Effect of arm swing direction on forward and backward jump performance

Hara, Mikiko; Shibayama, Akira; Arakawa, Hiroshi; Fukashiro, Senshi

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.07.002

Cited by 40 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Detailed biomechanical data on such leaps is, however, lacking. Arm swinging has been show to be beneficial to human leaps (Alexander, 1995;Cheng and Hubbard, 2008;Hara et al, 2008) and since gibbons have substantially more mass (relative to body weight) located in the forelimbs (16% body mass Michilsens et al, 2009) than humans, it is probable that forward movement of the forelimbs assists in powering the leap.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The biomechanics of leaping in gibbons

Channon

Crompton

Gunther

et al. 2010

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gibbons are skilled brachiators but they are also highly capable leapers, crossing distances in excess of 10 m in the wild. Despite this impressive performance capability, no detailed biomechanical studies of leaping in gibbons have been undertaken to date. We measured ground reaction forces and derived kinematic parameters from high-speed videos during gibbon leaps in a captive zoo environment. We identified four distinct leap types defined by the number of feet used during take-off and the orientation of the trunk, orthograde single-footed, orthograde two-footed, orthograde squat, and pronograde single-footed leaps. The center of mass trajectories of three of the four leap types were broadly similar, with the pronograde single-footed leaps exhibiting less vertical displacement of the center of mass than the other three types. Mechanical energy at take-off was similar in all four leap types. The ratio of kinetic energy to mechanical energy was highest in pronograde single-footed leaps and similar in the other three leap types. The highest mechanical work and power were generated during orthograde squat leaps. Take-off angle decreased with take-off velocity and the hind limbs showed a proximal to distal extension sequence during take-off. In the forelimbs, the shoulder joints were always flexed at take-off, while the kinematics of the distal joints (elbow and wrist joints) were variable between leaps. It is possible that gibbons may utilize more metabolically expensive orthograde squat leaps when a safe landing is uncertain, while more rapid (less expensive) pronograde single-footed leaps might be used during bouts of rapid locomotion when a safe landing is more certain.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The biomechanics of leaping in gibbons

Channon

Crompton

Gunther

et al. 2010

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on this definition and the cue 'bend knees' a smaller angle was considered to be more desirable. It is documented that arm swing from the shoulder contributes to increased horizontal jump performance (Ashby and Heegaard 2002;Ashby and Delp 2006;Hara et al 2008). However, there is much less support with regard to knee angle.…”

Section: Task and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kindergarten students' qualitative responses to different instructional strategies during the horizontal jump

Weimar

Martin

Wall

2011

Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The teaching strategies of modeling and the use of cue words are employed by both experienced and inexperienced teachers. While these strategies have received some attention in the literature, the effectiveness of these strategies in terms of the resultant change in the quality or kinematics of the motor skill performance has been limited. Purpose: To investigate the influence of cue words, when given independently and in conjunction with a modeled performance, on the qualitative or process characteristics (kinematics) of a motor skill. Participants and setting: Thirty kindergarten children participated in this study from a rural school in southern USA. Research design: A repeated measures design was employed to expose the participants to several teaching methodologies. Random assignment to order of methodology presentation was utilized. Data collection: Participants were pre-tested on the horizontal jump, initiated by the command, 'jump as far as you can'. The participants were then randomly assigned to either the cue word only condition or the model condition, and asked to jump again. Finally, the participants were exposed to both the cue words and the model together and asked to jump again. Data analysis: Two (shoulder angle and knee angle) Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) were used to determine differences between teaching strategy groups and conditions. Each assessment set produced data for a 2 × 3 (strategy × condition) mixed design with repeated measures on the last factor. Findings: The shoulder angle noted a significant difference between the pre and the cue word only conditions (p , 0.01) and between the pre and the model and cue condition, for the cue-only participants (p , 0.01). However, statistical analysis of the maximum relative knee flexion angle prior to the participant's feet leaving the ground yielded no significant difference (F(2,15) = 2.887, p = 0.087, h 2 = 0.278) across the three trial conditions. Conclusions: Results indicated that cue words used independently or in conjunction with a visual model influenced the kinematics of the skill.

show abstract

“…The positive influences of the AS on the VGRF curve have been demonstrated in all three of the involved joints (ankle, knee and hip) during the final phase of takeoff (Lees et al, 1996, 2004a). A jump is optimally performed with an AS when the arms are moved in the same direction as the jumping movement itself (Hara et al, 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of an Arm Swing on Countermovement Vertical Jump Performance in Elite Volleyball Players

Vaverka

Jandacka

Zahradník

et al. 2016

Journal of Human Kinetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to determine how elite volleyball players employed the arm swing (AS) to enhance their jump performance. The study assessed how the AS influenced the duration and magnitude of the vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) during the main phases (preparatory, braking and accelerating) of the countermovement vertical jump (CMVJ), the starting position of the body at the beginning of the accelerating phase and the moment when the AS began contributing to increasing the jump height. Eighteen elite volleyball players performed three CMVJs with and without an AS. Kinetics and kinematics data were collected using two Kistler force plates and the C-motion system. The time and force variables were evaluated based on the VGRF, and the position of the body and the trajectory of the arm movement were determined using kinematic analysis. The AS improved the CMVJ by increasing the jump height by 38% relative to jumping without an AS. The AS significantly shortened the braking phase and prolonged the accelerating phase, however, it did not influence the preparatory phase or the overall jump duration. The AS also significantly increased the average force during the accelerating phase as well as the accelerating impulse. The AS upward began at 76% into the overall jump duration. The AS did not influence the body position at the beginning of the accelerating phase. These findings can be used to improve performance of the CMVJ with the AS and in teaching beginning volleyball players proper jumping technique.

show abstract

Effect of arm swing direction on forward and backward jump performance

Cited by 40 publications

References 11 publications

The biomechanics of leaping in gibbons

The biomechanics of leaping in gibbons

Kindergarten students' qualitative responses to different instructional strategies during the horizontal jump

Effect of an Arm Swing on Countermovement Vertical Jump Performance in Elite Volleyball Players

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About