Comparison of three different vertical jump tests

摘要:

[目的]纵跳高度可以充分反映人体下肢爆发力.目的是比较不同纵跳测试方法的差异,为更有效准确地评价下肢爆发力提供依据.[方法]应用三种不同测试方法(重心法、纵跳带测试法、纵跳仪测试法)对40名(男女各20名)在校大学生进行摆臂纵跳和叉腰纵跳测试.采用2×2×3混合设计的三因素方差分析(ANOVA)检验性别、测试方法和不同纵跳方式对纵跳高度的影响.使用偏相关(Partial Correlation)分析重心法与纵跳带测试法、重心法与纵跳仪之间的关系.应用线性回归确定纵跳带测试法、纵跳仪测试法预测重心法的纵跳高度的关系.[结果]1)三因素方差分析表明性别、动作和测试方法三者对纵跳高度没有交互作用(F[2,76]=2.02,P=0.14),但性别与动作(F[1,38]=6.41,P=0.02)、动作与测试方法(F_[2,76]=24.05,P<0.001)、性别与测试方法(F[2,76]=5.07,P=0.01)对纵跳高度均有交互作用;2)纵跳带测试法(HBelt)、纵跳仪测试法(HVJI)与重心法(HCM)均呈显著性正相关(P<0.001);3)测试方法的准确性不受性别的影响,而与动作有关,但测试动作在纵跳带测试法和纵跳仪测试法评价纵跳高度的贡献率分别仅有0.3%和2.3%.[结论]与纵跳仪测试法相比,纵跳带测试法与重心法的结果误差更小,更能准确评价受试者的下肢爆发力.且女性完成叉腰纵跳时,纵跳带测试法比纵跳仪测试法的纵跳高度更精确.

Vertical jump is one of the most common basic movement in sports.Vertical jump height can be used to access the lower-extremity power.The purpose of this study is to compare the differences of three vertical jump test methods,and to provide the information for more effective and accurate evaluation of lower-extremity power ability.[Methods]40 college students(20 male and 20 female)were collected in this study to accomplish vertical jump with and without armswing by three methods.The vertical jump height was calculated by COM Test Method(HCM),Belt Test Method(HBelt),Vertical Jump Instrument Test Method(HVJI)individually.The influence of gender,task and test methods on the vertical jump height were analyzed by using mixed design 2×2×3 three-way analysis of variance(ANOVA).Partial correlation analysis was used to analyze the relationship between the COM Test Method(HCM)and the Belt Test Method(HBelt),the COM Test Method(HCM)and the Vertical Jump Instrument Test Method(HVJI).Linear regression was used to determine the relationship between vertical jump height of the COM Test Method predicted by Belt Test Method and Vertical Jump Instrument Test Method.[Results](1)The results of three-way variance analysis show that gender,task and test methods had no interaction(F[2,76]=2.02,P=0.14)on the vertical jump height,but gender and task(F[1,38]=6.41,P=0.02),task and test methods(F[2,76]=24.05,P<0.001),gender and test methods(F[2,38]=5.07,P=0.01)interact with vertical jump height;(2)The Belt Test Method(HBelt),the Vertical Jump Instrument Test Method(HVJI)and the COM Test Method(HCM)showed significant positive correlation(P<0.001);(3)The accuracy of the test method is not affected by gender,but is related to the task.However,the contribution rate of the task in the Belt Test Method and the Vertical Jump Instrument Test Method to evaluate the vertical jump height is only 0.3%and 2.3%respectively.[Conclusion]Compared with the Vertical Jump Instrument Test Method,the result error of the Belt Test Method and the COM Test Method is smaller,and the lower-extremity power of the subjects can be evaluated accurately.The Belt Test Method is more accurate than the vertical jump height of the Vertical Jump Instrument Test Method when the female completes the vertical jump without arms.

作者:

张美珍 刘瑞瑞 郭浩 王广宇 刘卉

Zhang Meizhen;Liu Ruirui;Guo Hao;Wang Guangyu;Liu Hui(College of Physical Education,Taiyuan University of Technology,Taiyuan 030024,China;School of Life Science and Biotechnology,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 200240,China;Institute of China sport and health,Beijing Sport University,Beijing 100084,China)

机构地区:

太原理工大学体育学院 上海交通大学生命科学技术学院 北京体育大学中国运动与健康研究院

出处:

《betway官方app 学报：自然科学版》 CAS 北大核心 2021年第1期101-107,共7页

基金:

国家自然科学基金(30870600,11972242,11632013) 教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金(18YJA890034) 中国博士后科学基金第59批面上项目(2016M591657) 山西省高等学校哲学社会科学研究项目(2017313,201801015,2019W025) 山西省回国留学人员科研资助项目(2020-032) 山西省研究生教育创新项目(2020SY501,2020SY502) 2020年太原理工大学学科建设经费 太原理工大学教改和大创项目(202010112017).

关键词:

纵跳 纵跳带 纵跳仪 重心

vertical jump vertical jump belt vertical jump instrument center of Gravity

分类号:

G804.62 [文化科学—运动人体科学]

纵跳测试评价方法的比较研究.pdf