1. POSTER TEMPLATE BY:
www.PosterPresentations.com
Relative Improvement in Collegiate Endurance Running
Marshall Milbrath, MEd; Laura Capasso, MS; and Sharla Schroeder, MA
University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO 80639
Introduction Discussion
References and Correspondence
Research Questions
Humanistic desire to improve athletic ability
influences prospective student-athlete decisions
when picking a college.
Providing humanistic sport environments in training
is largely promoted in Track & Field stressing
personal improvement over competitive victory.
In collegiate track and field endurance running, a
source of humanistic fulfillment may be seen
through:
• Improving personal best competition times
• Achieving personal goals
Assessing the extent to which personal best times
improve may be an indication of humanistic
fulfillment.
RQ1: Is there a difference in relative improvement for track and field athletes between levels of
collegiate competition?
RQ2: Is there a difference in relative improvement for track and field athletes between males and
females?
RQ3: Are any differences in relative improvement for track and field athletes between males and
females different between level of competition?
Purpose
Investigate mean differences of percent
improvement between sex and level of collegiate
competition (NCAA Division I v.s. Division III) of elite
collegiate track and field endurance runners.
Methods
Data Collection
Collect competition results from www.tffrs.org.
Subjects
• NCAA National Championships qualifier in only
one middle/long distance running event
• Started and ended in same year (4 years)
• Competed for only one college team
Analysis
• Calculate percent improvement between 1st year
personal best and overall personal best.
(Transformed to correct violation of normality)
• ANCOVAAnalysis
o Control for 1st year personal best
(standardized)
o Between sex differences
o Between division (D-I v.s. D-III) differences
o Sex*Division interaction
Results
Due to the Principle of Diminishing Return,
Comparing D-I and D-III athletes could bias results
as D-III athletes likely to have larger potential for
improvement due to lesser athletic ability justifying
the use of a covariate
Main effects suggest:
• D-I athletes, on average, improve more over
their careers than D-III athletes
• Females improve more than males
Interaction suggests:
• Males potentially improve more in D-III than in
D-I
• Females potentially improve more in D-I than in
D-III.
Statistical insignificance of the interaction is
potentially influenced by a dwarfing of the D-III Male
mean by the D-I Females as sample is ~50% larger
than the other subgroups.
Future Research
• Repeat analysis with additional cohorts of
athletes.
• Include athletes who competed over 5 years
• Include athletes who qualified in more than 1
event
• Investigate if humanistic fulfillment is different
between levels of competition
• Investigate connections between relative
improvement and humanistic fulfillment
SUMMARY OF ANCOVA
Source Df F d p
Standardized Year 1 Personal Best 1 57.605 1.56 < .001
Division 1 26.243 0.91 < .001
Sex 1 46.063 1.32 < .001
Division*Sex 1 3.735 0.32 0.056
Error 90
Dependent variable is log(x+0.517)
MAIN EFFECT DESCRIPTIVES
n Mean SD 95% CI
Male 43 4.23% 2.8% 0 - 9.7%
Female 52 4.67% 3.1% 0 - 10.8%
Division I 55 4.58% 3.0% 0 - 10.4%
Division III 40 4.32% 3.0% 0 - 10.2%
INTERACTION DESCRIPTIVES
n Mean SD 95% CI
Female/D-I 31 5.2% 3.4% 0 - 11.9%
Female/D-III 21 3.9% 2.5% 0 - 8.7%
Male/D-I 24 3.8% 2.0% 0 - 7.8%
Male/D-III 19 4.8% 3.5% 0 - 11.6%
Conclusions
Evidence suggests that relative improvement during
the Track & Field career of an elite collegiate
endurance athlete may be different between sexes
and level of collegiate competition.
References available upon requestfrom:
marshall.milbrath@unco.edu
Faculty Sponsor:Randy Larkins, PhD