| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Staunton, Craig A., et al.
(författare)
-
Misuse of the term ‘load’ in sport and exercise science
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. - : Elsevier BV. - 1440-2440 .- 1878-1861. ; 25:5, s. 439-444
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Despite the International System of Units (SI), as well as several publications guiding researchers on correct use of terminology, there continues to be widespread misuse of mechanical terms such as ‘work’ in sport and exercise science. A growing concern is the misuse of the term ‘load’. Terms such as ‘training load’ and ‘PlayerLoad’ are popular in sport and exercise science vernacular. However, a ‘load’ is a mechanical variable which, when used appropriately, describes a force and therefore should be accompanied with the SI-derived unit of the newton (N). It is tempting to accept popular terms and nomenclature as scientific. However, scientists are obliged to abide by the SI and must pay close attention to scientific constructs. This communication presents a critical reflection on the use of the term ‘load’ in sport and exercise science. We present ways in which the use of this term breaches principles of science and provide practical solutions for ongoing use in research and practice.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Wundersitz, D. W. T., et al.
(författare)
-
The influence of playing surface on external demands and physiological responses during a soccer match simulation
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Sports Sciences. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0264-0414 .- 1466-447X. ; 39:24, s. 2869-2877
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We investigated the effects of playing surfaces with different impact absorption characteristics on external demand and physiological responses. Fifteen participants completed a soccer match simulation on natural grass, synthetic turf and concrete surfaces. Accelerometry-derived PlayerLoadTM per minute (PL·min−1) and average net force (AvFNet) were used to quantify external demands at the centre of mass (CoM), upper-back, mid-back and hip. Heart rate, oxygen uptake, energy expenditure and RPE quantified physiological responses. The concrete surface exhibited the least impact absorption, with peak decelerations ~3.5x synthetic turf and ~10x natural grass (p < 0.001). Despite this, there was no differences in external demand between surfaces (surface: p ≥ 0.194; η2p≤0.092). Both AvFNet and PL·min−1 (location: p < 0.001; η2p≥0.859) were higher at the hip (613(91)N; 12.5(1.2)arb.u), reduced at the mid-back (521(67)N; 8.8(0.7)arb.u) and upper-back (502(60)N; 8.8(0.7)arb.u) when compared to CoM (576(78)N; 10.7(1.0)arb.u). Although playing surface did not influence the external demands, heart rate or oxygen uptake (p > 0.05), energy expenditure was highest on natural grass compared to synthetic turf (P = 0.034) and RPE was highest on synthetic turf compared to concrete (p = 0.026). Different playing surfaces can alter physiological responses to soccer-specific activity even when the external demands are similar.
|
|
