Upper Body Muscular Endurance Among Children 2-5 Years.

DOCUMENT RESUMEED 187 686AUTHORTITLEPUB DATENOTEEDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORSIDENTIFIERS SP 016 077Gabbard, Carl P.; And OthersUpper Body Muscular Endurance Among Children 2-5Years.8013p.áF01/PC01-Plus Postage.Age Differences; Body Height; Body Weight; MotorReactions; *M uscuiar . Sttength; *Preschool Children;Sex Differences*Straight Arm HangABSTRACTThe upper body muscular endurance of males and. .females 2-5 years of age was assessed, and relationships relative toSex, age, endurance and selected anthropometric ,measures wereinvestigated. None of the relationships were found to be of practicalpredicative value; while upper body muscular strength increased withage, no significant differences between total sample sex or sexwithin each group were found. Height and weight were determined notto be. of practical predictive value in upper body muscular enduranceperformances, (JD) ,

Upper Body Muscular Endurance AmongChildren 2-5 YearsCarl P. Gabbard, Jerry Elledge and Jerry JamesDepartment of Health and Physical EducationChild Movement CenterTexas A&M UniversityRunning Head: Muscular Endurance

AbstractUpper body muscular endurance, using the straight-arm hang, was. assessed in 232 males and females,. 2-5 years of age. Reliability for.,thé straight-arm hang trials ranged from .86 to .99 for sex and .94to .99 for the four age groups. Weight, height and age. measures increased in chronological order and were significantly (p .01) differentbetween groups. Endurance increased with age; 2 and 3 year olds notsignificantly different(p .05), but the 4 and 5 year old groups weresignificantly different (p .01) from each other and the 2 and 3 yearold groups. Group x sexANOVA revealed no significant (p ' .05) differencein endurance between totalsample sex or sex within each group.Correlation analysis also revealed that height and weight were notpractical indicators of upper body muscular endurance.

Upper Body Muscular Endurance AmongChildren 2-5. YearsTraditionally, spring dynamometers or cable tensiometers havebeen used to assess strength and endurance in children. The mostwidely used instrument hat been the grip dynamometer which has beenreported as a total, as well as isolated strength indicator. Theassessment of muscular endurance in children, especially those undersix years of age is critically lacking in the literature. Gabbard,Kirby and Patterson (1979) have proposçd an alternative instrument,the straight-arm hang, to assess upper body muscular endurance among, children 3-5: The authors secondary objective was to determine themuscular endurancecharacteristics of children in relationship tomovement on play apparatus (the horizontal ladder). The researchersinvestigated the use and reliability of the straight-arm hang among135 males and females ranging in age from 24 to 71 months. The authorsreported reliability coefficients (intraclass correlation coefficienttechnique) of .68 for the 2 year olds, to a quite acceptable .95 forthe 5 year olds. Gabbard and Patterson (1979) while investigatingthe relationship and comparison of selected anthrópometric measuresto muscular endurance and strength in 103 three to five year olds,reported reliability coefficients of .95 to .99 for straight-armhang trials.

Elkus and Basmajian (1973) studied electromyographic activity whileadults hung by their hands and reported-the pectoralis major, fingerflexors, wrist extensors and wrist flexors as actively involved. In1975 Brantner and Basmàjian reported the existence of a substantialtraining effect on performance of the straight-arm hang. The investigators proclaimed the task as an upper body endurance activity andreported muscle fatigue as a significant performance factbr. Gabbardand Patterson (1979a) found that grip style (thumb under or,thumb overthe bar) did not significantly affect hang performance among adult gymnasts. The authors also revealed a test-retest coefficient of .91 forthe'two grip styles. In light of the above findings, the straight-armhang test was assumed to be a valid and reliable assessment of upperbody muscular endurance among children and adults.Thus, the purpose of this study was (a) to' assess the upper bodymuscular endurance of males and females 2-5 years of age, and (b) to'compare and investigate relationships relative to sex, age, enduranceand selected anthropometric méasures.SubjectsSubjects were 223 males and females ranging in age from 24 to 71months. Participants were randomly selected from three sources: privateday care centers, public school and. the Texas A&M Child Movement Center.Scores were collected and compiled according to sex and age range group(months): 24-35, 36-47, 48-59, and 60-71.

Instrumentation and Procedurethe hanging rack was constructed as described by Gabbard, Kirbyand Patterson (1979). A digital .01 sec stop clock (Lafayette Model#54015) and micro switch imbedded in the 1.27 cm diameter hangingbar, were used for timing the length of the hang. Three trainedindividuals conducted the assessment processOne individualweighed and measured for height, while another lifted the subjectup to, and made needed adjustments at the bar. A third personcontrolled the clock and recorded the scores:Each subjects' armsand hands were extended overhead to estimate ground clearancd forthe feet, which was designated to be no less.than 6 inches.Timestarted (micro switch wire across bar) when the assistant took supportaway from the subject aft6r the lift up and terminated when one orboth hands were released from the bar. Subjects were instructedand hands adjusted so that the thumb was gripped under the bar.A standardized motivation technique was employed to interestthe subjects and attain optimum performance. The instrument wasreféw réd to as the "Gorilla Machine". Pre-trial conversation wasdirected around the strength of a aorilla and how the subject mightexert a similar performance. During the trial, the tester restatedto the subject every 5 sec, "hang on, don't give up!" An intervaltimer (Lafayette Model #52011) with visual signal, was used tocontrol pauses between motivational statements (5 sec interval with2 sec lag for statement). Subjects were tested in group fashion

