Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Strength Training Draft

383 views

Published on

  • WONDERFUL JOB on that...I've been using a service called MLMRC which automates your downline building. Works with any MLM business. Try it: www.mlmrc.com
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Strength Training Draft

  1. 1. Strength Training: The Experienced VS the Inexperienced Team Merle Anthony Robbins, Charlene Logan, Valerie Nielson, Danielle Harrison
  2. 2. Abstract There are many health benefits to strength training, but it may be difficult to obtain the wanted muscle hypertrophy in a strength training regimen based on prior experience. To determine whether there is a difference between experienced (EXP) and inexperienced (INEXP) strength trainers in muscle hypertrophy, 70 students, both male and female between the ages of 18 and 26 years of age from Brigham Young University Idaho (BYU-I), were placed into two groups: EXP and INEXP based on whether they had previously participated in a strength training program for at least three consecutive months. The participants performed seven different exercises for this study (Squat, Bench Press, Bicep Curl, Leg Extension, Leg Curl, Lat Pulls, and Triceps). The maximum rep weight was recorded pre-workout regimen, six weeks into the workout regimen, and 12 weeks into the workout regimen. The difference in the maximum weight rep was measured at pre-workout regimen and at 12 weeks into the regimen. A t-test was done for each exercise performed. When the separate data groups were evaluated, significant p- values were found in the Bench Press (p-value of 0.007333), Leg Extension (p-value of 0.014628), and Leg Curl (p-value of 0.037935) exercises. Based on the results of the t- test, there is no difference between the average change of weight lifted for EXP and INEXP participants and there is no difference in muscular hypertrophy amongst EXP and INEXP.
  3. 3. Introduction Strength training is an essential part to a healthy balanced workout. Benefits from a strength-training program include: increased bone density, disease prevention, energy boost, and improvements in mood (Seguin, R., & Nelson, M. E. (2003). It is not as easy to observe the results in a strength-training program as compared to an endurance-training program. In a study of 19 healthy adult women, they measured their muscular hypertrophy in a strength-training program that included 12 types of exercises for seven muscle groups. Significant changes in muscle mass were not observed until week six of their training (Yamaji, S., Demura, S., Watanabe, N., & Uchiyama, M. (2010). In endurance training, health improvements can start to be observed within the first week of exercising (Paton, C., Hopkins, W.G., 2004). Therefore with strength training programs, there are lower retention rates. In one study there was as great as a 75% drop out rate due to the length and intensity of the exercises (Cyarto, E. V., Brown, W. J., & Marshall, A. L. (2006). To help increase retention and adherence rates in a strength-training regimen, many studies have been conducted to find a technique that would allow for the greatest rate of improvement. One factor measured was age. Over a 12-week period, a group of various aged young adults were involved in a study where their non-dominant arm was strengthened and measured. At the end of the testing period, within the young adult category, there was no significant difference between the rate of muscular hypertrophy and their age (Lowndes,J., Carpenter, R.L., Zoeller, R.F., Seip, R.L, Moyna, N.M., Price, T.B., Angelopulos, T.J., 2009).
  4. 4. Another study was conducted comparing periodic resistance training with continuous resistance training. The results were similar with no significant difference, though there was a slight increase in muscle hypertrophy found in periodic resistance training (Ogasawara, R., Yasuda, T., Ishii, N., & Abe, T. (2013). One study, however, did find that with high intensity workouts, one could start seeing skeletal muscular growth within three to four weeks of their training program. (DeFreitas, J., Beck,T., Stock, M., Dillion, M., & Kasishke, P., 2011). In another study, the researchers were able to see results earlier, if the participant was actively training and previously experienced. They saw muscular increase as early as week two with these participants. However, these results are not consistent. Another study was conducted comparing experienced (EXP) individuals and inexperienced (INEXP) individuals. After eight weeks of training both groups had the same muscular gains. EXP participants and athletes often hit a max threshold of muscular development with very acute muscular architectural changes in a continuous resistance training regimen (Reardon et al., 2014). Therefore in our study, we want to know in resistance training, would an EXP participant have greater muscular hypertrophy as opposed to an INEXP participant. As EXP and INEXP participants are assessed with three different workout regimens over a 12-week period, we hypothesize that the INEXP participants will see greater muscular hypertrophy.
