the class
and was consistent in getting nearly 1 second. Therefore, in terms of the mean and standard
deviation, Karam has the best reaction time out of any student in the class.

Part 3: Comparing Genders

The average mean of male students’ reaction times:

1.05+1.03+0.98+0.92+1.02+1.01+0.97+1.001+0.99+ 0.99+0.96+1.01 11.931

= =0.99435
12 12
The average standard deviation of male students’ reaction times:

0.2+0.33+0.09+0.09+ 0.08+0.05+0.01+0.11+0.08+ 0.04+0.07+ 0.12 1.27

= =0.10583
12 12
The average mean of female students’ reaction times:

0.99+1.04+1.05+1.01+1.09+1.08+ 0.97+0.97+ 0.99+1.01+ 1.03+ 1.07+0.96 13.26

= =1.02
13 13
The average standard deviation of female students’ reaction times:

0.11+0.09+0.09+0.07+ 0.14+ 0.22+ 0.19+ 0.11+0.06+0.12+0.16+ 0.12+0.08 1.56

= =0.12
13 13
The average mean of female students’ reaction times without Preeti:

0.99+1.04+1.05+1.01+1.09+1.08+ 0.97+0.97+ 0.99+1.01+ 1.03+ 1.07 12.3

= =1.025
12 12
The average standard deviation of female students’ reaction times without Preeti:
 0.11+0.09+0.09+0.07+ 0.14+ 0.22+ 0.19+ 0.11+0.06+0.12+0.16+ 0.12 1.48
= =0.123333
12 12
According to the statistics for the male and female students above, it is found that the male students
have a closer average mean to 1 second than the female students. Additionally, the males have a
lower standard deviation than the females, suggesting the data values for the males only differ
slightly from the mean, thus having more attempts closer to the target time. In fact, Preeti’s results
were removed from the equations to make the numbers of male and female students equal; the
males still had the closer average mean to 1 second and had a lower standard deviation compared to
the females. As a result, it can be deduced that the male students in the class have the superior
reaction time in comparison to the females.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, this investigation was conducted to determine which student and gender had the best
reaction time in the class, using statistics such as the mean and standard deviation. It was found that
Karamveer Singh had the best reaction time out of the entire class as the statistics showed Karam
had a mean that was close to the target time and a low standard deviation. The hypothesis was
proven to be correct as the male students in the class had the quicker reaction times compared to
the female students, because their mean was closer to 1 second than the females and their standard
deviation was lower.

The methods used in this investigation were mean, mode, median, lower quartile, upper quartile,
interquartile range, range, and standard deviation. It was discovered that the standard deviation
plays a integral role in determining who had the fastest reaction time due to the information it
provides about the data’s spread from the mean. This investigation could be extended in the future
by using other statistics like the interquartile range and the median when determining which gender
had the greater reaction time. Overall, this investigation was a success and most things worked well.
However, some calculations were difficult to make without a graphics calculator available at that time
and the results during the comparison of genders could have been skewed as there was one more
female student in the class.

Bibliography:

Reaction time (no date) Reaction Time - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. Available at:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/reaction-time
(Accessed: 21 June 2023).

Standard deviation and variance (no date) Math is Fun Advanced. Available at:
https://www.mathsisfun.com/data/standard-deviation.html (Accessed: 21 June 2023).

CalculatorSoup, L. (no date) Quartile calculator: Interquartile Range Calculator, CalculatorSoup.

Available at: https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/statistics/quartile-calculator.php
(Accessed: 21 June 2023).