Suppr超能文献

技术反馈与传统反馈对未经训练女性后深蹲表现的影响

The effects of technological and traditional feedback on back squat performance in untrained women.

作者信息

Stien N, Andersen V, Engelsrud G H, Solstad T E J, Saeterbakken A H

机构信息

Faculty of Education, Arts, and Sports, Department of Sport, Food, and Natural Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway.

Faculty of Education, Arts, and Sports, Department of Sport, Food, and Natural Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway.

出版信息

BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2022 Sep 2;14(1):163. doi: 10.1186/s13102-022-00556-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recently, a novel method for improving movement quality called open-ended augmented feedback has been introduced. However, the effects of using such feedback in a training intervention have not yet been examined. The aim of this study was to assess the changes in performance and movement quality following a five-week resistance-training program with either (1) technological feedback or (2) traditional, verbal feedback from an experienced trainer.

METHODS

Nineteen untrained females (age: 21.84 ± 2.24 years, height: 169.95 ± 5.92 cm, body mass: 65.05 ± 7.93 kg) randomly allocated to one of the two conditions completed five weeks of training with two weekly sessions. Pre- and post-intervention, participants were tested for physical performance (i.e., back squat and isometric mid-thigh pull strength) and movement quality parameters (weight distribution, center of gravity variation, and subjective rating of the back squat technique).

RESULTS

Both groups similarly increased the training resistance throughout the intervention (p < 0.01), as well as strength in the back squat (technological feedback group: effect size (ES) = 1.31, p = 0.002; traditional feedback group: ES = 1.48, p = 0.002). Only the traditional feedback group increased isometric mid-thigh pull strength (ES = 1.11, p = 0.008) and subjectively rated lifting technique at the same load (p = 0.046). No changes in force distribution (p = 0.062-0.993) or center of gravity variation (p = 0.160-0.969) occurred in either group when lifting the same absolute loads at post-test. However, both groups displayed a greater variation in center of gravity when lifting the same relative load at post-test (technological feedback group: p < 0.001; traditional feedback group: p = 0.006). No differences were found between the groups for any of the observed changes (p = 0.205-0.401).

CONCLUSIONS

Five weeks of back-squat training with verbal feedback increased isometric mid-thigh pull strength and subjectively rated lifting technique from pre- to post-test, whereas technological feedback did not. Both methods improved back squat strength and training resistance. For resistance-training beginners, the choice between feedback methods should be based on the desired outcomes and the availability of expertise and equipment.

摘要

背景

最近,一种名为开放式增强反馈的改善运动质量的新方法被引入。然而,在训练干预中使用这种反馈的效果尚未得到检验。本研究的目的是评估在进行为期五周的阻力训练计划后,使用(1)技术反馈或(2)来自经验丰富教练的传统口头反馈,参与者在表现和运动质量方面的变化。

方法

19名未经训练的女性(年龄:21.84±2.24岁,身高:169.95±5.92厘米,体重:65.05±7.93千克)被随机分配到两种情况中的一种,完成为期五周的训练,每周训练两次。在干预前后,对参与者进行身体表现测试(即后深蹲和等长大腿中部拉力强度)以及运动质量参数测试(重量分布、重心变化和后深蹲技术的主观评分)。

结果

在整个干预过程中,两组的训练阻力均有相似程度的增加(p<0.01),后深蹲力量也都有所增加(技术反馈组:效应量(ES)=1.31,p=0.002;传统反馈组:ES=1.48,p=0.002)。只有传统反馈组的等长大腿中部拉力强度有所增加(ES=1.11,p=0.008),并且在相同负荷下主观评分的举重技术有所提高(p=0.046)。在测试后举起相同绝对负荷时,两组的力分布(p=0.062 - 0.993)或重心变化(p=0.160 - 0.969)均未发生变化。然而,在测试后举起相同相对负荷时,两组的重心变化都更大(技术反馈组:p<0.001;传统反馈组:p=0.006)。在观察到的任何变化方面,两组之间均未发现差异(p=0.205 - 0.401)。

结论

为期五周的后深蹲训练,使用口头反馈可使等长大腿中部拉力强度以及从测试前到测试后的主观评分举重技术有所提高,而技术反馈则没有。两种方法都提高了后深蹲力量和训练阻力。对于阻力训练初学者而言,反馈方法的选择应基于期望的结果以及专业知识和设备的可用性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/141d/9438286/69f30697fe9b/13102_2022_556_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验