AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF

Tae Won Jun for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in

Education presented on July 21, 1986.

Title:

in Male Co.11ege Students

Redacted for privacy

Abstract approved: dE
John Patrick' O'Shea

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the

relative effectiveness of interval weight training on the

development of dynamic muscular strength, power and

cardiorespiratory function.

Procedure: This study was conducted during the spring

term of the 1986 academic year. All training was done in

the weight training room of the Department of Physical

Education at Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

The subjects consisted of sixteen male students who had

registered for an intermediate weight training class.

The pre- and post-test control group research design

was employed for this study. The subjects were randomly
assigned to either the experimental group (interval weight

training program) or the control group (circuit weight

training program). Training was limited to sixty minutes

twice a week and continued for six weeks. All subjects

were pre tested and post tested for dynamic muscular

strength, power and cardiorespiratory function.

Analysis of Data: The amount of change in each group from

pre-test to post-test was determined for each dependent

variable. Initial and final means within each group were

analyzed by the wt" test for related samples. The one-way

analysis of covariance was used to determine significant

difference between group mean scores. The .05 level of

significance was used as the critical level for retention

or rejection of the null hypotheses for the study.

Conclusions: From the statistical evaluation of the

results, the following conclusions may be made.

1. Six weeks of interval weight training produces

significant increases in strength and power.

2. Six weeks of interval weight training is superior to

circuit weight training in producing squat strength.

3. Six weeks of interval weight training does not produce

a statistically significant improvement in

cardiorespiratory function.
THE EFFECT OF INTERVAL WEIGHT TRAINING ON DYNAMIC
MUSCULAR STRENGTH, POWER AND CARDIORESPIRATORY
FUNCTION IN MALE COLLEGE STUDENTS
by

Tae Won Jun

A THESIS

submitted to

Oregon State University

in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Completed July 17, 1986

Commencement June, 1987

 APPROVED:

Redacted for privacy

Professor of ysical Education in charge of major

Redacted for privacy

Chairm4Afof Department of Physical Education

,Redacted for privacy

Dean of School o ducation

A wi
Redacted for privacy
Dean of Gradu School

Date thesis is presented July 21, 1986

Typed by Harvey McCloud for Tae Von Jun

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The hardship and happiness which I have experienced

during my years of study at Oregon State University have

made me want to thank all the following people.
First, I would like to express my most sincere

appreciation to Dr. J. Pat O'Shea for professional

assistance, academic encouragement and guidance as an

outstanding major professor. I would like to especially

thank Dr. Richard F. Irvin for his humanity, kindness and

understanding. Appreciation is also expressed to Dr.

David R. Thomas, Dr. Cleon V. Bennett and Dr. Forrest J.

Gathercoal for their valuable time and sincere service as

members of the committee.

I would like to express a special thanks to the

president of the Korea Track and Field Federation, Chang
Ik Lyong, for his financial support of my studies and my

family. In addition, I would like to express my

appreciation to Dr. Thomas N. Tillman, who sacrificed his

time for editing the thesis. My deepest gratitude goes to

a close friend, Steve Auferoth, who contributed many hours

of his free time in helping me collect my data. I am also

eternally grateful to my parents, Jun Chung Kyu and Kim Ok

Soon, for their unfailing support.
 Especially, I would like to dedicate this thesis to
my wife, Kim Seong Ok, for her never-ending deep love,

encouragement, patience and sacrifice and to my three

sweet daughters, Jin Sun, Mi Sun, and Eun Sun.

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Study 5
Need for the Study 5
Null Hypotheses 6
Sub Hypotheses 6

Basic Assumptions 7
Delimitations 8
Definition of Terms 9

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 12

Physiological Changes Resulting from Weight 12

Training Programs
Strength Development in Weight Training 15
Programs
Power Development in Weight Training 20
Cardiorespiratory Function in Weight Training 24
Programs
Interval Training 31

III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES 39

Subjects 39
Orientation 41
Training Methods 41
Interval Weight Training Program 41
Circuit Weight Training Program 48
Safety Precautions 49
Testing Procedures 49
Strength 49
Power 50
Cardiorespiratory Function 54
Statistical Null Hypotheses 56
Treatment of the Data 58
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA 59

Statistical Procedure 59
Level of Significance 60
Null Hypotheses 60
Sub Hypothesis One 60
Sub Hypothesis Two 61
Sub Hypothesis Three 63
Sub Hypothesis Four 66
Sub Hypothesis Five 68
Sub Hypothesis Six 68
Summary of Findings 71
Discussion 72
Increase in Dynamic Muscular Strength 73
Increase in Power 81
Cardiorespiratory Function 82

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 89

Summary 89
Conclusions 92
Recommendations 92

REFERENCES 94

APPENDICES 105

Appendix A 105
Appendix B 106
Appendix C 107
Appendix D 108
Appendix E 109
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure page

1. Force-Velocity Curve 22

2. Force-Velocity Curve (Training Effects) 22

3. Changes in the Force-Velocity Curve with 22

Advanced Training
4. Dumbbell Curls 43

5. Lat-machine Exercises 44

6. Dumbbell Flys 45

7. Sit-ups 46

8. Rope Jumping 47

9. The Bench Press 51

10. The Squat 52

11. The Vertical Jump Test 53

12. Changes in Dynamic Muscular Strength 74

13. Changes in Power 75

14. Changes in Maximal Oxygen Uptake 76

15. Changes in Maximum Ventilation 77

16. Changes in Maximum Ventilatory Equivalent 78

17. Comparison of Change in Dynamic Muscular 79

Strength, Power and Cardiorespiratory
Function
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Weight Training Intensity 17

2. A Hypothetical Model of Strength Training 18

3. The Cycle Program 19

4. Guidelines for the Construction of an Interval 36

Weight Training Program (Training Time)

5. Guidelines for the Construction of an Interval 37

Training Program (Training Distance)

6. Age and Physical Characteristics of the Subjects 40

7. Comparison of Difference between Mean Scores on 62

Pre- and Post-Strength Tests

8. Comparison of Difference between Mean Scores on 64

Pre- and Post-Power Tests

9. Comparison of Difference between Mean Scores on 65

Pre- and Post-Cardiorespiratory Function Tests

10. Analysis of Covariance for Adjusted Mean Scores 67

for Strength

11. Analysis of Covariance for Adjusted Mean Scores 69

for Power

12. Analysis of Covariance for Adjusted Mean Scores 70

for Cardiorespiratory Function

13. Norms for Maximal 0 Consumption 85

2
 THE EFFECT OF INTERVAL WEIGHT TRAINING ON DYNAMIC
MUSCULAR STRENGTH, POWER AND CARDIORESPIRATORY
FUNCTION IN MALE COLLEGE STUDENTS

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Dynamic muscular strength, power and cardio-

respiratory endurance are the essential factors which

bring about winning and losing in athletic sports. Sports

such as soccer, rugby, tennis, field hockey, handball and

middle distance running (800m, 1500m, 5000m) require

athletes to have both relatively high aerobic power and

anaerobic power.

Development of the strength needed by such sports is

no doubt aided by weight training (73). Yet the aerobic

effects of weight training are disputed, and the idea of

simultaneously training for both strength and endurance is

controversial. It has in fact proven difficult to devise
a specific type of training which develops both aerobic

and anaerobic power to a high degree. Indeed, the

specificity of training principle dictates that aerobic

metabolism is affected by aerobic exercise, whereas anae-

robic metabolism is affected by anaerobic exercise (75).

It seems apparent that there is some type of inter-

ference when simultaneously cross training for aerobic and

anaerobic power, though the exact nature of that
 2

interference has not been identified. Hickson (52), for

example, concluded that endurance training interferes

with gains in absolute strength, and a study by Nelson

(70) concluded that absolute strength training interferes

with improvement in maximum oxygen uptake (V02 max),

though muscular endurance training does not interfere with
strength training.

However, recent studies have reported that programs

of circuit weight training are effective in producing

modest increases in maximal aerobic power and in muscular

strength ( 42, 43, 44, 45). Gettman (41) concluded that

the gains in aerobic work capacity and in muscular

strength induced by circuit weight training programs are

moderate.

Moreover, it is believed possible to combine the

development of both aerobic and anaerobic systems by using

interval training (34). The major difference between

interval training and other conditioning programs is that

while most conditioning programs are conducted on a

continuous basis without regard to rest periods, interval

training intersperses periods of relative rest among
periods of work. Activities such as calisthenics,
running, cycling, swimming and weightlifting can be done
in intervals, rather than continuously. As a result of

such interval training, more work and less fatigue is

realized in the exercise. Scientific evidence supports

 3

the idea that a proper work to relief ratio is the key to

interval training success (34).

One method of weightlifting that may tax the car-

diorespiratory system and thus bring about a significant

improvement in aerobic function as well as in muscular
strength is interval weight training (3k, 79). The

application of the interval training concept to conven-

tional weight training was first suggested by O'Shea (79)

in 198k. Interval weight training applies concepts of

intensity, volume and rest to a greater extent than

circuit weight training and can be used to develop
strength, power, and cardiorespiratory function. It can

also be used to physiologically improve neuromuscular

function, anaerobic metabolism, aerobic metabolism, and

muscle hypertrophy in order to maximize athletic

performance. According to O'Shea (79) the major benefits

resulting from interval weight training are:

1. Training the lactic acid system pushes
back anaerobic threshold which aids in
delaying the onset of fatigue.

2. Interval weight training greatly improves

cardiac function by bringing about maximal
attainable stroke volume. In this manner
the aerobic system is developed.
3. Interval weight training trains the fast
twitch muscle fibers (strength-producing
muscles), which may improve both muscular
strength and muscular endurance.

4. Interval weight training trains the mind

to accept and tolerate the pain that
accompanies intense aerobic work.
 4

The most advantageous time to use interval weight training

is during the basic strength cycle, and it should be used

for at least four weeks and not more than eight weeks

(79).

Application of the overload principles of intensity

to interval weight training programs is accomplished

through the manipulation of five variables (79):

1. Work interval (type and selection of the

weight training exercise.)
2. Intensity (a given percent of the 1 RM
in a lift.)

3. Volume (number of repetitions.)

4. Density (a ratio relating to the duration

of the work to relief interval.)

5. Relief interval (the rest time between the

work interval or between sets.)
It is important to note that two types of relief
interval were used:

1. Rest-relief interval: light stretching and walking

between intervals and sets.

2. Work-relief interval: light to mild exercise

between intervals and sets.

Interval weight training program prescriptions will

depend mostly on three main rules (79). One must:

1. determine which energy systems need to be

increased: ATP-PC, ATP-PC-LA, LA -02, or 0
2
systems.

2. select the type of weight training exercise

to be used.

3. employ the overload principle and the

specificity of training.
 5

However, research is untouched in the area of

interval weight training related to the simultaneous

development of dynamic muscular strength, power and

cardiorespiratory function.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the relative

effectiveness of interval weight training on the

development of dynamic muscular strength, power and

cardiorespiratory function.

