Table Of Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..1

Problem Statement………………………………………………………………………………...3

Experimental Design……………………………………………………………………………....4

Data and Observations…………………………………………………………………………….7

Data Analysis and Interpretation………………………………………………………………...14

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………….....17

Works Cited……………………………………………………………………………………...19
 Hitaj - Awada 1

Introduction

Around the world, parents of young children and teenagers all have a common issue- how

late their kids stay out and how much time they can waste without even realizing it has passed.

These teens and children alike have trouble with not only keeping track of accurate time without

a clock, but also managing it effectively. Why does this happen? There may be a more scientific

reasoning to this other than age alone. The answer to this question may be extremely important

to finding a look inside solutions to the punctuality and timing issues of the current 21st century

juveniles.

The experiment’s goal was to determine if the time perception of ​Homo sapien

individuals is impacted notably by the intensity of the task that they are performing, or if it is

more strictly based on their age alone. Three groups of test subjects were randomly gathered in

MMSTC, with teachers selecting students. The test subjects were also gathered at the Oakland

shopping mall, by randomly selecting a shopping outlet to visit via the ​Random.org​ website.

Each of these subjects played a game of HTML5 Tetris, with varying time and speed. The results

were then recorded into an Excel document. The ages ranged from 12-16 years for group 1,

17-23 years for group 2, and 24-43 years for the final group, group 3. Each group was comprised

of 33 volunteer test subjects each, making an overall of 99 people participating in the

experiment. One of three task intensities were randomly selected for each participant, either

“35”, “200”, or “365”. A time limit for the task was also randomly selected from three variables

for each subject, either being “75”, “90”, or “105”. All time is listed in seconds.

As task intensity rises, the deviation from the given time to each subject will rise because

concentration to anything but the given task will be lessened. The deviation will also rise as the
 Hitaj - Awada 2

task intensity is lowered to the minimum, as subjects will generally be uninterested or not paying

much attention.

When varying the ages of participants in the tests, those of a younger age will have more

deviation from the given time because they perceive time much differently than those of older

age (“Classics”). This is also the reason for why older participants will have a much lower

overall deviation from the time given during the experiment.

 Hitaj - Awada 3

Problem Statement

Problem:

Does age or task intensity have an effect on the short-term time perception of different

Homo sapien​ individuals?

Hypothesis:

If ​Homo Sapien ​individuals are distracted, then it will be concluded that the older

majority of the group being tested will have the trials to have gone faster than what was actually

the case.

Data Measured:

Two independent variables in this experiment include “Task Intensity” and “Age.” The

dependent variable is the amount of time that we collect from each candidate that helps in the

trials. This will be measured in seconds, and all of the data will be put into dot plots, box plots,

and histograms for analyzation purposes and to clarify the outcome of the experiment. We chose

the variables “35”, “200”, and “365” for task intensity to give participants a sufficient amount of

variability while testing. On the other hand, the age groups “11-16” , “17-23”, and “24-43” were

chosen because those are the main ages in the different stages of brain development in humans,

so it should produce more concise results regarding how much age impacts time perception.
 Hitaj - Awada 4

Experimental Design

Materials:

Computer (Optional) Camera

Internet Access Distraction-Free Test Room
Stopwatch 99 Human Test Subjects
5 Sheets of Paper Writing Utensil

Procedure:

1. Gather all required materials.

2. Obtain the first group of test subjects from a school by requesting 8 students to be
randomly selected by their teachers ranging through grade levels 6-12.

3. Using the store directory, find the amount of separate vendors located in the mall.

4. Give each store a number 1-​x.​

5. Proceed to use the ​random.org​ integer generator website to decide which store to visit.

6. Before testing begins, the time of day which will be used to find the final group must be
randomized as well. To do this, open ​random.org​ and select the random integer
generator, inputting numbers 1 (Min) -3 (Max). Assign each number a time, 1 being
12:30 pm , 2 being 2:30 pm, and 3 being 4:30 pm.

