Essay Sample on Glucose as a Source of Energy for Self-Control

Hypothesis, Participants and Results

The experiment sought to test the hypothesis that humans are not unique in their dependency on glucose as a source of energy for self-control. Nonhuman processes of self-control also depend on a similar biological resource as human self-control processes. The participants in the experiment were dogs of different breeds and age; both male and female from private owners. All the dogs had been trained to sit and remain immobile at the owner's command for at least two consecutive minutes.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The results indicated that the sense of self is not fundamentally necessary for self-regulatory behaviors nor is it necessary for incurring the metabolic cost of a prior self-regulatory exertion. Ability to coordinate rule-based past and current goal-directed cuts across nonhuman species.

Methods and Reactions to the Study

The investigation involved two experiments with the second one having a slight alteration from the first one. For the first experiment, the participating subjects were 12 recruited dogs; 10 males and 2 females of different breeds from private owners. They aged between 10 - 132 months. Also, the dogs had been initially trained, upon owner's instruction to sit and remain calm for at least two minutes (Miller et al. 534-538). Procedurally, I gave the dogs a Tug-A-Jug toy to play with for 20minutes per day for one week before the experiment. I filled the toy with food that could only be obtained upon sufficient manipulation by the dogs because the cylinder had a small hole. This experience made the dogs react as if there was food every time they were given the toy. Upon ratings on basis of the level training, I matched the dogs in pairs depending on their training history and I also matched some for the breed. From each pair, I randomly assigned a dog to either self-control condition or control condition.

I withheld food from the subjects for 4 hours before the experimental session. At the start of the experiment, I gave each dog the toy contained a small wooden block and a half wiener designed no escape the toy, and 150 g of dog food (Miller et al. 534-538). I allowed the dog to interact with the toy until it was able to get at least 2g of the dog food after which I cued the dogs in self-control condition to sit and remain in position while I exited the room leaving the door slightly ajar. Secretly, I observed the dog and rescued it back to its position consecutively so that it remained alone in the room for 10 minutes. After releasing the dog, I gave it a small piece of wiener, praised for 30 seconds before giving it a toy that now contained only half a wiener and a block of wood.

The dog manipulated the toy but could not release any of the components. Using a stopwatch and a video camera, I measured the amount of time the dog persisted playing with the toy. I retrieved the toy once a dog consecutively ignored it for two minutes. I carried out the tests in alternation with the dogs in the control condition (Miller et al. 534-538). The procedure was similar except that after the dog obtained the food, I put the dog in a cage and closed the door. After exiting the room, I kept rescuing the dog to remain in the cage just like in the self-conditioned dog. I released the dog after 10 minutes and I proceeded with the procedure as in the self-control condition.

For the second experiment, the procedure was similar to the first one, except that after the 10 minutes waiting period and praising it for 30 seconds, the dog was either given glucose drink or a sugar-free placebo. I gave each dog two minutes to digest the beverage before giving it the unsolvable task. Again, I measured the time that the dog persisted playing with the toy using a video camera and a stopwatch.

Conclusion

In summary, if I was a participant in the study (in place of dogs), I would not have guesses the hypotheses of the study nor the intentions based on its scientific complexity. My reactions as a participant would be filled with anxiety and rather calculated because unlike the dogs that, as a human, I would be fully aware that this is an experiment aimed at investigating something. It would make me cautious about my behavior during the experiment, something that is likely to affect the results. The study would be fun because as it appears, it would involve very interactive sessions of a challenge to acquire something edible (treats from the toy). I would not have faced a challenge performing the task because it cannot be termed complex and also because, before the start of the experiment, I would have been customized to the toy.

Work Cited

Miller, Holly C. et al. "Self-Control Without A "Self"?" Psychological Science 21.4 (2010): 534-538. Web. 16 Nov. 2018.