Pj. Abernethy et J. Jurimae, CROSS-SECTIONAL AND LONGITUDINAL USES OF ISOINERTIAL, ISOMETRIC, AND ISOKINETIC DYNAMOMETRY, Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 28(9), 1996, pp. 1180-1187
The purposes of this investigation were to assess whether maximal isoi
nertial (triceps pushdown [TP] and triceps extension [TE]), isometric
and isokinetic (1.04, 2.08, 3.14, 4.16, and 5.20 rad . s(-1)) forearm
extension strength measures: 1) presented statistical generality when
they were correlated prior to and following 4, 8, and 12 wk of resista
nce training; 2) were similarly affected by training; and 3) presented
statistical generality when their changes as a consequence of trainin
g were intercorrelated. Fifteen men (11 experimental and 4 controls) w
ithout a history of resistance training participated in the study. Tra
ining involved four sets of 8-12 repetitions, each followed by 90-s re
covery, at 70-75% one repetition maximum (IRM), three Ones a week, for
12 wk. Training incorporated the TP, close-grip bench press, and tric
eps kickback exercises. Prior to and after 4, 8, and 12 wk of training
, the intercorrelations among the TP, isometric, and isokinetic indice
s almost always achieved statistical generality (i.e., r(2) > 0.5). It
was concluded that the strength measures generally discriminated simi
larly between subjects. However, the sensitivity of the strength measu
res to the effects of training were dissimilar. While all strength ind
ices increased with the training, the timing (isoinertial prior to iso
metric and isokinetic adaptations) and magnitude (TP>TE> isometric>iso
kinetic) of these adaptations varied greatly. None of the intercorrela
tions between changes in the strength indices achieved statistical gen
erality. Furthermore, factor (F)-analyses on these changes indicated t
hat in the initial and later stages of training, there were three and
four discrete factors, respectively, accounting for strength developme
nt. These factors were thought to reflect differential effects of trai
ning on the structural, neural (including learning), and mechanical me
chanisms underpinning each strength index. Possible applications of th
is research design in better understanding strength development were a
lso canvassed.