Need for the Study

Physical educators and coaches are often faced with

the problem of raising the levels of dynamic muscular

strength, power and cardiorespiratory function in students

and athletes. In recent years, various weight training

programs have been used for this purpose. However,

general agreement has not been reached as to the best

program for the development of a combination of these

factors.

If it could be shown that interval weight training is

more effective than conventional weight training or

circuit weight training for improving dynamic muscular

strength, power and cardiorespiratory function, physical

educators and coaches could use this system of training

 6

when dynamic muscular strength, power and cardiorespira-

tory function are the primary objectives. Success in this

type of training might also be of considerable interest to

other areas of athletics and recreation.

Null Hypotheses

The general hypothesis tested in this study was that

six weeks of interval weight training would result in no

statistically significant improvement in dynamic muscular
strength, power and cardiorespiratory function in college
males.

Sub hypotheses

The following sub hypotheses were proposed for this

study. As a result of the experiment the following sub

hypotheses should be retained or rejected.

1. There will be no significant difference in the pre-test

and six-week post-test means for strength within the

circuit weight training group and within the interval

weight training group.

2. There will be no significant difference in the pre-test

and six-week post-test means for power within the circuit

weight training group and within the interval weight
training group.
 7

3. There will be no significant difference in the pre-test

and six-week post-test means for cardiorespiratory

function within the circuit weight training group and

within the interval weight training group.

4. There will be no significant difference in the six-

week adjusted mean scores for strength between the circuit

weight training group and the interval weight training

group.

5. There will be no significant difference in the six-

week adjusted mean scores for power between the circuit

weight training group and the interval weight training

group.

6) There will be no significant difference in the six-

week adjusted mean scores for cardiorespiratory function
between the circuit weight training group and the interval

weight training group.

Basic Assumptions

The following assumptions were made for this study.

1. The one-repetition maximum of bench press and squat is

a valid test for measuring dynamic muscular strength.

2. The vertical jump test is a valid test for measuring

power.
 8

3. The subjects performed maximally in their training

programs and during the testing periods.

Delimitations

The scope of this study was delimited by the

following factors:

1. The subjects were 16 male college students registered

in an intermediate weight training class at Oregon State

University during the spring term of 1986.

2. No subjects who participated in endurance training or

additional weight training activity were included in the
study.

3. All training groups trained only two days per week

throughout the training period of six weeks.

4. Strength was assessed only by using the one repetition

maximum of dynamic muscular strength in the bench press
and the squat.

5. Power was assessed only by using the vertical jump

test.

6. Cardiorespiratory function was assessed only by using

graded exercise testing.

, 7. Control of physical activities outside of weight

training and varsity sports was not possible.
 9

8. Motivation of the subjects to perform at maximum

capabilities could not be controlled completely.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study, the following defi-

nitions of terms are necessary.

Strength -- The force that a muscle or muscle group exerts

against resistance in one maximal effort.

Dynamic muscular strength -- The ability of a muscle or

muscle group to exert force in a given situation while

taking into account the phenomenon of inertia. That is,

the weight or object being lifted or moved must be first

accelerated, and once a velocity has been attained, the

weight or object has momentum that causes it to continue

moving even after the contraction is over.

Power -- Muscle strength multiplied by limb velocity.

Endurance -- The ability to repeat a series of muscular

contractions.

Cardiorespiratory function -- The adequate function or

response of those physiological systems that deliver fuel
and oxygen to the active muscles.

Circuit weight training -- A method of training in which

the participant moves from one weight station to another

 10

in a continuous fashion with minimal rest between

stations.

Interval weight training -- A series of repeated bouts of

weightlifting (the work interval) performed at the

anaerobic threshold, alternated with periods of work
relief.

Work interval -- That part of the interval training which

consists of the work effort.

Relief interval -- The rest time between the work interval

and between sets.

Rest-relief interval -- Very light exercise between work

intervals.

Work-relief interval -- Medium exercise between work

intervals.

Work-relief ratio -- A ratio relating the duration of the

work interval to the duration of the relief interval.

One repetition maximum (1 RM) -- The maximum load a muscle

or muscle group is able to contract against for one

repetition.

Repetition -- The number of times a dynamic or static

contraction is repeated in a given exercise set.

 11

Set -- One series of repetitions without a rest for a

given exercise.

Maximal oxygen consumption (102 max) -- The highest oxygen

uptake a subject can attain during physical work while

breathing air at sea level. This is often measured as

oxygen uptake in liters 02/minute or in relation to body

weight in kg (ml/kg/min).

Ve(BTPS) -- Minute volume expired ventilation - BTPS

conditions (normal body temperature 37°C, ambient

pressure, saturated with water vapor).

Ventilatory equivalent Oe/1021 -- The ratio of minute

ventilation to 0 consumed.
2
 12

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The literature reviewed was concerned with the

effectiveness of interval weight training on muscular

strength, power and cardiorespiratory function. No

studies were found which dealt directly with interval

weight training. Thus, it appeared appropriate to review

studies relating to physiological changes, strength, power

and cardiorespiratory function in weight training programs

and interval training, all of which have a direct

relationship to this study.

Physiological Changes Resulting from

Weight Trainlng Programs

Biochemical research in the past decade has shown

that there is an increase in the functional capacity of

skeletal muscle in response to weight training and

repetitive exercise (18, 29, 56, 59, 103). Such an

increase is a reflection of changes in the structure of

muscle fiber and its protein content (75).

Morpurgo (94) in 1887 was the first to demonstrate

that muscle hypertrophy could be achieved through

exercise. This finding was subsequently confirmed by

other investigators (11, 21, 77). The enlargement of

 13

muscle that results from weight training is mainly due to

an increase in the cross-sectional area of the muscle

fibers (35). Yet increased strength is not always

accompanied by muscle hypertrophy. Brouha (15) states

that it is possible to increase the power of muscle

three times or more without a proportional increase in
volume.

Penman (81) indicates that the lack of muscle

hypertrophy with strength increase is related to an

increase in packing density of the myofibrilar elements

and changes in the actin and myosin ratio in the muscle.

It is thought by researchers that weight training

results in hypertrophy (increase in size of muscle cells)

and not in hyperplasia (increase in number of muscle

cells) of the muscle fiber. Overall, the degree of

muscle hypertrophy associated with an increase in muscle

strength depends largely on the duration, intensity,

frequency, and type of exercise of the imposed training

program (75).

According to Mathews and Fox (35) the aerobic and

anaerobic changes due to training are as follows:

Aerobic changes

1. Increased myoglobin content.

2. Increased oxidation of glycogen.

 14

3. Increased number and size of the mitochon-

dria in skeletal muscle fibers.

k. Increased concentration of enzymes involved

in the Krebs cycle and electron transport system.

5. Increased amounts of glycogen stored in the

muscle.

6. Increased activity of glycogen synthetase.

7. Increased oxidation of fat which reduces

lactic acid accumulation, resulting in less
fatigue.

Anaerobic changes

1. Increased capacity of the ATP-PC system.

2. Increased muscular levels of ATP, PC and

creatine kinase.

O'Shea (74) summarized the effects of super quality

strength training on the neuromuscular system. As a

result of isotonic, full range, multiple-joint strength

training, there occurs in the neuromuscular system:

1. an increase in the nerve fiber diameters
2. an increase in the length of the motor-
neuron, providing a greater synaptic area
for the effective release of the neurotrans-
mitter.

3. an increase in the size of the neuromuscular

junction in proportion to muscle fiber type

4. an increase in the motor endplate area

(synaptic control area of the muscle fiber)
which expands in proportion to the increase
in axon length in the hypertrophied muscle

5. an increase in the number of functional

synapses, which allows the athlete to utilize
a greater percent of the motor units in a
 15

group of synergistic muscles at any one time;

by performing a dynamic strength movement over
and over for a prolonged period of time, cor-
rect patterns of "nerve-reflexes" are developed
in which the synapse blocks weak signals while
allowing the strong ones to pass, channeling
the signal in the proper direction

6. Associated with number 5 is a corre-

sponding increase in neuronal facilitation
and spatial summation; voluntary motorneuron
recruitment patterns are enhanced and
modified-select facilitation is developed.

7. a "learning process" in the motor cortex

that makes possible smoothness and accuracy of
full-range muscular movement that is acquired
only by practice; dynamic strength is increased
by more efficiently synchronizing motor units;
the mechanics of the process of learning how
to time nerve impulses and how to make a highly
complex motor action effortless and automatic
are unknown.

StrengthpAygjspxeje ight Train n zpsaA=

There is overwhelming evidence that weight training

can lead to significant gains in strength (7, 9, 11, 12,

13, 14, 17, 28, 33, 55, 62, 65, 68, 93, 105, 107, 108).
Investigators who used a one-repetition maximum test

protocol for assessing strength in circuit weight training

programs have also reported improvements in leg press and

bench press ranging from 7% to 27% and 8% to 32% respect-

ively (42). It is well established in the literature that

an increase in muscular strength can be achieved only by

an increase in intensity of work beyond that previously

demanded of a muscle or muscle group (progressive

overloading principle) (75). The intensity of the
 16

training program, based upon the selection of the number

of repetitions, sets, and load utilized for each exercise,

is the most important requirement for increasing strength

(19). Dynamic strength has been defined by O'Shea (75)

as:

The ability of muscle to exert force through a

wide range of multiple joints, to repeat maximum
or near maximum contractions, to contract the
muscles in proper sequence with other muscle
groups, and to allow mobility of multiple joint
action (p. 15).

One of the first experimental demonstrations in

humans of the overload principle was performed by

Hellebrandt and Houts (48). Delorme (24) investigated the

effectiveness of dynamic resistance training and

introduced the progressive overload principle, which

increases the load as the muscle becomes stronger. He

indicates that one to three rePetitions for three to four

sets with maximum load are best for the development of

strength. Delorme's progressive resistance principle

became the foundation of strength training programs.

Berger (7, 9, 10, 11) conducted several studies to

determine the optimal training program for strength. In
his study a 1 RM in the bench press was used for measuring

changes in dynamic strength. He found that three sets cf

2-6 RM, three times per week, produced the greatest

increase in muscle strength (11).

O'Shea (76) conducted a study in which the subjects

trained three times per week for six weeks using the 1 RMK
 17

in the squat and a leg dynanometer for knee flexion,

respectively. The subjects were divided into three

groups, one group performing three sets of 10 RM, the

second group performing three sets of 5 RM and the third

group performing three sets of 2 RM. All groups made

statistically significant gains in static and dynamic

strength, but no significant difference was found between

the three groups.

O'Shea (73) has summarized the research in strength

training which indicates three types of programs are

utilized to develop muscle strength and endurance. The

summary of his weight training method is shown in Table 1.

The programs are: (1) three sets of one to three repeti-

tions at 90% of 1 RM for maximum strength development,
(2) four to five sets of four to ten repetitions at 75-85%

of 1 RM for strength plus muscular endurance development,

(3) five to seven sets of eight to twelve repetitions at

60-75% of 1 RM for the development of muscular endurance.

