Discussion Overall from this experiment, the results support the null hypothesis: that caffeine has no significance

on BRPM and BPM after exercise, with a t value of 1.5 for BPM and 0.8 for BRPM (See Appendix 2(a) and 2(b) for data), and as such the null hypothesis was supported by these results. However the range of the data varied significantly (see Appendix 2(c) for tabulated data) in terms of both the change in both BRPM and BPM in both DECAF and CAF, which suggests that the large variance of data could have made a substantial impact upon the outcome. This is further seen in relation to the limitations of the experimental procedure. The random subject selection resulting in vast differences across replicates in terms of size, athletic ability, and average daily intake of caffeine; this could impact upon the overall effect of caffeine on individual subjects and result in statistical incongruities. This contrasts greatly to other experiments on the impact of caffeine in BRPM and BPM (McLellan & Bell 2004, p. 2; Yasufumi et al. 2002, p. 476), whereby subjects were selected on health and age similarities so as to limit statistical variability, as athletes and healthier subjects can provide more consistent day to day performance and as such may increase experimental reliability (Astorino & Roberson 2010, p. 6). Although through the utilisation of a random subject selection for this experiment, a more accurate representation of the population and the impact of caffeine on BPM and BRPM was obtained in contrast to other studies, where only minorities selected by their health and similarities were analysed.

Furthermore the moderate intensity exercise performed by the subjects may have also yielded conflicts in experimental results to other experiments, as most studies choose high intensity exercises so as to show a greater difference in overall impact of the

exercises on BPRM and BPM, as the effects may be more noticeable at higher metabolic rate, as found in studies by Ryu (2001), where high intensity exercises were used to achieve valid results, rather than the moderate intensity incremental step exercise which was utilised in this experiment. This is one limitation of this experiment that could be addressed under further investigation of the impact of caffeine on BPM and BRPM.

However, not all studies showed a correlation between results, some demonstrated a significant relationship between the ingestion of caffeine before exercise on BPM and BRPM, however others, like Hadjicharalambous (2006), reported, like the results obtained within this experiment showed no significant increase or decrease in BPM and BRPM after exercise with the consumption of caffeine versus non- consumption. The overall results of studies also differed considerably depending upon the amount of caffeine that was given to each subject depending upon their weight (Malec et al. 2006, p. 3), and yet the experimental procedure within this experiment ensured that each subject was given the same amount of either placebo or the treatment regardless of their weight, other studies also took into account the average daily intake of caffeine of each subject, and their meal consumption before the experiment was undertaken. Through utilising a similar approach, this experiment could have ensured a more reliable outcome, rather than randomly selecting subjects that may have even ingested caffeine before the experiment was undertaken, despite later ingesting the placebo (DECAF). To further allow for a more reliable experimental outcome, the same subjects should have been used for the control group (DECAF) as well as the treatment (CAF), and would have allowed for more valid outcome, as each subject may have varied in terms

of their responses in BPM and BRPM in both sample groups. Therefore the experimental data suggests that caffeine has no significant effect on the change in BPM and BRPM after exercise, as there was no obvious or notable difference in BPM or BRPM for the control group (DECAF) or the treatment group (CAF). This overall supports the null hypothesis.