7. Randomly select specific individuals in said store to test.

8. Open the​ random.org​ integer generator and set it to values 1 (Min.) - 3 (Max) to decide
what variables will be used during testing.

9. Generate a separate number for each test subject - assign each speed value and stopwatch
time to one of the integers separately.

10. Go to ​http://www.xarg.org/project/tetris.​

11. Press “p” to pause the game.

12. Edit the speed values by right clicking the “Speed Delay” slider, then pressing Inspect
Element.

13. Set the max speed to one of the values - either “35”, “200”, or “365” depending on what
number was returned by the integer generator.
 Hitaj - Awada 5

14. Close the Inspect Element window by pressing F12.

15. Click and drag the newly edited “Speed Delay” bar as far left or right as it will go.

16. Open up a stopwatch timer, either on an app or by any other means.

17. Set the stopwatch for a time of “1:15”, “1:30”, or “1:45” respectively.

18. Sit the subject down in front of the computer, with the tetris game open.

19. Start the game and start the stopwatch at the same time.

20. Stop the timer when it goes off, or if the subject gets a “Game Over” screen.

21. Ask each subject how much time exactly, in minutes and seconds, has passed.

22. Record all data and observations gained during the trial.

23. Repeat steps 2 - 22 for each individual of every group being tested.

24. Copy all recorded data and observations into a chart of some sort for ease of viewing.

25. Analyze data and draw conclusion.

 Hitaj - Awada 6

Diagram:

Figure 1. Test Subject

Figure 1, above, shows the experimental design and materials, such as the computer,

stopwatch, test subject, and Tetris game.

 Hitaj - Awada 7

Data and Observations

Data:

Table 1
Raw Data for Age Group One
Deviation
Trial Age Gender Variables
(Seconds)
1 12 M (s, s) 30
2 13 F (+, -) 17
3 13 M (-, s) 143
4 13 F (-,-) 25
5 14 M (s , s) 90
6 14 M (s , -) 16
7 14 M (s , s) 150
8 14 M (-, -) 10
9 14 M (s,s) 30
10 14 M (s, s) 60
11 14 F (s, -) 6
12 14 F (s, -) 12
13 14 M (s, -) 13
14 14 F (-, -) 15
15 14 M (+, s) 15
16 14 M (-, -) 30
17 14 M (s , s) 30
18 14 F (-,s) 1
19 14 M (-,-) 45
20 14 M (s,+) 60
21 14 F (+,+) 30
22 14 M (-, s) 116
23 14 M (+, -) 45
 Hitaj - Awada 8

24 14 F (-, +) 6
25 14 M (+, -) 38
26 14 F (+, +) 135
27 15 F (+, s) 15
28 15 F (+, s) 15
29 15 M (s,s) 14
30 15 M (+,s) 99
31 15 F (+,-) 18
32 16 F (s, s) 10
33 16 M (-, -) 15

Table 1, above, lists the results of 33 trials for the first age group, as well as the variables

used in the experiment. This age group contains individuals from 11 to 16 years of age.

Table 2
Raw Data from Age Group Two
Deviation
Trial Age Gender Variables
(Seconds)
34 17 M (-, -) 30
35 17 M (-, -) 6
36 17 M (s, +) 55
37 17 M (s, -) 15
38 17 M (+, s) 60
39 17 F (s, s) 20
40 17 F (+, -) 25
41 17 F (+, -) 50
42 18 M (+, +) 100
43 18 F (-, +) 1
44 18 M (+, +) 15
 Hitaj - Awada 9

45 18 F (s, -) 20
46 18 F (s, +) 27
47 19 M (-, -) 12
48 20 F (-, -) 10
49 20 M (s, -) 10
50 20 M (-, s) 30
51 20 F (+, -) 24
52 21 F (-, -) 5
53 21 F (s, s) 20
54 21 F (-, s) 100
55 22 F (-, +) 5
56 22 M (s, -) 18
57 22 M (s, -) 27
58 22 M (s, s) 30
59 23 M (s, s) 25
60 23 F (-, +) 2
61 23 F (s, s) 14
62 23 M (s, +) 65
63 23 F (s, +) 45
64 23 M (+, +) 15
65 23 F (+, +) 35
66 23 M (-, +) 10