Table 1. Weight Training Intensity

Work Load
Training Phase % of 1 RM Repetitions Sets

1. Maximum Strength 90+ 1-3 3

2. Strength Plus 75-85 4-10 4-5

Muscular Endurance

3. Muscular Endurance 60-75 8-12 5-7

 18

Stone and others (98) analyzed eleven studies and

presented a theoretical model for strength and power

training. This model is shown in Table 2. The four

phases in the model were hypertrophy, basic strength,

strength and power, and peaking or maintenance, The

recommended intensities of training programs were low

intensity for hypertrophy, moderate volume at high

intensities for basic strength, low volume at high

intensity for strength and power, and very low intensity
for peaking or maintenance. This model is similar to the

cycle program established by O'Shea (72). O'Shea's cycle

weight training program is shown in Table 3.

Table 2. A Hypothetical Model of Strength Training

Preparation Transition 1 Competitio Transition 2

Peaking*
Basic Strength or Main-
Phase Hypertrophy Strength & Power tenance

Setsx 3-5 3-5 3-5 1-3

Reps 8-20 2-6 2-3 1-3

Days/Wk 3-4 3-5 4-6 1-5

Times/Day 1-3 1-3 1-2 1

Intensity Cycle 2-3/1 2-4/1 2-3/1 -

(week) **
Intensity low high high very high
to low

Volume high moderate low very low

to high

* Peaking for sports with a definite climax or main-

tenance for sports with a long season such as football.
** Intensity Cycle -- ratio of the number of heavy
training weeks to light training weeks.
x Does not include warmup sets.
 19

Table 3. The Cycle Program

Training Work Load

Week % of 1-RM Reps Sets

Heavy 85-100+ 1-3 4-5

Light 60-75 4-5 3-4

Medium 70-85 4-5 4-5

O'Shea (72) recommends a cycle program for dynamic

strength development. The program is divided into four

weekly periods of heavy, light, and medium training using

a varying percentage of 1 RM for a given number of

repetitions and sets. A typical cycle program by O'Shea

includes (1) four to five sets of one to three repetitions

at 85-100% for heavy training, (2) three to four sets of

four to five repetitions at 60-75% of 1 RM for light

training, and (3) four to five sets of four to five

repetitions at 70 -85% of 1 RM for medium training.

The frequency and duration of the training programs

vary. The frequency of training largely depends on the

sports event, but at least two to three days a week are

recommended by most researchers (47, 72, 89). Duration of

the training program should be long enough to acquire

physiological adaptations. Studies (47, 99) indicate that
 20

a minimum of five weeks is required for adaptations to

take place.

Power Development in Weight Training

Power is very easy to understand with a basic

knowledge of physics. It is the amount of work which can

be accomplished per unit of time and is calculated simply

as the product of force multiplied by velocity.

Power = Work/Time = Force x Velocity

In the typical sports situation, power can be thought of

as the muscular strength a limb can generate in a given

movement times the limb velocity during that movement

(50).

Power = Muscular Strength x Limb Velocity

O'Shea (74) states that power interlocks the concepts

of strength and power. To develop high velocity power,

the athlete needs to emphasize both strength and speed in

the training program.

Garhammer (40) explained the training effect as a

relationship between force and velocity, as the following.
He explained, as shown in Figure 1, that force and

velocity are inversely related in a hyperbolic manner.

 21

While this relationship was originally found in isolated

muscle, it also is true for intact single joint movements
(82) and has recently been shown to hold for multi-segment

movements (37, 38, 58). There is considerable evidence to

show that strength training can shift this curve to the

right in beginners, as shown in Figure 2 (61). Because

Power = Force x Velocity, this clearly entails an increase

in power at all points on the curve, and it is likely that

the lower portion of the curve will continue to shift to

the right, as shown in Figure 3 (40). Furthermore, it is

possible that specific types of high speed, high power

training may positively influence the higher velocity

portion of the curve (58).

Garhammer (39) has filmed the maximum snatch and

clean and jerk of many weight lifters at national and

international contests over a period of several years. He

concluded that for a given lifter the higher power output

occurred when the heaviest weight was lifted (40).

He also found that Olympic style weightlifters have

been shown to produce the highest power output of any

human movement athletes to date (40).

According to O'Shea (73) whenever the skill demands

of running, jumping, lifting, throwing, blocking or

tackling are involved in a sport, strong rotary hip action

is required. Thus, the athlete utilizing these skills

needs a strong "power zone" in order to execute them

 22

Velocity

Force ( mws""k
Figure t. Force-ti eiocity Curve

Figure 2. Force-Velocity Curve ITreiniag

Effects)

Figure 3. amigos is the ferce-seiecity

curse with arkweaced treatise
 23

effectively and safely. He indicates that the muscle

groups encompassing the body's power zone are the

abdominals, obliques, lower back, hip extensors and

flexors, thighs and other smaller stabilizing muscles

surrounding the knee and hip joints. To maximize

development of these muscle groups requires working and

training them as a unit through a wide range of forceful

joint movement with speed using fairly heavy resistance

(approximately 25-30 percent of maximum speed) (73).

Several studies have been conducted to determine the

effect of weight training on power. Chui (20) examined

the effect of weight training on the development of power.

After three months of training, the weight training group

gained substantially in power, while the control group

showed no gains. Capen (16), in a similar study, also

reported significant development in power for the

experimental group.

In a comparison of dynamic and static training

programs, Berger (8) found that groups who were trained

dynamically improved significantly more in the vertical

jump than groups who trained statically.

Flood (32) studied the effects of power weight

training on the development of power. He used the

vertical jump test as his criterion measure. The

conventional weight training group executed two sets of

six to eight repetitions of five selected exercises and

 24

two sets of fifteen repetitions of two exercises. The

power training group executed a single one-minute bout of

each of the seven prescribed exercises during each

training session. A two minute recovery period was
provided between each exercise bout. Both groups trained

twice weekly for ten weeks. Flood concluded that both

groups significantly improved power.

o es

Research looking at the effects of weight training on

cardiorespiratory function has produced conflicting

results, but there is general agreement that high

resistance, low repetition weight training does not

effectively increase cardiorespiratory endurance (3).

In a study involving sixty college students, Nagel

(69) reported significant gains in cardiorespiratory

endurance as tested using bicycle ergometers. Two groups

trained with one hour weight training programs involving

five repetitions for one group and fifteen repetitions for
the other. Both groups improved in cardiorespiratory

endurance and no difference in improvement was found

between the high and low repetition groups. He con-

cluded that weight training increases cardiovascular

endurance as measured by heart rate responses to all-out

exercise.
 25

De Pauw and Vrijens (25) studied strength and

cardiorespiratory endurance of twenty Belgian weight-

lifters who were training for Olympic competition. The

report stated that, although the weightlifters belonged to

a group which records the highest absolute scores for

isometric strength, their measures of cardiorespiratory
function do not differ significantly from those of the

normal sedentary population. De Pauw and Vrijens con-

cluded that weight training systems used by this group do

not result in any statistically significant adaptations in

cardiorespiratory function, and indicated that endurance

type activities should be included in weight lifting

programs.

Research showing that weight training does not affect

cardiovascular endurance was done by Pickney (85), who

compared the effects of a weight training class and a

basketball class on physical fitness. The weight training

group used three sets of ten repetitions for all major

muscle groups whereas the basketball group used funda-

mental skills and practice under game conditions. After

seven weeks the basketball group showed a significant mean

gain in cardiovascular endurance as measured by the
Harvard Step Test. The weight training group did not make
significant gains in cardiovascular endurance as measured

by the same test.

 26

A study with opposite results was done by Kuisinitz

and Keeney (60) in which a randomly selected group of
junior high boys participated in an eight week progressive

weight training program and made significant gains in the

Harvard Step Test. A control group which participated in

regular physical education made no such gain.

Nagle and Irwin (68) cite statements by Steinhaus

(95) and McCloy (66) which offer opposing views.

Steinhaus believed that weight training decreased cardio-
respiratory endurance due to increased skeletal muscle
bulk which is not accompanied by similar increases in the

size and efficiency of cardiorespiratory mechanisms.

McCloy thought that muscle strength, which increases along

with muscle size, was necessary for developing cardiores-

piratory endurance, since an increase in strength would
necessitate fewer muscle fibers being used by an indivi-

dual in an exercise bout. If true, then fatigue would be

delayed and the demand on the cardiorespiratory system

would be decreased.

Wilson (109), who studied the effects of weight

training on physical fitness, found that a group of

students who trained with weights for a period of twelve

weeks showed an average decrease in treadmill running time
of 11.15 percent. A control group which participated in

volleyball showed a decrease of 1.0 percent. Wilson

concluded that weight training adversely affected

 27

cardiorespiratory function. Capen (16) however, found

that a group that trained with weights improved 6.2

percent in the three hundred yard run compared to a 6.3

percent gain by a control group which emphasized endurance

activities. Capen concluded that both of his programs

were equally effective in producing cardiorespiratory

endurance.

The use of the three hundred yard run as a test to

measure cardiorespiratory endurance might be questioned,

as might all other tests in the literature reviewed. In a

test of all-out bicycling to exhaustion on a bicycle ergo-

meter by Swegan (101), a weight training group increased

its all-out pedaling time, indicating an improvement in

cardiorespiratory endurance. However, strength and

muscular endurance may have been tested to a greater

degree than cardiorespiratory endurance in this study.

Hickson (51) examined the strength training effects
on aerobic power and short-term endurance. Nine men

participated in an exercise program five days a week for

10 weeks. He found that there was a small increase in V02

max during bicycle exercise (3.40 1/min to 3.54 1/min)

after training, but no significant differences were

observed when expressed in ml/kg/min.
Hurley (54) studied the effects of high intensity

strength training on cardiorespiratory function. After a

16 week training, maximal oxygen uptake did not change

 28

significantly in either the training or the control group,

and there were no changes in the hemodynamic responses to

submaximal exercise after training. These findings

indicate, therefore, that high intensity, variable

resistance strength training produces no adaptative
improvement in cardiorespiratory function.
Fahey and Brown (31) reported a decrease in V02
max after a nine-week weight training program. These

weight training studies showed no training effects on

cardiorespiratory endurance.

Allen (1) examined the effects of circuit weight

training on cardiorespiratory function. After a 12-week

program three days per week, no significant changes

occurred in V02 max, maximum cardiac output, stroke vol-

ume, or arteriovenous oxygen content difference (A -V02

difference) measured on a bicycle ergometer. Their

circuit program consisted of 30 seconds of high

resistance, low repetition work sessions followed by 60

seconds of recovery, for a total workout duration of 30

minutes.

Wilmore (106) studied a program using 15-second rest

periods interspersed between 30-second sessions. After

ten weeks training three days a week, 12 women improved

11% in V02 max, but 16 men showed no improvement.

He concluded that the women were working at a greater

percentage of their maximal heart rate (87.6% versus

 29

78.12%) and their V02 max (46.8% versus 41.1%) than the
men.

