After researching the possible effects of music, Elaina proposes that if people listen to faster-paced music, their pulse rates will increase more than if they listen to slower music. Her mother listens to classic rock at a high volume for 30 minutes, her younger brother listens to classical music quietly while he sleeps at night, and her grandmother listens to two hours of rap at a medium volume. Elaina records each person's pulse before and after listening to the music.

Question

What is missing from Elaina's scientific investigation?

Answer 1

Elaina's scientific investigation is missing a control group and a standardized measurement of the conditions under which the music is played. Here are some specific elements that could enhance her research:

1. Control Group: There should be a control group that does not listen to any music or listens to music with a neutral tempo to compare the effects on pulse rate.

2. Standardized Conditions: More consistency in the environment and conditions under which the music is played (e.g., room temperature, time of day, activity level before listening) would help ensure that any changes in pulse rate are due to the music tempo and not other factors.

3. Sample Size: Including more participants who listen to the different genres of music (fast-paced and slow-paced) would improve the reliability of the findings.

4. Clear Definitions: Elaina should define what constitutes "faster-paced" and "slower-paced" music, as well as the specific genres.

5. Measurement Methodology: A standardized method for measuring pulse rates before and after listening (such as the same duration of measurement time, same equipment, etc.) ensures consistency.

6. Additional Variables: Consideration of other factors that could affect pulse rate, such as participants' existing health conditions, age, and level of physical activity, which could confound the results.

Addressing these aspects would strengthen the validity and reliability of Elaina's investigation.