In regards to both the mean change in respiration rate and the mean change in pulse rate, the results indicate no statistical significance in difference (Appendix 2.1 & 2.2). Consequently, the null hypothesis is rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis stating that acute caffeine consumption does not increase heart and respiratory rate, and therefore does not elevate aerobic performance. These results are not consistent however with related research that asserts caffeine as a stimulant that physiologically affects the respiratory and cardiovascular systems (Rogers and Dinges, 2005).
Rogers and Dinges (2005) studied the physiological implications of caffeine in both men and women athletes with a particular focus on alertness. They were …show more content…
Through Roger and Dinges (2005) …show more content…
There are a number of variables within the experiment that could of created less favourable conditions to generate results with a statistical significance especially when considering the importance of caffeine, which has been known to have wide variability involved with its experimentation. Grahem et.al (1998) performed a double blind test on 9 young endurance runners to discover the difference in endurance effects of caffeine and coffee. The experiment was a double blind experiment which tested participants on 5 separate occasions as they consumed either a placebo capsule with water, decaffeinated coffee, caffeinated coffee or a caffeine capsule with water and then put through a physical endurance test. Through this method, Grahem et. al (1998) was able to compare both straight caffeine and caffeine contained in coffee and note any difference in endurance capabilities. Through this, he discovered a significant increase in endurance of the participants when they consumed the caffeine capsule compared to the coffee. This suggests that the ergogenic benefits of caffeine creates a larger measurable effect than straight coffee which is speculated by Grahem et.al (1995) to be due to the other numerous
Rogers and Dinges (2005) studied the physiological implications of caffeine in both men and women athletes with a particular focus on alertness. They were …show more content…
Through Roger and Dinges (2005) …show more content…
There are a number of variables within the experiment that could of created less favourable conditions to generate results with a statistical significance especially when considering the importance of caffeine, which has been known to have wide variability involved with its experimentation. Grahem et.al (1998) performed a double blind test on 9 young endurance runners to discover the difference in endurance effects of caffeine and coffee. The experiment was a double blind experiment which tested participants on 5 separate occasions as they consumed either a placebo capsule with water, decaffeinated coffee, caffeinated coffee or a caffeine capsule with water and then put through a physical endurance test. Through this method, Grahem et. al (1998) was able to compare both straight caffeine and caffeine contained in coffee and note any difference in endurance capabilities. Through this, he discovered a significant increase in endurance of the participants when they consumed the caffeine capsule compared to the coffee. This suggests that the ergogenic benefits of caffeine creates a larger measurable effect than straight coffee which is speculated by Grahem et.al (1995) to be due to the other numerous