Gettman (45) conducted a 20 week study on circuit

weight training based on the premise that better training

effects would be observed after a longer training program.

However, ony a 3.5% improvement in i02 max was observed
after 20 weeks in 11 men training three days a week, 30

minutes a session, at 50% of their maximum strength. The

V02 max improvements were statistically significant,

indicating that the circuit weight training had an aerobic

component. However, the changes were substantially lower

than the 17% improvement in i0 max during a 20-week

2

running program conducted simultaneously on another group

of 16 men.

Gettman (44) studied the training effects of eight

weeks of circuit weight training followed by eight weeks
of jogging and then eight weeks of either circuit weight
training or continuous jogging. Both groups maintained

cardiorespiratory function equally well for the subsequent

eight weeks.

A study conducted by Garfield (36) showed that young

men and women increased their V02 max 6% and 5%

respectively, after 12 weeks of a circuit weight training

program that consisted of 30 seconds of exercise followed

by 15 seconds of rest, using a 15 station circuit.

Subjects completed two circuits in the first half of the

 30

study and three circuits in the last half. Approximately

40% of maximum strength was used for each exercise.

Gettman (43) compared slow speed isokinetic training

with isotonic circuit weight training over 20 weeks, three

days a week, with 12 repetitions at 50% maximum strength

and 30 second rest periods between sets. Both groups

improved significantly in SO2 max-7% in the isotonic group

and 8% in the isokinetic group.

Messier (67) investigated the effects of a Nautilus

circuit weight training program on muscular strength and

maximal oxygen uptake. He concluded that for a training

period of short duration, Nautilus circuit weight training

appears to be an equally effective alternative to standard

free weight and aerobic training programs for untrained

individuals. Mareinzk (64) studied the effects of two

training programs, the calisthenic and circuit weight

training program. Study findings show the circuit weight

training program produced significantly greater dynamic

muscular strength and muscular endurance changes than the

calisthenic program.
Connor (22) compared the effects of two weight

training systems, the traditional set system and the

interval circuit system. The interval circuit systems

were performed in accord with circuit training format,

however a one minute work rest interval was employed for

each exercise. Both groups exercised three times per
 31

week during nine weeks and experienced a significant

increase in cardiorespiratory function.

Fox and Mathews (34, 35) suggest interval weight

training as a method of increasing cardiorespiratory
endurance, provided that the exercise stimulus is
sufficient enough to bring about and maintain a heart rate

between 120 and 180 beats per minute during the exercise

period.

Interval Training

The early works of Astrand, Christensen and their

co-workers (5, 6, 19) undoubtedly paved the way for much

of the research upon which interval training is based.

These researchers used the term 'intermittent' rather than

'interval' and the two terms have become synonymous over

the years.

The important aspects of the findings of these

studies are that the length of individual work bouts is

most critical in determining the reaction of the body to

intermittent running and that different combinations of

work and recovery can be used to stress the body in

different ways. In their book on interval training, Fox

and Mathews (35) refer to interval training as a series of

repeated bouts of exercise with periods of relief.

Saltin (92) used the terms 'intermittent' and
'interval' synonymously. He also suggested that there are
 32

different types of interval training, depending upon

whether the training is aimed at improving aerobic or
anaerobic capabilities. MacDougall and Sale (63), in a

discussion of the merits of continuous and interval

training, also used 'interval' and 'intermittent'

interchangeably. Additionally they agree with Saltin's

idea of using a type of interval training based on the

results desired.

Haskell (46) observed large changes in performance

ability with aerobic interval training but could observe

no consistent differences in metabolic and

cardiorespiratory variables produced by interval training

programs which differed in work rate.

Ekblom and co-workers (30) trained eight young males

for 16 weeks on a mixed program of short interval sprints,

long interval runs and continuous running. They observed

a mean increase in blood lactate after maximal exercise of

10.9% and again in maximal oxygen consumption of 16.2%. In

a similar program, Cunningham and Faulkner (23) examined

the effects of six weeks of training using both anaerobic

interval running and longer all-out runs on several

physiological and performance variables. The participants

in the conditioning regimen increased 8% and 9% in maximum

oxygen uptake and debt, respectively.

Hollering (53) also used a treadmill training program

consisting of repeated bouts of 30 second maximal runs
 33
with 45 seconds of rest over a period of 7 weeks. He

found a 10.9% increase in maximum oxygen consumption and a

15.1% increment in peak lactate.

In an evaluation of two intense interval running

programs, Knuttjen (57) observed that subjects who engaged

in repeated intermittent exercise of 15 seconds maximal
effort and 15 seconds rest did not improve in

physiological responses as much as individuals who took

part in 3 minutes work and 3 minutes rest. The latter

group was seen to increase 26% in i0 max and 11% in

2

maximal lactate, while those who trained over the shorter

distances increased 16% in maximal aerobic power and

decreased 5% in peak attainable blood lactate.

Several authors (5, 83) have shown that in performing
a given amount of work, the characteristics of the

exercise and recovery periods are critical in determining

the proportion of energy contributed by aerobic and

anaerobic sources. The exact importance, however, of the

rest pauses in intermittent work and interval training has

been disputed.

In recent years considerable enthusiasm has developed

with respect to the use of interval training for the

training of athletes. Much of the interest generated
probably resulted from the very interesting study of in-

termittent work done by Scandinavian investigators. Their

work showed that subjects could handle very heavy exercise

 34

loads with surprisingly low accumulations of 02 debt and

lactic acid when work and rest intervals were

interspersed.

However, Saltin (92), who is one of the Scandinavian

authorities in this area of investigation, reviewed the

evidence and came to the conclusion that interval training

does not appear to have an advantage over continuous

training as a way of enhancing endurance capacity.

Roskamm (91), a German pioneer in interval training,

performed a carefully controlled experiment comparing the
training effects of continuous exercise with interval
training. He found very small differences when testing

the training responses at maximal exercise. When heart

rate at moderate exercise loads was used as the criterion

for testing, continous exercise produced better results.

Pollock (86, 87) reported that the dropout rate in a

high intensity interval training program for adults was
double that of a continuous jogging program.

It should be pointed out that interval training for

athletes may have an advantage over continuous training,

in that the faster pace of interval training may come

closer to game conditions and therefore may favor the

involvement of the same muscles, fiber types, and muscle

recruitment patterns utilized in the competitive
situations (26).
 35

Fox and Mathews (35) summarized physiological

development of the energy systems resulting from interval

training.

1. The ATP-PC system can be used over and over.

This, in turn, provides an adequate stimulus
for promoting an increase in the energy capa-
city of this system and aids in delaying the
onset of fatigue by not delving so deeply into
the lactic acid system.

2. With proper regulation of the duration and

type of relief interval, the involvement of
the lactic acid system will be maximal and thus
improved.

3. By working long enough at a sufficient

intensity and by improvement in the maximal
attainable stroke volume, the aerobic system
is developed.

Mathews and Fox (34) have also identified five

variables which describe the nature of an interval

training program:

(1) the rate and distance of work interval

(which govern the intensity of work);

(2) the number of repetitions during each

workout (affecting the length of total work);

(3) the frequency of training per week;

(4) the type of activity during the relief

interval;

(5) the length of the relief interval.

Fox and Matthews (34) also summarized guidelines for
the construction of interval training programs on the
basis of training time and training distance. These

guidelines are shown in Table 4 and Table 5.

 TABLE 4
Guidelines for the Construction of an Interval Training Program (Training Time)

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G)

WORK MAJOR TRAINING REPETI- SETS REPETI- WORK- TYPE OF
EFFORT ENERGY TIME TIONS PER PER TIONS PER RELIEF RELIEF
AREA SYSTEM (min:sec) WORKOUT WORKOUT SET RATIO INTERVAL

1 ATP-PC 0:10 50 5 10 Rest-Relief (e.g.,

0:15 45 5 9 walking, flexing)
0:20 40 4 10 1:3
0.25 32 4 8

2 ATP-PC-LA 0:30 25 S 5 Work-Relief (e.g.,

0:40-0:50 20 4 5 1:3 light to mild
1:00-1:10 15 3 5 exercise,
1:20 10 2 5 1:2 jogging)

3 LA-02 1:30-2:00 8 2 4 1:2 Work-Relief

2:10-2:40 6 6
2:50-3:00 4 4 1:1 Rest-Relief

4 0 3:00-4:00 4 4 1:1 Rest-Relief

2
4:00-5:00 3 1 3 I:112
 TABLE 5

Guidelines for the Construction of an Interval Training Program

(Training Distance)

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H)

WORK MAJOR TRAINING DISTANCE REPETI- SETS MAXIMAL WORK- TYPE OF
EFFORT ENERGY YARDS TIONS PER PER REPS PER RELIEF RELIEF
AREA SYSTEM Run Swim WORKOUT WORKOUT SET RATIO INTERVAL

1 ATP-PC 55 15 50 5 10 1:3 Rest-Relief

110 25 24 3 8 (e.g.,walking,
flexing)

2 ATP-PC-LA 220 55 16 4 4 1:3 Work-Relief

440 110 8 2 4 1:2 (e.g., light
to mild exer-
cise, jogging)

3 LA-02 660 165 5 1 5 1:2 Work-Relief

880 220 4 2 2 1:1 Rest- Relief

4 02 1100 275 3 1 3 1:1/2 Rest-Relief

1320 330 3 1 3 1:1/2
 38

In concluding this review of literature relating to

interval training, the lack of any published papers on

interval weight training points out the critical need for

research in this area.

 39

CHAPTER III

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The study was performed at Oregon State University,

Corvallis, during the spring term of the 1986 academic

year. The purpose of the study was to examine the

relative effectiveness of interval weight training on the

development of dynamic muscular strength, power and
cardiorespiratory function of male college students. The

training for both the experimental group and the control

group was conducted in the weight training room of the

Department of Physical Education at Oregon State

University.

This chapter outlines the selection of subjects,

testing procedure and training methods. The final part of

the chapter summarizes evaluation method for the data

collected during the testing period.

Subjects

The use of human subjects for the study was approved

by the Human Subject Board at Oregon State University.

The subjects for the study were sixteen healthy male
student volunteers among students registered in an

intermediate weight training class during spring term,

1986. Students with any history of cardiorespiratory

 40

problems were not used as subjects. All subjects received

the informed consent form and signed it for participation

in the study. The subjects were randomly assigned to

either the experimental group (interval weight training

group) or the control group (circuit weight training
group), with each group consisting of eight subjects. The

experimental group met for a sixty minute period on

Tuesday and Friday. The control group met on Tuesday and

Thursday.

Although it is conceivable that some of the subjects

might have been exposed to weight training at one time or

another, none had previous systematic or regular interval

weight training experience.

The subjects, ages ranged from eighteen to twenty-six
years. A summary of their physical characteristics is

contained in Table 6.

Table 6. Age and Physical Characteristics of the

subjects.

