The Two-Point Threshold Essay

I. IntroductionIn the deuce-point doorsill taste it is obtained how close two distinct sharp point can be together for a person to timber two points instead of mavin. The assess of the two-point scepter is the minimal blank at which the dependent can touch sensation two distinct points. The principle behind this sample is the fact that mechanoreceptors argon not distributed homogeneously in the skin of the human body. There be atomic number 18as with a higher density and areas with a lower density of mechanoreceptors, do this certain area more or less sensitive. However, the smaller the outgo is where the subject can feel two distinct points, the more mechanoreceptors must(prenominal) be present in this area, enabling a person to feel small details in that part of the body. In this investigate we go out test the two-point room access at five ares of the body the back of the perish, the address of the hand, fingertip, the back of the neck, and the calf of the leg. With these given areas, the fingertips will extradite a smaller two-point threshold than the back of the hand.II. Materials and MethodsFor this experiment a get the picture is used to have got two sharp points to the skin at the same time, and a ruler to measure the distance of these points. The independent variable for the experiment is the are where the two-point threshold is measured. The dependent variable is the two-point threshold, or in other words the smallest distance at which the subject can distinguish between one and two points at one of the five tested areas. At first the compass is set on the smallest value, 2mm, and applied to a certain area. If the subject does not feel two distinct points the distance between the points will be increased until the subject can feel two points. That way the smallest distance, the two-point threshold is obtained.III. ResultsThe Two-Point Threshold Values For All SubjectsCalculations/ T-TestFirst the average two-point threshold is metric for both areas by summing up all values and dividing the sum by the proceeds of values,7. For the back of the hand it is an average of 22.4mm, and for the fingertips 4.71mm. Then the difference of separately value to the average value is awaitd and inserted in to the formula to calculate the standard deviation, where n is the number of subjects/values.X-X (back of hand) public squareX-X (fingertips) square4,419,362,717,344,419,360,710,57,454,765,328,116,6275,560,30,17,657,761,72,896,440,961,72,891,41,961,31,69The squares for both independent variables will now be summed up and change integrity by n-1= 6 before the square germ is taken.Back of the handFingertipsTo calculate the T-value the difference of the average values is subtracted by the square root of the sum of the two SD square divided by the number of subjects, 7.The measured T-value for this experiment is 9,46.The Average Two-Point Threshold and Standard Deviation for the Fingertips and the Back of the reac h outThe graph shows clearly that the fingertips have a practically smaller two-point threshold with an average of 4.71mm, than the back of the hand with 22.4mm. It also shows that the standard deviation for the fingertips is much lower with 2.69mm than the standard deviation of the subjects at the back of the hand with 8.85mm.IV. determinationThe results of the experiment support the hypothesis that the fingertips have a smaller two-point threshold than the back of the hand. It is supported by the average two-point threshold of both areas, fleck the fingertips have and average of 4.71mm and the back of the hand shows and average result of 22.4mm as two-point threshold which is almost five times greater compared to the average fingertip value. The T-test is a statistical hypothesis test to see if the hypothesis is supported. In this experiment a T-value of 9.46 was calculated to 6 degrees of freedom. According to the table there is a 0.0001% chance that the hypothesis is incorre ct. So inother words this T-value supports the hypothesis with over 99%.A source of error is sure the number of subjects in the experiment. For a strongly supported hypothesis I would refer a follow up experiment with many more subjects to hazard sure this hypothesis is still supported because only a few too high or low numbers can certainly change the results with only seven subjects. Also I would suggest to have only one tester in the follow up experiment because in this experiment there were seven testers, one for each subject and everybody measures slightly different. So instead of having human error involved from one tester, we have errors involved from seven. The last source of error is within the calculations. rounding error errors here and there can make a difference if the results are close together.