Table 2, above, lists the results of 33 trials for the second age group, as well as the

variables used in the experiment. This age group contains individuals from 17 to 23 years of age.
 Hitaj - Awada 10

Table 3
Raw Data from Age Group Three
Deviation
Trial Age Gender Variables
(Seconds)
67 24 M (s, -) 20
68 25 M (+, -) 5
69 25 M (+, -) 45
70 25 M (-, +) 5
71 26 M (s, s) 8
72 26 F (s, +) 39
73 27 M (s, -) 2
74 27 M (s, -) 25
75 27 F (+, s) 15
76 29 F (s, -) 20
77 30 F (s, -) 25
78 31 F (-, +) 9
79 32 F (-, s) 10
80 33 F (-, -) 17
81 35 F (+, s) 15
82 36 M (-, -) 10
83 36 M (-, -) 26
84 36 M (s, -) 10
85 36 M (s, -) 13
86 37 F (s, -) 2
87 37 F (s, s) 23
88 38 F (s, s) 15
89 38 M (-, +) 20
90 38 M (-, -) 13
91 38 F (+, +) 50
92 39 F (-, +) 15
 Hitaj - Awada 11

93 39 F (-, +) 5
94 39 M (+, +) 60
95 41 F (-, -) 6
96 41 F (s, s) 10
97 41 M (+, s) 11
98 42 F (-, s) 5
99 43 M (s, -) 9

Table 3, above, lists the results of 33 trials for the third age group, as well as the variables

used in the experiment. This age group contains individuals from 24 to 43 years of age.

Table 4
Average Deviation Per Age Group
Age Group Age Group Age Group
One Two Three

41.03 28.06 17.06

Table 4, above, displays the average deviation per age group (Age Group 1: 12-16, Age

Group 2: 17-23. Age Group 3: 24-43). As is shown, the older age group (three) had the least

amount of deviation, while the youngest age group (one) had the most.
 Hitaj - Awada 12

Observations:

Figure 2. Tetris Experiment

Figure 2, above, displays an example of a participant participating in the experiment.

Table 5
Observations
Trial 2 Subject kept changing her time.

Trial 3 Test subject released information regarding

the experiment to his classmates.
(This class was later excluded from testing
completely)

Trial 12 Subject glitched the game.

Trial 13 Subject wanted to keep playing the game.

Trial 16 Subject wanted to keep playing the game.

 Hitaj - Awada 13

Trial 18 Test subject had the least deviation with 1

second.

Trial 22 Subject had no estimation for how much time

had passed and gave a random number.

Trial 35 Subject glanced at watch during experiment.

Trial 47 Subject may have been intoxicated.

Table 5, above, displays the significant observations made during the trials.
 Hitaj - Awada 14

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Figure 3. Analyzed Data From The 99 Participants

Figure 3, above, displays the deviation for each individual tested, ranging from 12 years

of age, to 43 years of age. The graph presents an unambiguous downward tendency related to the

data. The oldest age group, Age Group 3, is much more grouped together with a lower deviation
 Hitaj - Awada 15

than the other two age groups, with the exception of the outliers.

Figure 4. Analyzed Data From The 99 Participants

Figure 4, above, displays the average deviation, in seconds, for each age group tested

(Age Group 1-3). Age Group 3 (24-43) has the lowest deviation, next being Age Group 2

(17-23), and finally Age Group 1 (12-16) with the highest deviation.

Table 6
Average Deviation Per Age Group
Age Group Age Group Age Group
One Two Three

41.03 28.06 17.06

Table 6, above, displays the average deviation per age group (Age Group 1: 12-16, Age

Group 2: 17-23. Age Group 3: 24-43). As is shown, the older age group (three) had the least
 Hitaj - Awada 16

amount of deviation, while the youngest age group (one) had the most. See Figure 2 for a visual

representation of this data.

