SPSS Lab report

KINES 260 – RESEARCH SKILLS IN KINESIOLOGY

LAB REPORT EXAMPLE

Format of Lab Report

i) Type 12-pt font Times New Roman.

ii) Include title and sub-titles.

iii) Print figure(s) with title, axis labels, and key if necessary (can be imported into the document or on a separate page).

iv) Include: Introduction; Method (Participants; Apparatus; Procedures); Results; Discussion; References

v) Use APA style (6th edition)

Introduction

This section briefly introduces the reader to the topic and explains the objectives of the study. Also, included are the research hypothesis(es) and null hypothesis(es). This section should clearly identify the purpose of the study.

Method

From reading this section anyone should be able to replicate the study. The method section includes sub-sections with these side headings: Participants, Apparatus, and Procedures .

Results

Provide statistical findings written out in sentences. In Table format and in Figure format show the key results. Describe what the Figure shows, including the means of the different conditions.

Discussion

Here conclusions are made about the hypotheses based on the results.

References

The full references are provided here for any articles mentioned in the report to enable any reader to locate the article(s).

Movements to Smaller Targets are Slower than to Larger Targets

Student Name

Introduction

A commonly held view is the notion that fast movements are less accurate than slow movements. Alternatively, in an effort to be accurate, movements are performed more slowly. This is referred to as the speed-accuracy tradeoff. Fitts examined the speed-accuracy tradeoff by recording the movement time for tapping between different size targets (Fitts, 1954; Fitts & Peterson, 1964). By varying the target size, the accuracy of movement was constrained. He found that movement time increased as the size of the target decreased. The study here attempts to replicate these previous findings. Movement time will be determined for tapping between small and large targets.

Research Hypothesis: H1: Movement time to hit a small target is slower than moving to hit a larger target.

Null Hypothesis: H0: The size of a target does not influence the movement time to reach the target.

Method

Participants

Twenty undergraduate students, twelve female and eight male, completed this experiment as part of a Kinesiology majors course. All except two participants were right handed. No participant had any previous experience with this particular task.

Apparatus

The apparatus included a piece of paper with a set of two target boxes 10 cm from one another. The width of the target boxes was 1 cm for the small target, and 2 cm for the large target. All targets were 4 cm high. Participants held a pen which they moved from target to target. The time was recorded using a stopwatch.

Procedures

Participants held the pen in their dominant hand and started inside one of the boxes. On the experimenters command to “go” participants tapped the pen alternately in the two target boxes, until the experimenter said “stop.” The experimenters recorded the number of taps in each target during a 10 second interval. This task was repeated three times each for the two different sizes of target. If a participant missed the targets more than three times in a single trial an additional trial was performed. The average number of taps across the three trials for each target was determined for each participant. To calculate the average movement time of each tap, 10 seconds was divided by the number of taps.

Results

Figure 1 illustrates that the movement time between the 1 cm targets (mean = 0.32 s) was significantly slower than for the 2 cm targets (mean = 0.25s), t(19) = 2.36, p < .05.

(another Table Example)

Table 1

Means and Standard Deviations of Cognitive Tasks for Exercise and Control Groups

Post-Test Means Adjusted Means

Exercise Control Exercise Control _________________________________________________________________

Task M SD M SD M M

 

Verbal Fluency:

Letter Fluency 12.20 3.01 10.70 2.71 11.82 11.08

Category Fluency 13.60 3.53 9.80 4.64 13.09 10.31

Switch Correct Resp 12.40 2.80 11.40 2.41 11.78 12.02

Switching Accuracy 11.80 1.23 11.00 .82 11.49 11.31

Color-Word Interference:

Color Naming 12.10a 1.73 10.10a 2.08 11.84 10.36

Word Reading 12.30a 1.70 8.50a 1.90 11.68 9.12

Inhibition 12.80 2.44 11.90 1.85 12.58 12.11

Inhibition with Switch 12.90 1.20 11.20 2.20 12.32 11.78

___________________________________________________________________ 

p < .05a

Figure 1. Mean Movement Time in a Reciprocal Tapping Task to

Different Size Targets

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

1 2

Target Size (cm)

Movement Time (s)

Discussion

In support of the hypothesis, movements to the small target were significantly slower than movements to the large target. The findings are also in agreement with previous work which has also shown participants make slower movements to smaller targets (Fitts, 1954; Fitts & Peterson, 1964). The results here support the notion of a speed-accuracy tradeoff, with movements which require greater accuracy being made more slowly than movements requiring less accuracy. This finding is important for designing human-equipment interfaces. It suggests that buttons that must be pressed quickly should be large.

References

Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling

the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 381-391.

Fitts, P. M., & Peterson, J. R. (1964). Information capacity of discrete motor responses.

Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 103-112.