Log in

Results Section Example

<!--[if gte vml 1]>

<![endif]--><!--[if !vml]-->

<!--[endif]--><!--[if !mso]-->

<!--[endif]-->

So that you are better able to understand and interpret
the results, the hypothesis is:
Reaction time will be faster in the Distraction
condition compared to the No distraction condition

<!--[if !mso]-->

<!--[endif]--><!--[if !mso & !vml]--> <!--[endif]--><!--[if !vml]-->

<!--[endif]--> 

 

 


Results

 

In
Table 1, both conditions show an identical range of scores. The mean score in
the No distraction condition is higher than that found in the Distraction
condition, as predicted. The similarity between the SDs indicates that there is
little difference between the conditions in terms of variance around the mean.

 

Table 1: Descriptive
statistics for reaction time responses in the experimental and control
conditions

 

 

Distraction

No distraction

Mean

5.3

5.8

SD

.95

.92

Range

4-7

4-7

 

 

Figure
1 indicates that the mean score for the Distraction condition falls within the
confidence intervals of the No distraction condition, and vice-versa. This
overlap suggests that the sample means from each condition are from the same
population.

 

<!--[if gte vml 1]>

<![endif]--><!--[if !vml]-->image<!--[endif]-->

Figure 1: Error bar charts
for reaction time responses in the experimental and control conditions

 

In
conclusion, although the difference between the means is in the direction
predicted by the hypothesis, the overlap evident in the error bar charts
suggests that both conditions are in fact taken from the same population, as stated
by the null hypothesis.