Standard Minimum Maximum

Variable Mean Deviation Value Value

Age 20 2.309 18 26

Height (cm) 178.5 4.662 173 191

Weight (kg) 76.75 7.407 62 90

 Orientation

During the first week all subjects were oriented

concerning what would be expected of them during the
spring term. Interval weight training and circuit weight

training techniques to be used during the experimental

period were explained. Each subject was asked to use only

the prescribed training routines and to avoid other

vigorous activity as much as possible. Subjects were also

asked to attend each class period and to put maximal

effort into each class.

Training Methods

Interval Weight Training _Program

After completion of the pre-testing, the six-week

interval weight training period was started. The interval

weight training was divided into three phases.

During the first phase of the training the experi-

mental group used 60 percent of their 1 RM in the core

lifts, the bench press and the squat. For each of these

lifts the subject executed 15-16 repetitions for three

sets. Between each set the work-relief consisted of rope

jumping for two minutes. A 1 1/2 minute rest followed the

rope jumping. The subject then repeated the cycle.

At the completion of the two core lifts the subject

took a 5 minute rest and then executed the mini-circuit
 42

training twice, consisting of 4 bodybuilding exercises.

Exercises consisted of dumbbell curls, lat-machine

exercises, dumbbell flys and sit-ups (Figures 4, 5, 6, 7).

Subjects were allowed to select whatever resistance felt

comfortable at this time. Each exercise was executed

14-16 repetitions with a 30 second rest between exercises.
At the completion of each circuit the work-relief

consisted of two minutes of rope jumping (Figure 8)

followed by a 1 1/2 minute rest.

During the second phase (second two weeks of the

experimental period), the same training procedures were

followed as outlined for the first phase, except that the

training intensity was increased to 65 percent and 70

percent of the 1 RM in the bench press and squat

respectively for 9-10 repetitions for 3 sets. Rope

jumping time was reduced to 1 1/2 minutes and mini-circuit

weight training remained unchanged.

During the third phase, the training intensity for

the core lifts was increased to 70 percent of 1 RM for the

bench press and 80 percent of 1 RM for the squat for 4-5

repetitions for two sets. Rope jumping remained at

1 1/2 minutes, and the mini circuit remained the same.

Sample workouts are contained in Appendix A.
Training intensity and repetitions were based upon

the established 1 RM value for each subject in the pre-

test. Pulse rate was monitored by holding the hand over

 43

°1---T-----e-gz

Figure 4. Dumbbell Curls

 44

Figure 5. Lat-machine Exercises

 I

"
1,
I [Ivr:r, I
Lekili/H 'AjA14141411111,0116 411,4 11
 47

_7r

Figure 8. Rope Jumping

 48

the left breast for establishing the work interval inten-

sity. Subjects were required to maintain a heart rate

between 120 and 180 beats per minute during the work
interval. In this study Tuesday was a relatively light
workout day while Friday was a heavy workout day. Before

starting the interval weight training, the subjects parti-

cipated in a warm-up set of lifting with lighter loads,

performing 8-10 repetitions. After completion of interval

weight training, the subjects had a cool down set of lift-

ing with lighter loads using 8-10 repetitions. A critical

feature of the interval weight training program was the

progressive overload training principle. Every two weeks

the training intensity was increased for all subjects.

Circuit Weight Training Program

The control group performed the circuit weight

training program. The circuit weight training consisted
of a twelve-station circuit which included exercises set

up in the following order around the weight training room:

squat, lock-knee deadlifts, bench press, leg extension,

toe raise, seated dumbbell curl, front squat, leg curl,

sit ups, leg press, hack squat, ladder walk. Each

exercise was executed in short, all-out bursts of 45

seconds duration, then followed by a one minute rest.

Subjects selected their resistance on the basis of body

weight. Sample workouts are contained in Appendix B.
 49

Safety Precautions

Because relatively untrained non-athletes might not

have sufficient abdominal and lower back strength to

withstand the intensity or stress imposed by interval

weight training, specific safety measures were taken

during the experimental period to reduce the possibility
of injury. The following specific precautions were taken

as suggested (75, 89):

1. training was never done alone;

2. correct techniques were used in all

exercises;

3. every experimental workout started and

ended with free and stretching exercise
movements for the lower back muscles;

4. all subjects were required to wear

a 10 cm wide leather belt to provide added
support to the lower back and abdominal
muscles.

There were no injuries during the entire experimental

period of the study.

Testing Procedures

Strength

The one-repetition maximum for the bench press and

squat was used as a base line for this study. The

pre-test was administered immediately following the first

week. Testing was conducted again at the conclusion of
the 6th week of the experimental period. The criteria for

judging the success of the lifts are outlined in the

 50

official rules of the International Power-lifting

Federation (80).

In executing the bench press to determine a 1 RM, the

subject assumed a supine position on a bench, feet in

contact with the floor. The barbell was lowered from an

arms extended position down to the chest and back up to an

arms extended position (Figure 9). Safety spotters were

used in the event that weights were too heavy. In order

for the attempt to be successful, the bar had to touch the

chest with no bouncing; the head and trunk (including

buttocks) had to remain in contact with the bench, the

feet flat on the floor and the arms extended evenly (80).

In executing the squat to determine a 1 RM, the

subject lifted a loaded barbell off the rack and onto the
shoulders (Figure 10). For test consistency, the subject

was squatted to a 50 cm high bench. From this standing

position the subject squatted down until the buttocks
touched the bench (approximately a 3/4 full squat) and

then extended his legs and back in returning to the

starting position.

Power

The vertical jump test was used to measure explosive

power. The pre-test was administered immediately
following the first week period.

In executing the vertical jump test, the subject

first stood flatfooted facing the board with both arms

 51

1=

Figure 9. The Bench Press

 52

Figure 10. The Squat

 53

Figure 11. The Vertical Jump Test

 54

stretched as high as possible overhead. After chalking

the fingers of one hand, the subject took a crouched

position with a knee angle approximately 115 degrees and

the feet spread 13 cm to 25 cm laterally and about 13 cm

anteriorly-posteriorly (Figure 11). The subject was

allowed to practice the jump several times to find the

most comfortable position. The subject held the crouched

position for approximately two seconds and then jumped as

high as possible. As he reached the peak of his jump, the
subject touched as high as possible on the board with the
chalked hand while thrusting downward with the opposite
arm. The score for each trial was the number of

centimeters from the bottom of the board to the point

touched during the jump. Measurement was to the nearest

half-centimeter. Three consecutive trials were given.

The highest score was used as the power score.

Cardiorespiratory Function
The cardiorespiratory function test was conducted in
the Human Performance Laboratory within the Department of

Physical Education at Oregon State University. Prior to

testing, each subject was introduced to the testing

equipment and given the opportunity to become accustomed

to graded treadmill walking. The subjects also had the

opportunity to breathe through the mouth-piece and

breathing valve which was used in all metabolic
determinations.
 55

A modified treadmill V02 max protocol was admi-

nistered to each subject to derive a direct measurement

of maximal oxygen uptake and respiratory function. The

treadmill test followed the standards recommended by

Thoden (104).

1. The purpose and procedures of the test were

explained to the subject.

2. The subject was prepared with electrodes (V5).

3. Introduction to treadmill running began at 4.0 mph

and was gradually increased to the subject's pre-
ferred warm-up speed (usually 5.0-7.0 mph). This

was continued for a minimum of 5 minutes until the

subject was satisfied.

4. Subjects attaining a heart rate greater than

160 beats per minute were run at 7.5 mph; of 140

to 160 bpm, at 8.0 mph; of less than 140 bpm, at

8.5 mph.

5. The subject was attached to the breathing appar-

atus and began to run at 0% grade.

6. The treadmill angle was increased by 2.5% of its

length each two minutes until termination of the

test.

7. The subjects were encouraged to cool down by

resuming moderate exercise at 0% grade and a speed

of 4.0 to 5.0 mph for several minutes.
 56

Metabolic determinations were made each minute via

open circuit spirometry. The subjects breathed through a

Daniels' Type low resistance two-way valve with the volume

of inspired air being measured by a Parkinson-Cowan CD-4

dry gas meter. The expired air then passed through a 5

liter mixing chamber with a sample being drawn off

continuously at a rate of 500 cc per minute. This sample

then passed through a Beckman LB-2 infrared carbon dioxide

(CO
2
) analyzer and an Applied Electrochemistry S-3A oxygen
(0
2
) analyzer. The gas analyzers were calibrated against
gases of known concentration before and after each test.
Oxygen consumption (V02), CO2 production (VCO2),

ventilation (1e), and the respiratory exchange ratio

(R.E.R.) were calculated immediately via an automated

computer system (Rayfield Electronics, Chicago, IL).

The subject's heart rate was monitored using a

Physio-Control Lifepak 7 (Physio-Control Corp.) in order

to attain maximum heart rate during the test.

Statistical Null Hypotheses

The general hypothesis was that six weeks of interval

weight training would result in statistically no

significant improvement in dynamic muscular strength,

power and cardiorespiratory function in college males.

The specific sub hypotheses which were tested are the

following:
 57

1. There will be no significant difference in the

pre-test and six-week post-test means for strength
within the circuit weight training group and within

the interval weight training group.

2. There will be no significant difference in the

pre-test and six-week post-test means for power

within the circuit weight training group and within

the interval weight training group.

3. There will be no significant difference in the

pre-test and six-week post-test means for cardio-

respiratory function within the circuit weight

training group and within the interval weight

training group.

4. There will be no significant difference in the

six-week adjusted mean scores for strength
between the circuit weight training group and the
interval weight training group.

5. There will be no significant difference in the

six-week adjusted mean scores for power between

the circuit weight training group and the interval

weight training group.

6. There will be no significant difference in the

six-week adjusted mean scores for cardiorespiratory

function between the circuit weight training group

and the interval weight training group.

 58

Treatment of the Data

Statistical analysis was carried out on data on the

physical characteristics of the subjects and on the

dynamic muscular strength, power and cardiorespiratory

function tests.

1. The methods used to analyze data from physical

characteristics tests involved determination of the means,
standard deviations, and extreme values of the variables.

2. The t-test was computed on each dependent variable

within each group to determine whether the changes which

took place in each group were significant. Dependent

variables present in this study were dynamic muscular

strength, power and cardiorespiratory function measures.

3. The one-way analysis of covariance was used to

determine differences in the means of test scores in
strength, power and cardiorespiratory function between the

experimental group and the control group. The pre-test

values were used as the covariate and the post-test values

were used as dependent variables.

4. The .05 level of significance was selected for all

statistical conclusions.

5. Graphical analysis was used to demonstrate the

relationship in a given set of test scores.
 59

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA

The basic problem of this study was to examine the

relative effectiveness of interval weight training on the

development of dynamic muscular strength, power and

cardiorespiratory function.

