Journal
RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT
Volume 75, Issue 4, Pages 413-420Publisher
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2004.10609174
Keywords
periodization; progressive resistance exercise; resistance training
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The purpose of this study was to quantitatively combine and examine the results of studies examining the effectiveness of periodized (PER) compared to nonperiodized (Non-PER) training programs for strength and/or power development. Two analyses were conducted to (a) examine the magnitude of treatment effect elicited. by PER strength training programs compared to Non-PER programs and (b) compare these effects after controlling for training volume, frequency, and intensity. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were coded based on characteristics that might moderate the overall, effects (i.e., participant characteristics and characteristics related to the training program). Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated for each study and an overall ES of 0.84 (+/- 1.41) favoring PER training was found. Further analyses identified, the treatment effect, specific to training variation to be ES = 0.25. Significant moderating variables included age, training status, and length of training program. As a result of this statistical review of the literature, it is concluded. that PER training is more effective than. Non-PER training for men. and women, individuals of varying training backgrounds, and for all age groups. In line with the overload principle, additions to volume, intensity, and frequency result in additional training adaptations.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available