Hannah Croy and Sophia Whitesel

Ms. Coley (Period 1)

CHS Statistics
24 January 2018

The students conducted this experiment to find how far people could walk in a straight
line without their vision. The trials were conducted along a 100 foot-long, three-foot wide strip.
The participant was blind folded, by a pair of blacked out ski goggles, at the beginning of the
strip and asked to walk normally. The students asked the participant to stop moving as soon as
they the students saw them step a whole foot out of bounds. Three trials were recorded for each
participant, measured in inches, and averaged out to find their individual mean travel distance.
The students only took away the participants vision while leaving their other senses alone. The
hallway remained quiet for the duration of all trails so that the participants could not rely on
sound to guide them down the strip. Two students walked behind and in front of the participant
in order to correctly collect their distance traveled. The students then measured the distance from
the beginning of the strip to the heal of the foot that stepped completely out of bounds.

Sample Mean: 521.3998714

Sample mean was found by adding the list of average trial length then divided by the
number of participants.
Sample Standard Deviation: 175.4837515
Critical Value (tc): 2.160368652
Critical value was found by taking invT for a 95% confidence interval.
Margin of Error: 101.3213014
Margin of error was found by multiplying the above standard deviation and margin of
error, then divided by the square root of fourteen. Fourteen represented the number of
participants.
Confidence Interval: (420.07857, 622.7211728)
The confidence interval was found by both adding and subtracting the margin of error
from the mean trial length.

Overall, there is no definitive correlation to the data. The only thing that the students can
conclude is that most of the participants walked a farther distance their second trial. The students
believe this is because the participant was more focused on walking in a straight line. If the
students were to conduct the experiment again, they would take note of the direction in which the
participant veered off course. The students would then see if there was any correlation between
the distance walked and the direction they veered off course. The students’ data could be skewed
because the students disregarded the trials where a participant exceeded the 100-foot strip. There
also is a possibility that the distance traveled could be slightly off due to human error.
 Average Trial
Length
Name # Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 (inches)
Emma Stumm 1 1108.103 384.3309 455.4412 649.2917
Regina Torchia 2 539.9412 522.4412 625.5515 562.6446
Finn O'Shea 3 247.2206 1173.103 453.4412 624.5883
Michaela Shrimm 4 210.7206 1137.103 705.6618 684.4951
Hannah Croy 5 241.2206 295.2206 252.8505 263.0972
Alex Hoehn 6 290.2206 969.6324 238.7206 499.5245
Sophia Whitesel 7 227.2206 371.8309 169.1103 256.0539
Joanna Belechak 8 1100.7427 559.5515 874.7721 845.0221
Brooke Carmazzi 9 343.3309 426.4412 262.2206 343.9976
Aaron Ventresca 10 487.4412 687.6618 995.8824 723.6618
Malia Fairbrother 11 484.4412 569.5515 240.2206 431.4044
Ryan Feczko 12 310.3309 323.3309 540.5515 391.4044
Brooke Wiethorn 13 505.8113 522.4412 356.3309 461.5278
Keaton Jennings 14 708.6618 542.5515 437.4412 562.8848