The data from each graph distinctly confirmed the assertion that time perception is a skill

more fine tuned to the brains of older individuals rather than younger, as the downward trend for

the deviation on each graph is so prevalent in association with older aged peoples. Throughout

the experiment, age group one (12-16), had a higher deviation than both age groups two and

three. More specifically, age group one had a deviation of around 41.03 seconds, while group

two 28.06 seconds, and group 3 had 17.06 seconds, as seen in Table 6 above. This deviation is

calculated by subtracting the perceived time of the trial from the actual time elapsed, once per

age group.
 Hitaj - Awada 17

Conclusion

It was hypothesized that if the ​Homo Sapien​ test subjects were distracted, then the result

would be that the older majority of the group would have perceived time more accurately, with

less deviation than the younger majorities because of research that has revealed the changes in

time judgments that occur throughout childhood (Time Perception in Children). This hypothesis

was accepted. The experiment was envisioned to test differences in deviations based on age

groups. Age Group 1 is exclusively comprised of 12-16 year-olds, Age Group 2 is made up of

17-23 year-olds, and Age Group 3 encompasses 24-43 year-olds (“At What Age”). To test the

time perception of each age group, every participant was instructed to play one game of HTML5

Tetris until they reached a “Game Over” screen, or were told to stop. This game was located on

​ ebsite. Randomization of time limits and task intensity was

the ​www.xarg.org/project/tetris/ w

achieved by using the integer generator found on the ​random.org​ website. Test subjects were

found at Butcher High School as well as Oakland Shopping Mall. These two locations were used

as it was most convenient to the researchers, and the locations each had a surplus of test subjects.

The eldest age group, Age Group 3, had the least deviation from the time elapsed. This is simply

due to older individuals having a finer tuned perception of time (Classics), which may be caused

by dopaminergic and/or cholinergic pathways, and the interaction between them (Ferreira). In

addition. g​rowth hormone levels also decline with age and may be associated with cognitive

performance (“​Ageing and The Brain​”). ​Compared to other experiments of similar variety, the

results gathered developed similar results to what other researchers recorded. For example,

results gathered by the ​Neuropsychiatry Archives Association​ also stated that, out of the three

groups they tested, the oldest age group had the least deviation (Ferreira).
 Hitaj - Awada 18

There were no errors made while following the procedures. Future researchers could

avoid certain things to ensure accuracy in the data gathered. These include minimizing the time

delay upon starting the stopwatch. This research can greatly benefit younger people in life

because it could give them an idea how to correctly prepare for deadlines, as they will know

ahead of time what to expect.

At the end of the day, our hypothesis, that older individuals would have lower overall

deviation from younger, was accepted. It was imperative to double check every aspect of the

experiment, including carrying out procedures correctly, and writing documents with the correct

data. It also included many valuable lessons. These lessons taught that working laboriously,

forming social bonds and communicating with others.

 Hitaj - Awada 19

Works Cited

"At What Age Is The Brain Fully Developed?" ​Mental Health Daily​. n.p., 19 Feb. 2015. Web. 12

May 2017.

Classics in the History of Psychology -- James (1890) Chapter 15. n.p., n.d. Web. 10 May 2017.

Ferreira, Vanessa Fernanda Moreira, Gabriel Pina Paiva, Natália Prando, Carla Renata Graça, and

João Aris Kouyoumdjian. "Time Perception and Age." Arquivos de

Neuro-Psiquiatria. Associação Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, n.d. Web. 10 May

2017.

Peters, R. "Ageing and The Brain." ​Postgraduate Medical Journal.​ BMJ Group, Feb. 2006.

Web. 10 May 2017.

Time Perception in Children: A Neurodevelopmental Approach. n.p., n.d. Web. 10 May 2017.