  5. 5. Methods Subjects A group of 70 Brigham Young University-Idaho (BYU-I) students, ranging from the ages of 18 to 26, volunteered to participate in a 12 week weight training program. In order to qualify for this study, the participants were not to be involved in any previous weight training program for more than two weeks within a six month period prior to this study. Before beginning the study, participants filled out and signed multiple consent forms and health questionnaires, which informed them what the study was about and also assessed their health. Two participants were eventually excluded from the study, as they were unable to fulfill the study’s requirements as well as one participant who was a statistical outlier. The data used for the pre-said study was originally collected by a group of exercise physiology students at BYU-I. Testing Protocol Before testing, each participant underwent a three-session familiarization period. During these sessions, participants became accustomed to the movement and technique of the lifts before adding additional weight. To record squat depth accurately, surgical tubing was used to mark receptive depth once the participant’s thigh was parallel with the ground. At the beginning of weeks zero, six, and 12, the participant’s one rep max (1 RM) was measured on seven required exercises: squat, bench press, bicep curl, leg extension, leg curl, lat pulls, and tricep extension. At week zero, 1 RM assessments were performed twice—each test performed at least 48 hours apart. Between the two tests, the higher 1 RM was used for statistical purposes in the study.
  6. 6. Groups Participants were placed in two groups according to experience: Experienced (EXP) and Inexperienced (INEXP), which consisted of 30 and 37 participants respectively. Participants who were placed in the EXP group were those who had previously performed in at least three consecutive months of a weight training regimen. The INEXP group consisted of participants who had performed in less than three consecutive months of a previous weight training regimen. The participants in these groups were then additionally spilt up into three other groups: 1-set (n=20), 1-3 set (n=22) and 3-set (n=25). Participants in the 1-set group completed one set of each lift three days per week for 12 weeks. The 1-3 set group completed one set for three days per week for the first six weeks and then for the final six weeks completed three sets of each lift three days a week. The 3-set group completed three sets of each lift three days per week for all 12 weeks. Training Program Each participant performed seven different exercises: squat, bench press, bicep curl, leg extension, leg curl, lat pulls, and tricep extension. These exercises were performed three days per week for 12 weeks. The participants lifted 82 percent of their 1 RM for weeks one, two, seven, and eight; 87 percent for weeks three, four, nine, and 10; and 93 percent for weeks five, six, 11, and 12. This periodization of weight lifting was used to focus on the improvement of the 1 RM. Participants who were placed in the 3-set group and the 1-3 set group were given a two to three minute resting period in between each set.
  7. 7. Analysis Changes in pounds lifted in 1 RM between EXP and INEXP groups were recorded as real differences (RD). Percent differences (PD) were calculated afterwards. The collective data was separated into testing groups to control for variation in exercise, week of record, regimen intensity, and type of difference. Testing groups did not control for EXP and INEXP. Variances for RD and PD of the EXP and the INEXP participants were measured using Microsoft Excel 2013’s VAR.S formula for each testing group. If the smaller variation multiplied by four was less than the larger variation a heteroscedastic t-test was performed to find the p-value of the results. If the smaller variation multiplied by four was greater than the larger variation, a homoscedastic t-test was performed. Significance for both t-tests was set at p < 0.05. For this study there were a total of 91 t-tests performed. The average real change (ARC) and average percent change (APC) was also found for EXP and INEXP in each testing group. The first test will be a t-test for APC that controls for variations in the training period and will look for a significant difference in the APC of EXP and INEXP for all of the exercises performed and exercise groups at the 0-12 Week Difference. Due to a lack of data involving some of participants in the study and statistical outliers, only five of the seven exercises were tested. Results When the separate data groups were evaluated no significant difference was found in the squat (see Table 1) and bicep curl exercises (see Table 2). Significant results were found in the bench press (see Table 3), leg extension (see Table 4), and leg curl (see Table 5) exercises. There were eight significant results from the t-tests performed. One of
