•  
  •  
 

Dynamic vs Static Stretching in Force Production and Endurance During a Back Squat

Abstract

While several attempts have been made to quantify the relationship between static stretching and force production, there are still many gaps in the literature. This study was performed to determine whether differences in force production after static or dynamic stretching could be quantified with a dynamometer. It was hypothesized that dynamic stretching will allow for more force to be more produced during a back squat. A second hypothesis was that force production would be correlated with muscular endurance. 8 healthy females, age 20-25 were recruited for the study. All were physically active but not considered athletes. Subjects performed a squat on top of a wooden platform wearing a waist strap attached to a scale digital dynamometer which was attached to a wooden platform with a carabiner. During the first trial individuals were asked to perform dynamic stretching before using a digital dynamometer to calculate force production during the extension phase of a squat. After a rest period of three minutes the individuals performed as many squats as possible in one minute. Results were recorded. During the second trial individuals were asked to perform static stretching before using a dynamometer to calculate force production during the extension phase of a squat, after a rest period of three minutes the individuals performed as many squats as possible in one minute. Results were recorded. On average, force production after dynamic stretching was 313.88 lbs and after static stretching was 270.5 lbs. Subjects averaged 48 air squats after dynamic stretching and 43 air squats after static stretching. When comparing the results of the two trials force production was significantly greater with dynamic stretching than static stretching. In terms of endurance and more data would need to be gathered in order to come to a conclusion because there were no significant differences in the two trials. These results support the hypothesis because dynamic stretching allowed for more force to be produced. This study was limited by a small sample size and a failure to control female cycle timing. Its possible that the variability in the data arose from hormone changes because each subject may have been in a different phase of their menstrual cycle.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS