Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 1999 March;39(1) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 1999 March;39(1):54-60

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

A Journal on Applied Physiology, Biomechanics, Preventive Medicine,
Sports Medicine and Traumatology, Sports Psychology


Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,215


eTOC

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  


The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 1999 March;39(1):54-60

Copyright © 1999 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Anthropometric dimensions to predict 1-RM bench press in untrained females

Scanlan J. M., Ballmann K. L., Mayhew J. L., Lantz C. D.

Human Performance Laboratory, Truman State University, Kirksville, Missouri, USA


PDF  


Background. Previous ­research has indi­cat­ed a ­strong rela­tion­ship ­between anthro­po­met­ric dimen­sions and ­strength in ­males. To ­date, lit­tle ­work has ­been ­done to ­explore ­this top­ic in ­females. The pur­pose of ­this ­study was to deter­mine the rela­tion­ships ­between select­ed anthro­po­met­ric dimen­sions and 1-RM ­bench ­press in ­untrained col­lege ­females.
Methods. Untrained col­lege ­females (n=113) ­were eval­u­at­ed for 18 meas­ured and sev­en ­derived anthro­po­met­ric var­i­ables to pre­dict 1-RM ­bench ­press ­strength. Triplicate meas­ure­ments ­were aver­aged for ­five skin­folds, ­five cir­cum­fer­enc­es, and six skel­e­tal ­widths. Derived meas­ure­ments includ­ed Body Mass Index, per­cent fat, fat-­free ­mass (FFM), ­flexed arm ­cross-sec­tion­al ­area (CSA), shoul­der ­width: hip ­width ­ratio, androg­y­ny ­index, and somat­o­type.
Results. Highest ­zero-­order cor­re­la­tions ­with ­bench ­press ­were arm CSA (r=0.45), ­flexed arm cir­cum­fer­ence (r=0.45), mes­o­mor­phy (r=0.44), and fore­arm cir­cum­fer­ence (r=0.42). First-­order par­tial cor­re­la­tions hold­ing con­stant ­body ­mass or FFM gen­er­al­ly ­decreased ­most cor­re­la­tions ­with ­bench ­press (r<0.30). Factor load­ings ­were ­used to pro­duce mus­cle, ­length, and fat com­po­nents ­which ­were ­placed in a mul­ti­ple regres­sion anal­y­sis to pre­dict ­bench ­press but result­ed in ­only lim­it­ed suc­cess (R=0.58, SEE=±5.6 kg). Coefficients of vari­a­tion (SEE/Mean ×100) for the equa­tions ­ranged ­from was 18.9% to 21.0%.
Conclusions. Prediction of ­bench ­press ­strength ­from anthro­po­met­ric dimen­sions ­does not ­appear to be prac­ti­cal or accu­rate in ­untrained ­females.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail