1. Effects of Instability versus Traditional Resistance Training on Strength, Power and
Velocity in Untrained Men
What the authors are studying in this journal article is the different effects of a
traditional training program versus an instability resistance-training program. The authors
are using these programs to test the upper and lower body in areas of strength, power,
speed, and jumping ability. Despite changes to their workouts, no big changes were found
in the two experimental groups. The authors used different training devices to test the
untrained men to put them under stable conditions. Despite all that their one rep maximum
for strength, power, speed, and jumping ability did not increase more with one program or
the other.
Past studies show that strength-training programs assigned under stable conditions
are excellent for improving power through lifts, as well as jumping ability. Past studies also
show that circuit weight training is very effective at improving performance in beginner
men/athletes. The authors chose to do this study because some authors like Anderson and
Behm identified a need for more investigation into short and long-term affects for
instability training programs. Also many different hypotheses were created from 2000-
2007 so they needed to be tested. Some authors said people needed to test things such as
the stiffness of the men’s joints through the lifts, how posture could affect the men’s bones,
how the joints adjust to the weight, and whole body instability.
The subjects were 36 students from the faculty of Physical Activity and Sport
Sciences split into three groups. First was the control group (CG) made up of 12 men whose
age was 20-24 years and weight was 65-85 kg, Second was experimental group one
consisted of 12 men who were 18-24 years, and 66-84 kg, Third was experimental group

2. two which included 12 men of 21-23 years of age, and weighed 65-79 kg. What makes
these men unique is the fact that they are all young 18-24 all in pretty good shape because
they already were working out 2-3 times a week, meaning that the young men have already
had experience with free weights like bench press and such. This is not a good sample of
the world population, but as for the population students in college the subjects represent it
very well. Which one would think the population in this case is, the students. The authors
put them into two different situations, in one situation the men practiced with traditional
training and the other was instability training. This is a multi-method experiment because
of the fact that the authors use numbers to analyze the results of their tests, but then they
explain the results trailing back to the joints, observing the participants, and content
analysis.
The main findings in the experiments were actually quite strange. Throughout the
seven-week program the subjects were tested. What the authors found out was that the
control group, who didn’t do training, had nearly no difference in ability in each of the
areas of strength, velocity, and power. As for the other two groups, traditional resistance
training and instability circuit training was a different story. For instability circuit training
(ICR) their weights and distances went up tremendously in a seven-week program. To give
one an example the instability circuit-training subject’s back squat went up 10.83
kilograms; bench press went up 3.67 kilograms, etc. On the other hand traditional
resistance training went up too, but there is not a big difference between the results in the
two programs. For example, men’s back squat went up 10.8 kilograms, and the men’s bench
press went up 3.5 kilograms. So the different training programs according to the numbers
produced practically the same results in a seven-week period.

3. The overall findings in this study are for healthy, physically active individuals with
little experience in resistance training can use either approach. Whether its instability
training using devices that produce instability throughout the body, or the more traditional
weight training including free weights, the outcome would be almost the same. The authors
do suggest to use cross-training, which means if one would use traditional training with
free weights, use instability exercises as complimentary to give the muscles a variation of
training to form them to be more developed. These findings are important because if one
was just trying to get strong, the subjects would probably use the more traditional
approach, but if one would want to be an athlete. Then one would want to use a
combination of traditional and instability training because athletes need more dynamic
movements than just somebody who is trying to look big and strong. There was one
limitation that one could notice in the article, which was that the authors only did the tests
on young males. What if they did the experiment on young females, or possibly a different
age group, but the authors didn’t point that out. One suggestion that the authors made for
future study was to experiment with athletic training in sports such as basketball or
volleyball at least two or three times a week. The authors said it would be interesting to see
a test done with the instability approach to improve the athlete’s performance in terms of
gains in strength, power, speed and jumping ability.