Knee extension isometric torque production differences based on verbal motivation given to introverted and extroverted female children

Abstract

To date, little research has been conducted to test the efficacy of different forms of motivation based on a female child's personality type. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of female children to perform a maximal knee extension isometric torque test with varying forms of motivation, based on the child's personality type (introvert vs. extrovert). The subjects were asked to perform a maximal isometric knee extension test under three different conditions: 1) with no verbal motivation, 2) with verbal motivation from the evaluator only, and 3) with verbal motivation from a group of their peers and the evaluator combined. A 2×3 mixed ANOVA was significant for an interaction (F 2,62=17.530; p<0.0005). Post hoc testing for the introverted group showed that scores without verbal motivation were significantly higher than with verbal motivation from the evaluator or the evaluator plus the peers. The extroverted group revealed that scores with verbal motivation from the evaluator or the evaluator plus the peers were significantly higher than without verbal motivation. Results suggest that verbal motivation has a varying effect on isometric knee extension torque production in female children with different personality types. Extroverted girls perform better with motivation, whereas introverted girls perform better without motivation from others.

Feasibility of using a large amplitude movement therapy to improve ambulatory function in children with cerebral palsy

“…From our observations, it is also possible that these two children did not respond well to the enthusiastic style of cueing used in this intervention protocol. In a study of strength training in children, McWhorter et al (2011) found that children who were extroverted improved their performance with enthusiastic coaching while children who were introverted did better with quiet encouragement. Additionally, we observed that P1 and P2 exhibited higher variability in the post-intervention gait data (Tables 3 and 4), which may be the reason why significant changes were not observed in these two participants.…”