Download The Effect of Different Roller Coasters on Human Heart Recovery

The Effect of Different Roller Coasters on Human Heart Recovery Rate
Melody Ramezani and David Truong
Department of Biological Sciences
Saddleback College
Mission Viejo, CA 92692
This study examined whether there was a significant difference between the effects of two
difference roller coaster rides on the human (Homo sapiens) heart rate. It was expected that there
would be a significant difference between the two roller coaster rides being tested. Two sample
groups containing eight human subjects each, males and females between the ages of 18-28 were
selected to have their heart rates measured, using a Polar E600 heart rate monitor, on two selected
rides located inside of Disneyland Theme Park in Anaheim, California to see how long it would take
for the human heart rate to come back to rest after riding the two rides. The results showed that the
average heart rate recovery time (secs) for the first ride, Space Mountain was found to be 130.8 ±
3.11 (± S.E.M.). The average heart rate recovery time (secs) for the second ride, The Matterhorn was
found to be 139.9 ± 5.16 (± S.E.M.). The experimentation showed different results than expected,
with results that reveal that there is no significant difference between heart rate recoveries of the
two rides (p = 1.52 x 10-1, two-tailed unpaired t-test). Results showed that there was a significant
difference between the change in heart rate for Space Mountain and The Matterhorn (p = 1.33 x 10-3,
two-tailed unpaired t-test). The change in heart rate for Space Mountain was 55.8 ± 9.50 (± S.E.M.).
The change in heart rate for The Matterhorn was 13.1 ± 3.14 (± S.E.M.). The outcome of this study
indicates that the heart rate is controlled by different types of activities and behaviors, however due
to vibrations of the coasters, more stimuli was added to the heart, thus the different changes in
heart rate. Condense the abstract, results and data should be in results section. Plus use correct
format. Your data is fine here. What are your units for change in HR?
Introduction
The heart rate is calculated based on the number of contractions of the ventricles (number of
ventricular contractions/min), which are the lower chambers of the heart. The average heart rate at rest is
usually between 60-80 beats per minute; males tend to have a lower rate than females, and the resting rate
tends to fall with age. The pulse is the most commonly used method of measuring the heart rate. The pulse
is the throbbing of the arteries produced by the contractions of the ventricles caused by the successive
contractions of the heart. A more precise method of determining pulse involves the use of an
electrocardiograph, or ECG. Continuous electrocardiograph monitoring of the heart is frequently done in
many clinical settings. Commercial heart rate monitors are also available, which consist of a chest strap
with electrodes. The signal is transmitted to a wrist receiver for display. Heart rate monitors allow accurate
measurements to be taken continuously and can be used during exercise when manual measurement
would be difficult to attain (such as when the hands are being used). Several activities or behaviors causes
the heart rate to go up or down, such as excitement, anxiety, nervousness, stimulant drugs, fever, pain,
hypoxia, excessive thyroid hormone, etc. A growing body of evidence from clinical trials and
epidemiological studies has identified elevated resting heart rate as a predictor of clinical events. Proof of
1
direct cause and effect is limited, because current drugs that lower heart rate (e.g., beta-blockers) have
multiple mechanisms of action (Arnold et al., 2008). However, in this experiment the main objective will
allow examination to determine whether different roller coasters have a significant effect on the heart rate
recovery. The researchers hypothesize that there will be a significant difference between the average heart
rate recovery of each gender and the two specific rides. This experiment may have potential to lead to
further and advanced experimentation confirming the effects of exhilarating rides on human heart rate.
Materials and Methods
This experiment required a group of 16 human subjects. Of these humans, 8 were identified as
male, and the remaining 8 identified as female. Each group was assigned to ride two different roller coaster
rides. The first ride, called Space Mountain, runs for a duration (could also say ‘lasts about… getting a little
too wordy) of 2 minutes, 45 seconds at a speed of 32 mph (51.5 km/h). The second ride is called The
Matterhorn which lasts 2 minutes, 26 seconds at a speed of 27 mph (43.5 km/h). Both rides located inside
of Disneyland Theme Park in Anaheim, California. On March 17, 2010 at 12:00 P.M. the 16 selected
human subjects, chosen based on ages within 18-28, were asked to have their heart rates measured to test
whether there is a significant difference in average heart rate recovery between the two roller coasters,
Space Mountain and The Matterhorn. The subjects were required to wear Polar E600 heart monitors
strapped right below their chest. Each electrode was moistened with water in order to insure proper contact
and assure conductance. Each subject also had to wear a wrist watch capable of measuring the heart rate.
To avoid any discrepancies in the readings of the heart rate monitors, each subject was instructed to wear
the Polar E600 for at least two hours prior to the experiment and asked not to consume anything during
those two hours to refrain from heart rate changes caused by interference with data (awk?) and digestion.
For the first ride, Space Mountain, the subjects sat in the rockets and read their resting heart rate; the
timing was started once the roller coaster ride began. Upon finishing the ride, the subjects stood up and
started recording their time right away to see how long their heart rates took to drop back down to the
resting rate (awkward, rephrase). Both initial and final heart rates were noted, as well as the peak heart
rate. For the second ride, The Matterhorn, the subjects completed the same procedure and the initial and
final heart rates were noted as well including the peak heart rate. The average heart recovery rate was
calculated in Microsoft Excel for each roller coaster ride, as well as the average heart recovery rate
between the genders for each ride and graphed for evaluation.
