University Microfilms 300 North 2Eeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns ...tch may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)''. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of “photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 North 2eeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 A Xerox Education Company 73-2031 JOHNSON, Martin Wesley, 1941- CONSTRUCTION OF A TRUNK FLEXION STRENGTH- ENDURANCE TEST FOR COLLEGE MEN. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1972 Education, physical University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan © Copyright by Martin Wesley Johnson 1972 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. CONSTRUCTION OF A TRUNK FLEXION STRENGTI1 -ENDURANCK TEST FOR COLLEGE MEN DISSERTATION Presented in Partial FulTillment of the Requirements fo the Decree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of tho Ohio State University By Martin Wesley Johnson, B,S,, M .Ed * ***** The Ohio State University 1972 Approved by PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to express his appreciation to the many persons who contributed to the successful completion of this study. Special gratitude is expressed to my advisor Dr. Seymour Kleinman, and to committee members, Dr, Edward Fox and Dr. Robert Bartels, for ;heir guidance and as sistance in the conduct of this study. Special thanks are also extended to the administration and students of the participating North Dakota colleges and universities for their cooperation. The writer would also like to thank Dr. Frederick Hagerman of Ohio University who indirectly provided the original impetus for this study. Finally, the writer wishes to express gratitude to his wife for her under standing and encouragement throughout the course of this s tudy. H VITA November 27, 19^1 . • * Born - Georgetown, Minnesota 1960-1963 • • ......... United States Marine Corps 1966 . • * B.S. Mayville State College 1 9 6 6 -1 9 6 7 ........... Instructor of Health, Physical Edu cation, and Recreation, Mayville State College, Mayville, North Dakota 1 9 6 7 -1 9 6 8 ........... Teaching Assistant, Physical Edu cation Department, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 1 9 6 8 .........M. Ed., University of Arizona 1 9 6 8 - 1 9 6 9 ••••••• Physical Education Teacher and Coach, Morenci, Arizona, High School 1969-1971 .......... • Recreation Director, Wyandotte Communities, Columbus, Ohio 1971-1972 ........ • Assistant Professor of Education, Mayville State College, Mayville, North Dakota FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Physical Education Minor.Field: Health Education ill TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................... ii VITA .................................................. iii LIST OF T A B L E S ........................................ vii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION................................. 1 Statement of* the Problem Hypothesis Assumptions and Limitations Definitions II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE................. 10 Validity of the Sit-up as a Tost of Abdominal Muscle Strength Position of the Legs During the Sit-up Test Potential Hazards of Sit-ups Electromyographic Research on Muscle Action During the Sit-up and Similar Movements Importance of Maintaining Strong Abdominal Muscles Summary III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES....................... 31 Phase I - Test Selection Description of the Subjects Experimental Test Apparatus Background Apparatus Specifications Administration of the Experimental Tests Experimental Test - Variation I Experimental Test - Variation II TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued Chapter Page Experimental Test - Variation III Administration of the Static Trunk Flexion Strength Test Instrument Reliability of Procedures Method Administration of the Dynamic Trunk Flexion Strength Test Instrument Reliability of Procedures Method Testing Procedure - Phase I Phase II - Validation of the Proposed Test Description of the Subjects Methods Employed in the Validation of the Proposed Test Methods Employed in Determining- the Bases for Norms Weight Standing Height Sitting Height Statistical Analysis Testing Procedure - Phase II Phase III - Construction of Norms Description of the Subjects Method of Norm Construction Hull Scale IV. ANALYSIS OF THE D A T A ................... 52 Phase I Statistical Analysis Criterion Test Reliability Selection of the Proposed Test Discussion - Phase I v TABLE OP CONTENTS— Continued Chapter Page Anthropometric Measurements Experimental Test Reliability Criterion Strength Test for Phase II Experimental Test-Variation I Revisions Phase II Statistical Analysis Validity and Reliability of the Proposed Test Influence of Anthropometric Measures on Test Results Selection of a Time Limit for Admin istration of the Proposed Trunk Flexion Strength-Endurance Test Phase III Norm Tables Hull Scale Norm Table Descriptive Norm Table V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 75 Summary Procedure Reliability and Validity of the Proposed Test The Proposed Trunk Flexion Strength- Endurance Test Conclusions Relationship of the Findings to the Stated Hypotheses Re c ommendat ions APPENDIX A. QUESTIONNAIRE 85 B. PHOTOGRAPHS OF EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT .... 87 C. TEST APPARATUS DIMENSIONS 104 BIBLIOGRAPHY 106 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. QUESTIONNAIRE DATA - PHASE I SUBJECTS , . , . 33 2. PHASE I - TESTING SCHEDULE ................ 43 3. QUESTIONNAIRE DATA - PHASE II SUBJECTS .... 45 4. PHASE II - SCHEDULE OF TESTING AND NUMBER TESTED EACH P E R I O D ........................ 49 5. DISTRIBUTION OF SUBJECTS UTILIZED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF NORMS ......................... 50 6 . PHASE I - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ............. 54 7. SUMMARY OF DATA ON CRITERION TEST RELIABILITY . 55 8 . PHASE I - INTERCORRELATIONS................ 57 9. COMPARISON OF MEANS BETWEEN VARIATION I AND VARIATION I I .............................. 58 10. COMPARISON OF CORRELATIONS WITH THE STATIC TRUNK FLEXION STRENGTH TEST AS THE COMMON VARIABLE ..... ........................... 60 11. COMPARISON OF CORRELATIONS WITH THE DYNAMIC TRUNK FLEXION STRENGTH TEST AS THE COMMON VARIABLE ....... ....................... 61 12. PHASE II - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ............. 65 13. INTERCORRELATIONS FOR PHASE II VARIABLES . 65 14. SUMMARY OF DATA ON TEST VALIDITY .......... 6 6 15. SUMMARY OF DATA -ON TEST RELIABILITY........ 6 8 16. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF THE PROPOSED TEST SCORES AT TEN-SECOND INTERVALS (N = 80) . 6 9 17. THE PROPOSED TRUNK FLEXION STRENGTH-ENDURANCE TEST HULL SCALE NORM TABLE FOR COLLEGE MEN . 73 18. THE PROPOSED TRUNK FLEXION STRENGTH-ENDURANCE TEST DESCRIPTIVE SCALE NORM TABLE FOR COLLEGE MEN ................................... 74 vil CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The pendulum of interest in physical fitness in general, and fitness tests in particular has swung back and forth over the years. The present emphasis began in the 1950*s when the results of the Kraus-Weber minimal muscular fitness tests, given to thousands of children, emphasized 7 the need for more vigorous physical education programs. As a result, more people are involved in both organized and un organized exercise programs than ever before in the history 2 of the United States. The Kraus-Weber test was followed by a battery of new and more extensive "physical fitness" tests, the most widely used of these being the American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation Youth Fitness Test.10 Since 1958, when the AAHPER Youth Fitness Test was first published, it has been administered to millions of children throughout the World.1- One of the more popular exercises in many fitness programs and tests is the sit-up, which has long been used both to strengthen the abdominal muscles and to test the performance of these muscles. Traditionally, the exercise is performed in the supine position with the legs extended, 2 and usually the feet are restrained while the trunk