  8. 8. these results was in the upper body area and the other seven were in the lower body area. This seems to indicate that muscle growth variation is most apparent in lower body muscle groups. Table 1: P-values of the real change and percent change for Squat exercise at 0-6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and 0-12 weeks. Squat p-values Week 0-6 DIF 6-12 DIF 0-12 DIF Type of Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Group 1-1 0.891311 0.458824 0.113387 0.33681 0.23058 0.973864 Group 1-3 0.360602 0.102519 0.145851 0.338176 0.921301 0.426549 Group 3-3 0.081229 0.15431 0.495041 0.50759 0.218955 0.542086 Table 2: P-values of the real change and percent change for Bicep Curl exercise at 0-6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and 0-12 weeks. Table 3: P-values of the real change and percent change for Bench Press exercise at 0-6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and 0-12 weeks. *Significant p-value result Bicep Curl p-values Week 0-6 DIF 6-12 DIF 0-12 DIF Type of Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Group 1-1 0.871877 0.306218 0.328041 0.770644 0.630375 0.251692 Group 1-3 0.546014 0.342956 0.511406 0.958814 0.919751 0.424339 Group 3-3 0.650629 0.64292 0.463999 0.71412 0.379523 0.83578 Bench Press p-values Week 0-6 DIF 6-12 DIF 0-12 DIF Type of Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Group 1-1 0.091609 0.381213 0.195026 0.710018 *0.007333 0.793187 Group 1-3 0.387469 0.639307 0.530058 0.796872 0.204021 0.954183 Group 3-3 0.535336 0.371514 0.540259 0.832061 0.960728 0.644078
  9. 9. Table 4: P-values of the real change and percent change for Leg Extension exercise at 0-6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and 0-12 weeks. Leg Extension p-values Week 0-6 DIF 6-12 DIF 0-12 DIF Type of Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Group 1-1 *0.005196 *0.002677 0.150725 0.150391 0.495596 *0.032616 Group 1-3 0.467207 0.360547 0.324925 0.32635 0.158252 0.143789 Group 3-3 *0.049181 0.087677 0.234796 0.89533 *0.014628 0.072213 *Significant p-value result Table 5: P-values of the real change and percent change for Leg Curl exercise at 0-6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and 0-12 weeks. Leg Curl p-values Week 0-6 DIF 6-12 DIF 0-12 DIF Type of Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Real Change Percent Change Group 1-1 0.454869 0.614461 0.215408 0.097265 0.636715 0.417631 Group 1-3 0.097261 0.0716 0.19452 0.169105 *0.037935 *0.040454 Group 3-3 0.777444 0.464765 0.458711 0.455201 0.760229 0.241654 *Significant p-value result Bench Press Exercise In the bench press exercise Group 1-1 showed a significant difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 6 change. The real difference in weight lifted between EXP participants and INEXP participants was 9.2 lbs., with EXP participants lifting more. See Table 6. Leg Extension Exercise In the leg extension exercise Group 1-1 showed a significant difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 6 change. The real difference lifted in weight between EXP participants and INEXP participants was 14.8 lbs., with INEXP participants lifting more. Group 1-1 showed a significant percent difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 6 change. The percent difference between
  10. 10. EXP and INEXP participants was 5.6, with EXP participants lifting more. Group 1-1 also showed a significant percent difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 12 change. The percent difference between EXP participants and INEXP participants was 16.8, with INEXP participants lifting more. In the leg extension exercise Group 3-3 showed a significant real difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 6 change. The real difference between EXP participants and INEXP participants was 19.0 lbs., with EXP participants lifting more. In the leg extension exercise Group 3-3 showed a significant real difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 12 change. The real difference between EXP participants and INEXP participants was 8.19 lbs., with INEXP participants lifting more. See Table 6. Leg Curl Exercise In the leg curl exercise Group 1-3 showed a significant real difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 12 change. The real difference between EXP participants and INEXP participants was 9.09 lbs., with INEXP participants lifting more. Group 1-3 also showed a significant percent difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the Week 0 to Week 12 change. The percent difference between EXP participants and INEXP participants was 4.27, with INEXP participants lifting more. See Table 6.
  11. 11. Table 6: Significant differences in Bench Press, Leg Extension, and Leg Curl exercises among EXP and INEXP participants. The differences are divided by exercise group, type of difference (real change or percent change),as well as time measurement. Exercise Exercise Group Type of Difference Time Measurement Difference between EXP and INEXP P-value Bench Press Group 1-1 Real Change Week 0-6 9.196429 lbs 0.007 Leg Extension Group 1-1 Real Change Week 0-6 14.80303 lbs 0.005196 Leg Extension Group 1-1 Percent Change Week 0-6 21.23% 0.002677 Leg Extension Group 1-1 Percent Change Week 0-12 16.79% 0.032616 Leg Extension Group 3-3 Real Change Week 0-6 19.02778 lbs 0.049181 Leg Extension Group 3-3 Real Change Week 0-12 26.11111 lbs 0.014628 Leg Curl Group 1-3 Real Change Week 0-12 10.77273 lbs 0.037935 Leg Curl Group 1-3 Percent Change Week 0-12 15.68% 0.040454 In the first t-test, the researchers were looking for a significant difference between EXP and INEXP participants at the 0-12 Week difference measurement. EXP participants had an APC of 30.34 percent and the INEXP participants had an APC of 34.35 percent. The overall p-value of these findings was measured as 0.081 from the PC, therefore the finding was insignificant at  = 0.05. The following figures demonstrate the ARC in pounds lifted for the EXP and INEXP participants for weeks 0-6, 6-12, and the overall difference for the squat, bench press, bicep curl, leg extension, and leg curl exercises (Figure 1).