The study lasted for a six-week experimental period

and comprised two groups: a control group, which undertook
a circuit weight training program, and an experimental

group, which undertook an interval weight training

program. Each subject was given a pre-test before the

experimental period began and a post-test afterwards, with

scores for each subject recorded. The raw data for all

subjects are found in Appendix 0.t-r:

Statistical Procedure

Since the results of each training were to be

analyzed according to pre- and post-test control group

research design procedures, both groups were given pre-

and post- dynamic muscular strength, pre- and post-power

and pre- and post-cardiorespiratory function tests. Two

statistical procedures were used to analyze the data. A

"t" test was used to determine if differences between pre-

and post-test scores were significant, and an analysis of

covariance was used to determine if there were any

 60

significant differences between the control group and the

experimental group.

Level of Significance
It is conventional in behavioral science research to

use either a .05 or a .01 level of significance to

determine the success of a hypothesis (88). The .05 level

was selected to monitor this investigation because it

seemed to allow sufficient variation to permit acceptance

or rejection of the hypotheses.

Null Hypotheses

The following general null hypothesis was tested in

this study:

1. Six weeks of interval weight training will result

in no statistically significant improvement in

dynamic muscular strength, power or cardio-

respiratory function in college males.

The findings of the study will be discussed in order,

according to the six sub hypotheses presented below.

Bub lisuothesis One

1. There will be no significant difference in the

pre-test and post-test means for strength

within the circuit weight training group and

within the interval weight training group.
 61

The results of the pre- and post-test means for

dynamic muscular strength are presented in Table 7. At

the end of the experimental period, both groups had

achieved an increase in bench press strength and in squat

strength, though the greater increase for both groups took

place in the squat. The experimental group gained 8.375

kg (10%) in the bench press and 31.5 kg (26.3%) in the

squat, whereas the control group gained 4.375 kg (5.7%) in

the bench press and 12.25 kg (10.4%) in the squat.
The computed t-test values for the experimental group
and the control group in the bench press were 3.360 and
2.606 respectively. The critical value of t at the .05

level of significance is 2.365. Thus both t-test values

were statistically significant at the .05 level. The

t-test value for the experimental group in the squat was

9.656. This value was significant at the .01 level. The

t-test value for the control group in the squat was 2.938.
This value was significant at the .05 level. Therefore,

the null hypothesis was rejected.

Sub Hypothesis Two

2. There will be no significant difference in the

pre-test and post-test means for power within

the circuit weight training group and within

the interval weight training group.

 TABLE 7

Comparison of Difference between Mean Scores

on Pre- and Post-Strength Test

Variable Group Pre Standard Post Standard Difference Computed

Mean Deviation Mean Deviation between Pre- t

Score Score and Post-Test

Bench Experimental 83.875 21.715 92.25 21.076 8.375 3.360*

Press 76.5 25.145 80.875 20.932 4.375 2.606*
(kg) Control

Squat Experimental 119.875 17.748 151.375 19.449 31.5 9.656**

(kg) 12.25 2.938*
Control 117.875 31.457 130.125 25.542

N = 8
* Significant at the .05 level
** Significant at the .01 level
 63

Table 8 shows that in the vertical jump test, both

groups made a significant gain. The mean score for the

experimental group increased from a pre-test level of

54.375 cm to a post-test level of 57.125 cm, a gain of

2.75 cm (5.1%). The control group also gained, with a

4.25 cm (7.7%) increase from the pre-test mean to the

post-test mean. The computed values of t for the

experimental and the control group were 4.438 and 5.194

respectively. Since these values were greater than the

critical value (3.499) of t at the .01 level of

significance, the null hypothesis was rejected.

Sub Hypothesis Three

3. There will be no significant difference in the
pre-test and post-test means for cardiorespira-

tory function within the circuit weight training

group and within the interval weight training

group.

The results of changes in cardiorespiratory function

for each group are presented in Table 9. According to

this table, maximal oxygen uptake values, whether

expressed in 1/min or ml/kg/min, did not change

significantly in either group. The values of t computed

for maximum oxygen uptake of the experimental group and

the control group were 0.721 and 0.965 respectively.

These statistics indicate no significant difference at the
.05 level for either group.
 TABLE 8

Comparison of Difference between Mean Scores

on Pre- and Post-Power Test

Variable Group Pre Standard Post Standard Difference Computed

Mean Deviation Mean Deviation between Pre- t
and Post-Test

Vertical Experi- 54.375 4.069 57.125 5.853 2.75 4.438**

Jump mental
(cm)
Control 54.875 8.610 59.125 7.240 4.25 5.194**

N . 8
Significant at the .05 level
* * Significant at the .01 level
 Table 9
Comparison of Difference between Mean Scores
on Pre- and Post-Cardiorespiratory Function Test

Variable Group Pre Standard Post Standard Difference Computed

Mean Deviation Mean Deviation between Pre- t
Score Score and Post-test

VO2 max Experimental 4.504 0.541 4.571 0.461 0.067 0.721

(1/min) 4.128 0.725 4.336 0.581 0.208 0.965
Control

V02 max Experimental 59.03 6.340 59.23 4.059 0.2 0.175

(ml/kg/ 5.080 57.008 5.864 0.224 0.245
Control 56.934
min)
Max Ve Experimental 130.848 15.270 134.506 13.604 3.658 1.274
(BTPS) 126.453 20.885 123.053 23.210 -3.4 -0.824
Control
(1/min)
Maximum Experimental 29.101 1.465 29.503 2.269 0.402 0.558
Ventilatory Control 29.346 3.487 28.274 3.258 -1.092 -1.555
Equivalent

N = 8
* Signficant at the .05 level
 66

Maximum ventilation (BTPS) and maximum ventilatory

equivalent also did not change significantly. The t-test

values of the experimental group and the control group in

ventilation were 1.274 and -0.824 respectively. Neither

of these t-test values was statistically significant at

the .05 level. For maximum ventilatory equivalent, the

t-test values of the experimental and the control group

were 0.558 and -1.555 respectively. These values also

show no significant difference at the .05 level.

Therefore, the null hypothesis was retained.

Sub Hypothesis Four

4. There will be no significant difference in the

six-week adjusted mean scores for strength

between the circuit weight training group and

the interval weight training group.

Table 10 shows that the computed F values for the

eight-week adjusted mean scores for strength in the bench

press and in the squat between the control group and the

experimental group were 3.514 and 16.177 respectively.

The critical value of F at the .05 level of significance

with degrees of freedom of 1 and 13 is 4.67. Thus the

computed F value in the bench press was not statistically

significant, while the computed F value in the squat was

statistically significant at the .01 level. Since there

was a significant difference between the two groups in the

case of the squat, the null hypothesis was rejected.
 TABLE 10

Analysis of Covariance for Adjusted Mean Scores for Strength

Variable Source of df SS MS
Variation

Bench Press Between 1 97.611 97.611

(kg) 27.779 3.514
Within 13 361.123
Total 14 458.734

Squat Between 1 1538.934 1538.934

(kg) 16.177**
Within 13 1236.714 95.132
Total 14 2775.648

N = 8
* Significant at the .05 level
** Significant at the .01 level
 68
Sub Hypothesis Five

5. There will be no significant difference in the

six-week adjusted mean scores for power between

the circuit weight training group and the

interval weight training group.

It is shown in Table 11 that the computed F for the

six-week adjusted mean scores for power between the

control group and the experimental group was 2.609. This

was less than the critical value of F, which is 4.67.

Therefore, the null hypothesis was retained.

Sub Hypothesis Six

6. There will be no significant differences in the

six-week adjusted mean scores for cardiores-

piratory function between the circuit weight

training group and the interval weight training

group.

Table 12 shows the computed F values for the adjusted

post mean scores for maximum oxygen uptake values between

the control group and the experimental group. These were

expressed in both 1/min and ml/kg/min for both groups and

were 0.013 and 0.125 respectively. Neither of these F

values surpassed the critical value of F at the .05 level

of significance with degrees of freedom of 1 and 13.

 TABLE 11

Analysis of Covariance for Adjusted Mean Scores for Power

Variable Source of df SS MS
Variation

Vertical Jump Between 1 9.767 9.767

(cm)
Within 13 48.664 3.743 2.609
Total 14 58.430

N = 8
* Significant at the .05 level
** Significant at the .01 level
 TABLE 12

Analysis of Covariance for Adjusted Mean Scores

for Cardiorespiratory Function

Variable Source of df SS MS
Variation

V02 max Between 1 0.002 0.002 0.013

(1/min) Within 13 2.024 0.156
Total 14

V02 max Between 1 0.849 0.849 0.125

(ml/kg/min) Within 13 88.268 6.790
Total 14

Max Ve(BTPS) Between 1 88.130 88.130 0.897

(1/min) 1279.267 98.251
Within 13

Total 14

Maximum Between 1 8.038 8.038 2.065

ventilatory Within 13 50.600 3.892
equivalent
Total 14

N = 8
* Significant at the .05 level
** Significant at the .01 level
 71

The computed F value of the adjusted post mean scores

for maximum ventilation, as indicated in Table 6, was

0.897. For maximum ventilatory equivalent the computed F

value for the adjusted post mean scores between the two
groups was 2.065. Neither of these computed F values
exceeded the critical F value of 4.67. Since none of the

computed F values for cardiorespiratory function surpassed

the critical value, the null hypothesis was retained.

Summary of Findings

The findings from this study may be summarized as

follows:

1. There was a significant difference at the .05 level of

significance between the pre-test and six-week post-test

means for strength within the circuit weight training

group and within the interval weight training group.

2. There was a significant difference at the .01 level of

significance between the pre-test and six-week post-test

means for power within the circuit weight training group

and within the interval weight training group.

3. There was not a significant difference at the .05 level

of significance between the pre-test and six-week post-

test means for cardiorespiratory function within the

circuit weight training group and within the interval
weight training group.
 72

4. There was not a significant difference at the .05 level

of significance in the six-week adjusted mean scores for

bench press strength between the circuit weight training

group and the interval weight training group.

However, there was a significant difference at the

.01 level of significance in the six-week adjusted mean

scores for squat strength between the circuit weight

training group and the interval weight training group.

5. There was not a significant difference at the .05 level

of significance in the six-week adjusted mean scores for

power between the circuit weight training group and the

interval weight training group.

6. There was not a significant difference at the .05 level

of significance in the six-week adjusted mean scores for

cardiorespiratory function between the circuit weight

training group and the interval weight training group.

Discussion

Both the circuit weight training group and the

interval weight training group showed a significant

increase in dynamic muscular strength and power during the

six-week training period. However, the statistics
indicate that the interval weight training was more
effective in the development of squat strength than was

the circuit weight training. This study also showed no

 73

significant increase in cardiorespiratory function in

either group. Figures 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 graphi-

cally display how the groups changed in dynamic muscular

strength, power and cardiorespiratory function after the

six-week experimental period.

Increase in Dynamic Muscular Strength

One of the findings of this study was the increase in

dynamic muscular strength in the experimental group (8.375

kg in the bench press and 31.5 kg in the squat) and in the

control group (4.375 kg in the bench press and 12.25 kg in

the squat). The interval weight training program resulted

in a 10% increase in bench press strength and a 26.3%
increase in squat strength. The circuit weight training

program showed a smaller increase in the bench press

(5.7%) and in the squat (10.4%). This was expected since

the interval weight training program used higher

intensities (at least 60% of 1 RM) than did the circuit

weight training program (40-60% of 1 RM).

