4.4 Article

Reactive Strength Index Modified Is a Valid Measure of Explosiveness in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players

期刊

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
卷 30, 期 5, 页码 1341-1347

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001226

关键词

biomechanics; vertical jump; power; factor analysis; principal components; construct validity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Kipp, K, Kiely, MT, and Geiser, CF. Reactive strength index modified is a valid measure of explosiveness in collegiate female volleyball players. J Strength Cond Res 30(5): 1341-1347, 2016The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity of the reactive strength index modified (RSImod) as a measure of lower body explosiveness. Fifteen female, National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I volleyball players performed vertical countermovement jumps (CMJs) while standing on a force plate. Each player performed 3 CMJs. The vertical ground reaction forces collected during each jump were used to calculate jump height, time to take-off, time to peak force, peak force, peak rate of force development, and peak power; the latter 3 variables were all normalized to body mass. Reactive strength index modified was calculated as the ratio between jump height and time to take-off. All variables, except for jump height, were then entered a factor analysis, which reduced the input data into 2 factors: a force factor and a speed factor. Although RSImod loaded more strongly onto the force factor, further analysis showed that RSImod loaded positively onto both force and speed factors. Visual analysis of the Cartesian coordinates also showed that RSImod loaded into the quadrant of greater force and speed abilities. These results indicate that the construct of RSImod, as derived from CMJ force-time data, captures a combination of speed-force factors that can be interpreted as lower body explosiveness during the CMJ. Reactive strength index modified therefore seems to be a valid measure to study lower body explosiveness.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据