  12. 12. Discussion
  13. 13. Based on the results of the t-test, we fail to reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the average change of weight lifted for EXP and INEXP participants. There is no difference in muscular hypertrophy between EXP and INEXP strength training participants. The results and progression of each participant were measured the same. This study, amongst other studies that we have reviewed, concluded to the same results. The different exercise regimens didn’t have an effect on which group performed better. This study is important because the duration of the study is three semesters worth of information, which causes for a strong study with strong data. This study involved all major muscle groups, all of which were tested and have actual measured mass. The limitations of this study include outside activities among the involved participants; each individual’s eating habits and daily schedule may have some effect to the results of each exercise performed. Also, this study was conducted by a third party, which may have caused misinterpretations of the data that was collected. Future research needs would be to have the participants record their weight more often and see when the highest peak of change is. In conclusion, knowing that EXP and INEXP individuals show no significant difference in muscle gain can confirm that muscle strength and endurance training helps anyone improve with any workout regimen. This can be extremely motivational to those who have never participated in a strength training regimen to know that success is attainable.
  14. 14. References Abe, T., DeHoyos, D. V., Pollock, M. L., & Garzarella, L. (2000). Time course for strength and muscle thickness changes following upper and lower body resistance training in men and women. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 81(3), 174- 180. doi:10.1007/s004210050027 Ae-Rim, H., Sang-Min, H., & Yun-A, S. (2014). Effects of Resistance Training on Muscle Strength, Endurance, and Motor Unit According to Ciliary Neurotrophic Factor Polymorphism in Male College Students. Journal Of Sports Science & Medicine, 13(3), 680-688. Cyarto, E. V., Brown, W. J., & Marshall, A. L. (2006). Retention, adherence and compliance: Important considerations for home- and group-based resistance training programs for older adults. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 9(5), 402-412 DeFreitas, J., Beck, T., Stock, M., Dillon, M., & Kasishke, P. (2011). An examination of the time course of training-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 111(11), 2785-2790. Flann, K. L., LaStayo, P. C., McClain, D. A., Hazel, M., & Lindstedt, S. L. (2011). Muscle damage and muscle remodeling: No pain, no gain? Journal of Experimental Biology, 214(4), 674-679. Fontana, F. E. (2007). The effects of exercise intensity on decision making performance of experienced and inexperienced soccer players. (Order No. 3270093, University of Pittsburgh). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 134. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304839174?accountid=9817. (304839174)
  15. 15. Lowndes, J., Carpenter, R. L., Zoeller, R. F., Seip, R. L., Moyna, N. M., Price, T. B., . . . Angelopoulos, T. J. (2009). Association of age with muscle size and strength before and after short-term resistance training in young adults. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research / National Strength & Conditioning Association, 23(7), 1915. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b94b35 Ogasawara, R., Yasuda, T., Ishii, N., & Abe, T. (2013). Comparison of muscle hypertrophy following 6-month of continuous and periodic strength training. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 113(4), 975-985. doi:10.1007/s00421- 012-2511-9 Paton, C., Hopkins, W.G., (2004). Effects of High-intensity Training on Performance and Physiology of Endurance Athletes. Sportscience 8, 25-40. Reardon, D., Hoffman, J. R., Mangine, G. T., Wells, A. J., Gonzalez, A. M., Jajtner, A. R., . . . Fukuda, D. H. (2014). Do changes in muscle architecture affect post- activation potentiation? JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCE AND MEDICINE, 13(3), 483-492. Seguin, R., & Nelson, M. E. (2003). The benefits of strength training for older adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 25(3), 141-149. Yamaji, S., Demura, S., Watanabe, N., & Uchiyama, M. (2010). Slow movement resistance training in women. Health, 02(10), 1156.

×