It is likely that the increase of strength for both

groups can be attributed not only to physiological
adaptation but also to adaptations of the neuromuscular
system. Overloading skeletal muscle results in strength

increase accompanied by hypertrophy of the muscle involved

(27, 94).
 74

pre-test

post-test

Cr)

160 -

150 - LEI

11
140 - fel
ul
Lr
N.
130 - co
0.N
00
N.

120 -
ao

110

100 - tr,
N.
(x) kr)

90 - co
14-1
CO

CO

80 - N.

70 -

60 -

50 -

Bench Squat Bench Squat

Experimental Control

Figure 12. Changes in dynamic muscular strength

 75

pre-test
Er
post-test
111
62

60
59.125

58 57.125

56-
54.875
54.375

54-

52-

50-

Experimental Control

Figure 13. Changes in power.

 76

pre-test

post-test
62

60
59.23
59.03

58 57.008
56.93

52

50

Experimental Control

Figure 14. Changes in maximal oxygen uptake.

 77

pre-test

post-test

1364
134.506

134

132 t
131.748

E
130

128
126.453

126

124 123.053

122

120

Experimental Control

Figure 15. Changes in maximum ventilation (BTPS)

 78

pre-test

post-test

34

32

29.503 29.346
30 29.101
28.274

28

26

24

22

20 -

Experimental Control

Figure 16. Changes in maximum ventilatory equivalent

40% experimental group

control group
30%
26.3%

20%

10.4%
10%
10% 7.7%
5.7% 5.1%
3%
1.3%
0.3% 0.3% -3.7%
-3%
IIL

Bench Press Squat Vertical Maximum 1

jump oxygen
uptake Maximum Maximum.
ventilation ventilatory
equivalent

Figure 17. Comparison of change in dynamic muscular strength, power and

cardiorespiratory function.
 80

O'Shea and Wegner (78) state:

Adaptation of the neuromuscular system to

the stress of the power training program
involves changes in the recruitment patterns
of the motor units. Such a change would
reflect an increase in spatial summation and
a corresponding decrease in the nerve
activation threshold due in part to greater
facilitation of the synapse (p. 9).
Therefore, it is conceivable that increased neuromuscular
efficiency improved the ability of muscles to adapt to the

stimuli of the bench press and squat movements.

This study showed a greater increase in squat

strength compared to bench press strength for both groups.

The greater increase in the squat can be explained in the

following way:

1. The body as a whole responds more effectively to

training than does each individual part. Since the squat

involves more major muscle groups than does the bench

press, the squat may result in a greater strength

increase.

2. The major muscle groups utilized in the bench press are

smaller and weaker than the muscle groups used in the
squat (96). The bench press develops strength for muscle
groups such as the triceps, deltoids, pectorals, and

latissimus dorsi (17). The squat movement develops

muscular strength for the erector spinae, gluteus maximus

and medius, tensor faciae latae, quadriceps, abdominals,

hamstrings, and ankle flexors (71, 97, 102). The larger

 81

muscle fibers brought into play by the squat movement are

better able to adapt to the stresses of a training

program.

3. Trainability of various muscle groups is different.

Muscle groups utilized in the squat have greater

trainability than muscle groups utilized in the bench

press (49, 100).

This study also showed no statistically significant

difference in bench press strength improvement between the

interval weight training group and the circuit weight
training group. However, there was a significant
difference in squat strength improvement between the two
groups. These findings may be explained by the three

factors listed above and by the progressive overload

principle, which was applied scientifically in the

interval weight training program.

Increase in Power

The interval weight training program and the circuit

weight training program both resulted in a significant

increase in power, as measured by vertical jumping

ability. However, the analysis of covariance showed that

there was no significant difference in increase in power

between the experimental group and the control group.

Since power can be thought of as muscular strength
multiplied by limb velocity, the increase in power for
 82

both groups can be attributed to: (1) an increase in

muscular strength, (2) an increase in limb velocity, or

(3) an increase in both muscular strength and limb

velocity. No tests were made in this study to measure

increase in limb velocity. However, both training

programs did result in a significant increase in muscular

strength, as measured by the bench press and the squat.

Therefore the increase in power for both groups is at

least partially due to the increase in muscular strength

for both groups. The increase of power can also be

explained by the fact that both training programs included

the squat movement. According to O'Shea (75), the squat,

together with the power clean, are the two most important

basic weightlifting movements for power.

Cardioresniratory Function
It is difficult to develop both aerobic and anaerobic

power to high degrees in one specific type of training

program. Hickson (52) reported that at the upper limits

of strength development, aerobic training can inhibit

strength gains. However, studies indicating that weight

training produces an increase in cardiorespiratory

endurance were cited in the review of literature (17, 51,

55, 69). In the present study it was expected that both

the interval weight training program and the circuit

weight training program would result in an increase in

cardiorespiratory function.
 83

However, the study showed that neither the interval

weight training program nor the circuit weight training

program had any significant effect on cardiorespiratory

function. The results indicate that neither training

program improved maximum oxygen uptake expressed either as
liters per minute or as milliliters per kilogram per

minute. These results, along with the finding of no

significant change in respiratory function, suggest that

interval weight training fails to produce adaptations in

cardiorespiratory function.

It has been well-established that intensity, duration

and frequency of exercise are essential components in

stimulating cardiorespiratory adaptations in response to

training (26). The American College of Sports Medicine

(2) has made the following recommendations for the

quantity and quality of exercise for developing and main-

taining cardiorespiratory fitness and body composition.

1. Type of activity: Any activity that uses large muscle

groups, that can be maintained continuously, and is

rhythmical and aerobic in nature.

2. Intensity of conditioning: 60 to 90% of maximum heart

rate or 50 to 75% of V02 max.

3. Duration of conditioning: 15 to 60 minutes of

continuous or discontinuous aerobic activity.

 84

4. Frequency of conditioning: 3 to 5 days per week.

The intensity of exercise relative to V02 max appears

to be the most important factor in promoting gains in V02

max (26). The fact that no significant increase in

cardiorespiratory function was found in this study can be

attributed to the following possible factors:

1. The subjects in the interval weight training group

already had excellent cardiorespiratory function at the

time of the initial test. The mean maximum oxygen uptake

of the experimental group was 4.504 1/min (59.03
ml/kg/min) which, according to Astrand's (4) categori-

zation (Table 13) of maximum oxygen uptake levels, was in

the "high" category (57+ ml/kg/min). Among eight subjects

in the experimental group, two subjects already had very

high values of V02 max (68.05 ml/kg/min and 68.95

ml/kg/min), while the subject with the lowest V02 max
registered 51.13 ml/kg/min. It is reasonable to assume

that improvements in cardiorespiratory function made in

only a six-week interval weight training program might not

be significant for a group that begins at such a high

level of cardiorespiratory function.

It is worth noting that at the beginning of the

experiment the mean maximum oxygen uptake for the control

group was in the upper end of the "good" category

 85

TABLE 13

Norms for Maximal 02 Consumption

(Aerobic Working Capacity)*

Women

Age Low Fair Average Good High

20-29 1.69 1.70-1.99 2.00-2.49 2.50-2.79 2.80+

28 29-34 35-43 44-48 49+

30-39 1.59 1.60-1.89 1.90-2.39 2.40-2.69 2.70+

27 28-33 34-41 42-47 48+

40-49 1.49 1.50-1.79 1.80-2.29 2.30-2.59 2.60+

25 26-31 32-40 41-45 46+

50-65 1.29 1.30-1.59 1.60-2.09 2.10-2.39 2.40+

21 22-28 29-36 37-41 42+

Men

Age Low Fair Average Good High

20-29 2.79 2.80-3.09 3.10-3.69 3.70-3.99 4.00+

38 39-43 44-51 52-56 57+

30-39 2.49 2.50-2.79 2.80-3.39 3.40-3.69 3.70+

34 35-39 40-47 48-51 52+

40-49 2.19 2.20-2.49 2.50-3.09 3.10-3.39 3.40+

30 31-35 36-43 44-47 48+

50-59 1.89 1.90-2.19 2.20-2.79 2.80-3.09 3.10+

25 26-31 32-39 40-43 44+

60-69 1.59 1.60-1.89 1.90-2.49 2.50-2.79 2.80+

21 22-26 27-35 36-39 40+

*Upper figure = liters per minute

Lower figure = milliliters of 02 per kilogarm body
weight
 86

(52-56 ml/kg/min) according to Astrand's classification.

The value of V02 max for this group was 4.128 1/min
(56.934 ml/kg/min), with the the highest value being 62.48

ml/kg/min and the lowest being 47.59 ml/kg/min. The fact

that the circuit weight training program also showed no

significant increase in cardiorespiratory function, which
differs from results previously reported in the literature

(42, 43, 44, 45), may also be at least partially due to

the high initial cardiorespiratory function for the

control group.

2. The intensity of the interval weight training might not

have been enough to stimulate cardiorespiratory adapta-

tions.

3. The duration of the interval weight training might not

have been enough to bring about an increase in cardiores-

piratory function. The work-relief interval, consisting

of rope jumping, was just 15 minutes in length.

4. The frequency of training (2 times per week) might not

have been enough to stimulate cardiorespiratory function.

Although interval weight training did not result

in a significant increase in cardiorespiratory function

in this study, the experimental group did show a small

amount of increase in maximum oxygen uptake (59.03 to

59.23 ml/kg/min). However, the two subjects who began

 87

with very high values of 10 max (68.05 ml/kg/min, 68.95

2

ml/kg/min), decreased their maximum oxygen uptake after

the experiment (68.05 to 63.59 ml/kg/min, 68.95 to 64.77

ml/kg/min). These two subjects showed an increase in both

strength and body weight (73 to 75 kg and 73 to 75 kg).

This could be the result of the decrease in maximum oxygen

uptake. It is also worth noting that if the scores of

these two subjects are disregarded, the experimental group

increased its maximum oxygen uptake from 55.87 to 57.59

ml/kg/min (3.1%).
The study indicated no significant difference in
maximum ventilation between the interval weight training

group and the circuit weight training group. While the

experimental group showed an increase in maximum

ventilation (130.848 to 134.806 1/min) after the six week

training period, the control group had a decrease in

maximum ventilation (126.483 to 123.053 1/min). The

experimental group also had an increased maximum

ventilatory equivalent (29.101 to 29.503), while the

control group showed a decrease (29.346 to 28.274).

Robinson (90) contends that a factor in the increase in

maximum ventilation with training is the increase in

strength and endurance of the respiratory muscles.