to increase the possibility of maximum effort, as revealed in aprevious pilot study using other subjects.The investigation took place on Monday, Wednesday, and Fridayof the same week. The first session was used as a practice periodto familiarize the subjects with the instrument, procedures, andrecord weight, height, age, and sex. A single trial was given duringeach of the remaining two sessions and the highest score (maximumhang) used in the analysis. Parents and institutional authoritieswere presented a memo explaining the experiment and asking not toallow play apparatus activity prior to each session.Results and DiscussionMean values and reliability information are presented in Table 1.An intraclass correlation coefficient technique (Safrit, 1973) wasutilized to calculate reliability for hang-time trials by group and sex.Insert Table 1 about hereCoefficients ranged from .86 to .99 for sex and .94 to .99 for groups.The total sample reliability coefficient was .98. These correlationssupported the assumption for consistent individual trials.Results of the ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range test revealedthat weight, height and age means increased in chronological orderand were significantly (p - .01) different between groups. Maximumhang performance measures increased with age. The 2 and 3 year old

groups were not significantly different (p .05), but the 4 and 5year old performances were significantly different (p .01) fromeach other and the 2 and 3 year olds. A Group x Sex ANOVA revealedno significant (p. .05) differences on maximum hang performancesbetween total sample sex or six within each group. It might benoted however that the females were lighter and their maximum hangperformances were greater than males in all but the 5 year old group.Table 2 represents correlation information for key variables.Insert Table 2 about hereEven though there were a number of significant correlations,the authors felt that none of the relationships were of practicalpredicative value.In conclusion, upper body muscular endurance., as assessed byusing the straight-arm hang, increased with age among children 2-5years; the increase was significantbetweenall groups except thetwo and three year olds. There were nosignificant differencesbetween total sample sex or sex within each group on maximum hang'performances. Height and weight were determined not to be ofpractical predicative value in upper body muscular endurance performances:

Table 1Mean Values and Reliability Information for Groups and SexAgeGroups(mo)HeightMean SD(cm)WeightMean SD(kg)Max. HangMean SDInitial/RetestEndurance Tests(sec)RSexNFM42152731.0 3.230.1 3.431.4 -3.190.4 6.986.8 5.592.4 7.013.7 1.812.8-T1.514.2 1.741.5 26.143.3 24.540.5 27.3.99.99.99FM73353842.1 .2.542.0 2.442.3i 2.697.4 4.598.0 5.097.8 4.115.0 1.614.7 1.815.2 1.342.8 18.743.4 21.542.2 16.1.94.99.86FM53252853.8 3.053.4 1.954.2 3.8106.5 5.3105.0 4.7107.9 5.618.0 2.517.1 2.518.7 2.368.1 27.768.5 29.067.9T 27.2.95'.94.95FM55322364.6 2.464.9 2.564.3 2.4111.5 6.1111.2 6.3112.0 6'.020.0 1.919.4 1.720.8 2.185.3# 26.579.9 22.493.0 30.3.97.95.9848.4 12.3 101.9 9.516.7 3.159.1 30.4.9824-3536-4748-5960-71TotalAge(mo)223

Table 2Correlation Information for Height, Weight and 8 **48-59FMTotal252853-.35.08.'-.11-.48**. Signi ficant * .01 ** .05Maximum HangHeight.37*Maximum HangWeight-:-.59**-.14'-.23.01-.00 .37*

ReferencesBasmajiah, J. V., & Bazant,. F.,J. Factors preventing downwarddislocation of the adducted shoulder joint: An electromyographic and morphological study.,. Journal of Bone and JointSurgery, 1959, 41-A, 1182-1186.Basmajian. J. V., & Trávill, A. Electromyography of the pronatormuscles in the forearm. 'Anatomical Record, 1961, 139, 45-59.B,rantner, J. N., &.Ba smajian, J. V. Effects on training or endurancein hanging by the hands. Journal of Motor Behavior, 1975,.7,131-134.Carlsou, S. ; & Guharay, A. R. A- study of the muscle activity andblood flow in the musctes of the upper arm in supporting Aeavy:loads.Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 1968, 72, '366-369.Elkus, R., & Básmajian, J. V.Endùrance in hanging by the hands.American-Journal of Physical Medicine, 1973, 52, 124-127.Gabbard, C. P., Kirby, T. E., & Pattersdn, P. E. Reliability ofthe straight-arm háng for testing muscular endurance amongchildren 2-5. Research Quarterly, 1.979,'50; 760-764.Gabbard, C. P., & Patterson, P. E. A study of grip style andendurance while hanging by the hands. Manuscript submittedfor publ i cati on, 1979.

Gabbard, C. P,, & Patterson, P. E. Relationship and comparisonof selected afthropometric measures to mùscular endurance andstrength in childien 3 to 5 years. Manuscript submitted forpublication, 1979.Safrit, M. J. Evaluation in physical education. Englewood Cliffs,N. J.: Prentice-Hall 1973.

The upper body muscular endurance of males and. . females 2-5 years of age was assessed, and relationships relative to Sex, age, endurance and selected anthropometric ,measures were investigated. None of the relationships were found to be of practical predicative