BIOLOGY HOMEWORK

Assignment Instructions

Part 1: Personal Experience

1. Describe how you personally felt after going through your chosen treatment. Did you experience a reduction in stress? How do you know? How long did the effects last?
2. Studies show that stress reduction benefits increase with regular use. How likely are you to continue with either practicing mindfulness meditation or limiting social media use on your own? What are the potential benefits? What could be the challenges of continuing this routine?
3. Do you think the other stress reduction treatment (the one you did not personally do) would work better or worse for you, compared to the treatment you chose? Why?

Part 2: Experiment Conclusions

1. Copy and paste the graph you created from Reducing Stress? Data Analysis here.
2. Summarize the results of your data analysis as seen in your graph. Did mindfulness practice reduce stress? Did limiting social media use reduce stress? Which one was more effective? Be sure to include specific values from your analysis.
3. Using at least one source, write a short paragraph about how the stress response might be altered by either mindfulness meditation or limiting social media use (you may pick either). Be sure to describe the physiological basis of the response - what is physically happening in the body? To help you think about physiological changes, remember the measurements you took in the Physiology and Health Analysis Labwhen you were doing the mindfulness meditation and what changes you noticed were occurring. If using A.I., explain the importance of the diurnal cortisol slope.
   • Be sure that the source is credible, and include both an in-text citation and a full citation in your works cited.
4. Did the results of our experiment agree with your explanation from question #3? Why do you think this might have been the case?
   • It may be helpful to review your notes from Lesson - Nervous System and the Stress Pathway to integrate relevant physiology information into your discussion.

Part 3: Experimental Design Critique

The goal of this research study is to understand how effectively mindfulness meditation and/or limiting social media use reduce stress levels. An important part of any research study is assessing the significance of the results — How much of these results can be generalized?

1. Name at least one variable that we did not control for while conducting this experiment (i.e., a variable that we did not measure). Explain what it was and how it could have affected the results.
2. Identify at least 2 potential limitations of this experiment, considering factors such as the duration of the study, sample size, use of controls, demographics of participants, and measurement protocol. Explain how each of these limitations might affect the interpretation and generalizability of the results. (You may find it helpful to review the Evaluating Experimental Design and Scientific Claims page as you write this response.).
3. If you were to replicate this study to test this hypothesis, how could you improve the study design? Explain at least two changes that you would make and why they would improve the quality of this study from a scientific perspective. If using A.I., incorporate statistical modeling in your answer.
4. What new question(s) do you have based on your findings from this class experiment? Explain. You must list at least one new question.

Submission

Create a document that includes the graphs from your data analysis and the answers to the questions above. Submit this assignment in a Word document or pdf format.

Grading

To see how this assignment will be graded, scroll down to view the grading rubric. If no rubric is visible, click on the three dots in the upper right corner of this page, then click "Show Rubric". If you're reviewing this assignment using the Canvas mobile app, the rubric is included in the Grade tab.

Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Personal Experience	4 to >2.0 pts Complete Reflection thoughtfully addresses all questions and provides adequate depth. 2 to >0.0 pts Incomplete Reflection does not address all questions, or responses are incomplete, or is lacking in significant depth. 0 pts No Submission	4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Graph	4 to >3.0 pts Exellent Data is summarized using an appropriate graph type. Axes are appropriately labeled and a figure title is provided. 3 to >2.0 pts Good Data is summarized using an appropriate graph type but is missing a minor component(s). 2 to >0.0 pts Needs Improvement Inappropriate graph type is selected to represent data, and/or data is not aggregated, and/or graph is missing several components (e.g., no/incorrect axes labels, no figure title, etc.). 0 pts No Submission	4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Experiment Conclusions and Graphs	8 to >7.0 pts Excellent Student provides a logical and insightful interpretation of the experimental results. Response effectively incorporates relevant information from a credible source to explain the physiological mechanism of stress reduction. Relevant biological content is incorporated into the explanation to explain each treatment's effect on stress levels. 7 to >6.0 pts Good Student provides a logical interpretation of the experimental results. Response incorporates relevant information from a credible source to explain the physiological mechanism of stress reduction but could benefit from elaboration or clarity. Relevant biological content is incorporated into the explanation to explain each treatment's effect on stress levels but may be missing some relevant details. 6 to >4.0 pts Developing Student provides an interpretation that is only partially supported by the experimental results. A source is provided, but may not be very relevant or summary is lacking in details. Some biological content is present in the explanation but is lacking significant details. 4 to >0.0 pts Needs Improvement Student provides an interpretation that is not supported by the data. Multiple required elements are missing, contain major inaccuracies, and/or lacks citations. Little to no biology content is incorporated into the explanation. 0 pts No Submission	8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 3: Critique of Experimental Design	8 to >7.0 pts Excellent Student responded insightfully to all four critique prompts and provides justification, where appropriate. Response incorporates information from Evaluating Experimental Design and Scientific Claims. 7 to >6.0 pts Good Students responded to all four critique prompts but responses need further explanation or analysis, or student responded insightfully to three critique prompts, and there is a major issue with one of them. Response incorporates information from Evaluating Experimental Design and Scientific Claims. 6 to >4.0 pts Developing Student attempted to respond to the four critique prompts, but may not provide appropriate justification for their responses. Response does not include information from Evaluating Experimental Design and Scientific Claims. 4 to >0.0 pts Needs Improvement Response attempts to address some of the four critique questions but contains major inaccuracies or contains no justification for their answers. 0 pts No Submission	8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource is properly cited	1 pts Appropriate source cited as in-text citation and a properly formatted reference list. 0.5 pts Source improperly formatted or not fully cited. 0 pts No Marks	1 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpelling and Grammar	0 pts Full credit Submission has no (or only minor) spelling and grammar errors. 0 pts Spelling/Grammar deduction 10% deduction for excessive spelling and grammar errors.	0 pts
Total Points: 25