Results
The average heart rate recovery time (secs) for Space Mountain was found to be 130.8 ± 3.11 (±
S.E.M.). The average heart rate recovery time (secs) for The Matterhorn was found to be 139.9 ± 5.16 (±
S.E.M.). Analysis of variance indicated no significance between data points, (p = 1.52 x 10-1, two-tailed
unpaired t-test) as shown in Figure 1. The average change in heart rate (mmHg) for Space Mountain was
found to be 55.8 ± 9.50 (± S.E.M). The average change in heart rate (mmHg) for The Matterhorn was
found to be 13.1 ± 3.14 (± S.E.M.). Analysis of variance indicated significant difference between data
points, (p = 1.33 x 10-3, two-tailed unpaired t-test) as shown in Figure 2. These results are evidence to
show that heart rate is elevated in Space Mountain due to more vibration than The Matterhorn which
according to our results, showed greater affect on the heart rate recovery.
2
Figure 1. The average heart rate recovery time (secs) for Space Mountain was
130.8 ± 3.11 (± S.E.M.). The
average heart rate recovery time (secs) for The Matterhorn was 139.9 ± 5.16 (± S.E.M.). Analysis of
variance showed no significant difference between the heart rate recovery time between Space Mountain
and The Matterhorn, (p = 1.52 x 10-1, two-tailed unpaired t-test).
Figure 2. The average change in heart rate (mmHg) for Space Mountain was 55.8 ± 9.50 (± S.E.M). The
average change in heart rate (mmHg) for The Matterhorn was 13.1 ± 3.14 (± S.E.M.). Analysis of variance
showed significant difference between the change in heart rate recovery time between Space Mountain and
The Matterhorn, (p = 1.33 x 10-3, two-tailed unpaired t-test). (I think your suppose to put ‘P<0.05’)
Discussion
Based on this study, the human heart rate was influenced by the two different types of roller
coaster rides being tested. The results indicate that the average heart rate recovery time (secs) for Space
Mountain was lower than the average heart rate recovery time for The Matterhorn. (What chemicals
released could affect someone’s heart rate?) (Does age or health issue play a part in their heart rate
3
recovery?) A possible explanation of the results may be due to the speed or duration of the rides, as well as
the vibrations of the rides and the environmental effects on change in heart rate. Possible errors that could
have reduced this experiment’s efficacy might have been related to the sample size. If the sample size was
larger, it would have allowed for a more precise representation of the distribution. (Don’t put what could’ve
changed your experiment or how your experiment could’ve been more reliable) Also, if there was a way to
control body temperature of each subject or outside temperature, the outcome of the experimentation may
have been more accurate due to having more control on the body thermoregulation which is one of the
factors altering heart rate. Several studies have previously been carried out revealing that a ride on a roller
coaster causes a sudden and sustained rise in the heart rate and therefore myocardial consumption of
oxygen (Pringle et al., 1986). Another study was conducted on two panels of human subjects with lung
function impairment in order to evaluate whether sub micrometer particulate air pollution was associated
with heart rate variability and showed that air pollution had an effect on heart rate (Chan et al., 2004).
Similar experiment given the controversy regarding cardiovascular responses and heart rate variability
(HRV) in underwater conditions showed that the heart rate in dive was increased when compared to pre
and post, the authors assessed the combined effect of psychological stress and scuba diving on cardiac
autonomic modulation measured through HRV during and following a diving mission (Flouris and Scott,
2009).
Literature Cited (fix this section)
Arnold, J.M., D.H Fitchett, J.G. Howlett, M.E. Lonn, and J.C. Tardif. (2008). Resting heart rate: A modifiable
prognostic indicator of cardiovascular risk and outcomes?. The Canadian Journal of Cardiology, 24
Chan, C., K. Chuang, G. Shiao, and L. Lin. (2004). Personal Exposure to Submicrometer Particles and
Heart Rate Variability in Human Subjects. Environmental Health Perspectives, 112 (10), 1063-1067
Chong, Jia-Rui. (2007) “Coaster warnings on the level German study finds thrill rides lift heart rate, blood
pressure :[Final Edition].” Journal – Gazette, 11.A
Chong, Jia-Rui. (2007) “BIGGER COASTER THRILLS CARRYING HEART RISKS.” Pittsburgh Post –
Gazette, A.3
Flouris, A.D., JM. Scott. (2009). Heart rate variability responses to a psychologically challenging scuba
dive. The journal of sports medicine and physical fitness, 49 (4), 382-386
Pringle, S.D., P.W. MacFarlane, and S.M. Cobbe. (1986). Response of heart rate to a roller coaster ride.
British Medical Journal, 299 (6715), 1575.
R.Y.I. Enterprises. 2010. Twilight Zone Tower of Terror. Sharing the Magic Wordwide. AllEars.Net.
Retrieved 23 January 2010. This is not a literature.
4
Review Form
Department of Biological Sciences
Saddleback College, Mission Viejo, CA 92692
Author (s): Truong and Ramenzani
Title: The Effect of Different Roller Coasters on Human Heart Recovery Rate
Summary
Summarize the paper succinctly and dispassionately. Do not criticize here, just show that you understood the paper.
Investigators measured heart rates before and after test subjects rode roller coasters, thus to determine
how long it takes for an increased heart rate to return to rest.
General Comments
Generally explain the paper’s strengths and weaknesses and whether they are serious, or important to our current
state of knowledge.
Data was solid and well-put forth, so was their interpretation of data. However need to work on format,
condense abstract, “they beat around the bush” too much, need to get to the point. Uhhhh… Need to
look more into how biologically increased heart rate is decreased.
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.
5
This paper was a final version
This paper was a rough draft
Recommendation
 This paper should be published as is
 This paper should be published with revision
 This paper should not be published
6