Accepting this explanation, the training effects of a

six-week interval weight training program on maximum

ventilation and maximum ventilatory equivalent would be
 88

dependent, at least in part, on the increased strength and

endurance of the thoracic, abdominal, and diaphragm

muscles. However, the training adaptations of ventilation

for the control group were unexpected, and the causes for

the decreases in maximum ventilation and maximum

ventilatory equivalent in this group remain undetermined.
 89

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The purpose of this study was to determine the

relative effectiveness of interval weight training on the

development of dynamic muscular strength, power and

cardiorespiratory function.
A search of the literature revealed a number of
studies published in the area of weight training for

strength, power and cardiorespiratory endurance. However,

no studies were found in the area of interval weight

training and its effects on the development of dynamic

muscular strength, power and cardiorespiratory function.

This investigation was conducted during the spring

term of the 1986 academic year. All training was done in

the weight training room of the Department of Physical

Education at Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

The subjects consisted of sixteen male students who had

registered in the intermediate weight training class.

The pre- and post-test control group research design

was employed for this study. The subjects were randomly

assigned to either the experimental group (interval weight

training program) or the control group (circuit weight

training program). Training was limited to sixty minutes

 90

twice a week and continued for six weeks. Subjects in the

experimental group followed an interval weight training

program. Subjects in the control group followed a circuit

weight training program.

All subjects were tested for dynamic muscular
strength, power and cardiorespiratory function prior to

the six-week training period. The subjects were re-tested

following the six-week period. One repetition maximum for

the bench press and for the squat were used as a strength

test. The vertical jump test was used as a power

criterion. Cardiorespiratory function was tested using

the running protocol graded exercise testing.

The amount of change in each group from pre-test to

post-test was determined for each dependent variable.
Initial and final means within each group were analyzed by

the "t" test for related samples. The one-way analysis of

covariance was used to determine significant differences

between group mean scores. The .05 level of significance

was used as the critical level for retention or rejection

of the null hypotheses for the study.

As a result of the analysis, the following findings

are reported:

1. There was a significant difference in the pre-test and

post-test means for strength within the circuit weight

training group and within the interval weight training

group.
 91

2. There was a significant difference in the pre-test and

post-test means for power within the circuit weight

training group and within the interval weight training
group.

3. There was no significant difference in the pre-test and

post-test means for cardiorespiratory function within the

circuit weight training group and within the interval

weight training group.

. There was a significant difference in the six-week

adjusted mean scores for squat strength between the
circuit weight training group and the interval weight

training group.

There was no significant difference in the six-week

adjusted mean scores for bench press strength between the

circuit weight training group and the interval weight

training group.

5. There was no significant difference in the six-week

adjusted mean scores for power between the circuit weight

training group and the interval weight training group.

6. There was no significant difference in the six-week

adjusted mean scores for cardiorespiratory function

between the circuit weight training group and the interval

weight training group.

 92

Conclusions

Within the limitations of the sample and procedure in

this study, the following conclusions seem justified:

1. Six weeks of interval weight training produces

significant increases in strength and power.

2. Six weeks of interval weight training is superior to

circuit weight training for producing squat strength.

3. Six weeks of interval weight training does not produce

a statistically significant improvement in

cardiorespiratory function.

Recommendations

On the basis of the results of this study, the fol-

lowing recommendations are made for future investigations.

1. The effect on the development of dynamic muscular

strength, power and cardiorespiratory function of an

interval weight training program which employs three or

more workouts per week should be investigated.

2. A study similar to the present study, but using a large

sample representing various age groups and including
female subjects, is suggested.

3. A study similar to the present study, but consisting of

subjects who have low initial values of maximum oxygen

 93

uptake, is suggested in order to further investigate

cardiorespiratory function effects of interval weight

training.

4. A study similar to the present study, but using

different types of work-relief intervals and differently

timed work-relief intervals, is suggested.

5. An investigation is suggested to determine to what

extent interval weight training can be utilized by world

class athletes.

6. A study to determine the effects of interval weight

training on maximal anaerobic power and capacity in

athletes is suggested.
 94

REFERENCES

1. Allen, T. E., R. J. Byrd, and D. P. Smith.

"Hemodynamic Consequences of Circuit Weight
Training." The Research Quarterlx 43 (1979):
299-306.

2. American College of Sports Medicine. Guidelines for

Graded Exercise Testing and Exercise
Prescription. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger,
1980.

. Andersen, Vertis M. "The Effect of Three Methods of

Weight Training on Circulo-respiratory
Endurance," (Unpublished Master's Thesis, Brigham
Young University, 1968).

4. Astrand, I. "Aerobic Work Capacity in Men and Women

with Special Reference to Age." Acta
physiological Scandinavica 49, Suppl. 169 (1960).

5. Astrand, I., P. 0. Astrand, E. H. Christensen, and R.

Hedman. "Intermittent Muscular Work." Acta
yhysiolostica Scamlinaxica 48 (1960) : 448-453.

6. Astrand, I., P. 0. Astrand, E. H. Christensen, and R.

Hedman. "Myohemoglobin as an Oxygen Store in
Man." Acta Phvsiologica Scandinavica 48 (1960b):
454-462.

7. Berger, R. A. "Comparison of the Effects of Various

Weight Training Loads on Strength." The Research
Quarterly 36 (May 1965): 141-146.

8. Berger, R. A. "Effects of Static and Dynamic Training

on Vertical Jumping Ability." The yesearch
Quarterly 34 (October 1963): 419-424.

. Berger, R. A. "Comparative Effects of Three Weight

Training Programs." The Research Quarterly 34
(July 1963): 396-398.
10. Berger, R. A. "Optimum Repetitions for the
Development of Strength." The Research Quarterly
33 (1962): 334-338.

11. Berger, R. A. "Effect of Varied Weight Training

Programs on Strength." The Research Quarterly 33
(1962): 168-181.
 95

. Berger, R. A. "The Effect of Varied Weight Training

Programs on Strength and Endurance."
(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of
Illinois, 1960.)

13. Biegel, Kenneth L. "The Effect of Beginning Weight

Training Classes at Brigham Young University on
Strength and Cardiorespiratory Endurance."
(Unpublished Master's Thesis, Brigham Young
University, 1970).

14. Bjornas, B. S. "Flexibility and Strength Training

Considerations for Young Athletes." National
Strength and Conditioning Journal 4
(August-September 1982): 62-64.

15. Brouha, L. "Physiology of Training, Including Age and

Sex Differences." Journal of ,Sports Medlcine and
Physical Fitness 2 (1962): 3-11.

16. Capen, Edward K. "The Effect of Systematic Weight

Training on Power, Strength, and Endurance." The
Research Quarterly 31 (May, 1950): 83-93.

17. Capen, Edward K. "Study of Four Programs of Heavy

Resistance Exercise for Development of Muscular
Strength." The Research Quarterly 27 (May 1956):
132-142.

18. Carrow, R. E., B. Brown, and W. Van Huss. "Fiber Size

and Capillary to Fiber Ratios in Skeletal Muscle
of Exercised Ratio." Anatomical Record 159
(1967): 33-40.
19. Christensen, E. H., R. Hedman, and B. Saltin.
"Intermittent and Continuous Running." Aeta
Phvsiologica Scandinavic. 50 (1960): 269-286.

20. Chui, Edward. "Effects of Isometric and Dynamic

Weight Training Exercises upon Strength and Speed
of Movement." The Research Quarterly 35 (October
1964): 246-257.

21. Clarke, H. H. Muscular Strength and Endurance in Man.

Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966.

22. Connor, William P. "The Comparative Effects of Set

and Interval Circuit Weight Training Systems on
Muscular Strength, Cardiovascular Endurance and
Selected Anthropometric Measures of College Men."
(Unpublished Doctor of Education Dissertation,
University of Northern Colorado, 1975.)
 96

23. Cunningham, D. A., and J. A. Faulkner. "The Effect of

Training on Aerobic and Anaerobic Metabolism
during a Short Exhaustive Run." Medicine and
Science in Sports and _Exercise 1 (1969): 65-69.

24. Delorme, T. L. et al. "Effects of Progressive

Resistance Exercise on Muscle Contraction Time."
The Archives of Physical Medicine 33 (February
1952): 86.

25. De Pauw, D., and T. Vrijens. "Physique, Muscle

Strength and Cardiovascular Fitness of
Weight-Lifters." The Journal of Sports Medicine
and Physical Fitness 12 (September 1972):
193-300.

26. de Vries, Herbert A. Physiology of Exercise for

Physical Education and Athletics. Dubuque, Iowa:
William C. Brown Co. Publishers, 1980.

27. Edington, D. W., and V. R. Edgerton. The Biology of

Physical Activity. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.,
1976.

28. Edgar, Harold Stanley. "The Effect of Rest During a

Selected Progressive Resistance Exercise on the
Acquisition of Strength and Muscular Endurance."
(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Louisiana
State University and Agriculture and Mechanical
College, 1969.)

29. Edgerton, V. R., and G. L. Carrow. "Histochemical

Changes in Rat Skeletal Muscle after Exercise."
Experimental Neurology 24 (1969): 110-123.

30. Ekblom, B., P. 0. Astrand, B. Saltin, J. Stenberg, and

B. Wallstrom. "Effects of Training on.
Circulatory Response to Exercise." ,Journal of
Applied Physiology 24 (1968): 518-28.
31. Fahey, R., and H. Brown. "The Effects of Anabolic
Steroids Plus Weight Training on Normal Males --
A Double Blind Study." Medicine and Science in
Snorts 4 (1972): 54.

32. Flood, James J. "The Effects of a Power Weight

Training System on Strength, Cardiorespiratory
Efficiency and Power." (Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, University of Northern Colorado,
1970.)
 97

33. Foss, Merel L. "Changes in Cardiovascular

Conditioning from an Eight Week Weight Training
Program as Shown by the Cameron Heartometer."
(Unpublished Master's Thesis, South Dakota State
College, 1960.)

34. Fox, Edward C., and Donald K. Mathews. Interval

Training: Conditioning for Sports and General
Fitness. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company,
1974.

35. Fox, Edward C., and Donald K. Mathews. The Physi-

ological Basis _of Physical Education and
Athletics. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company,
1971.

6. Garfield, D. S., P. Ward, R. Cobb, et al. The

Syracuse Circuit Weight Training Report.
Houston: Dynamic Health Equipment, 1979.

37. Garhammer, J. J. "Force-Velocity Constraints and

Elastic Energy Utilized during Multi-Segment
Lifting/Jumping Activities" (Abstract). Medicine
and Science in Sports and Exercise 13 (1981): 96.

38. Garhammer, J. J. "Evaluation of Human Power Capacity

through Olympic Weightlifting Analyses."
(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of
California at Los Angeles, 1980.)

39. Garhammer, J. J. "Longitudinal Analysis of Highly

Skilled Olympic Weightlifters." In J. Terauds
(Ed.) ,Science in Weightlifting. Del Mar,
California: Academic Publishers, 1979.

40. Garhammer, J. J. "Some Thoughts on Strength and

Power." National Strength and Conditioning,
Association Journal (1982): 24-26.

41. Gettman, L. R., P. Ward, and R. D. Hagan. "A Compari-

son of Combined Running and Weight Training with
Circuit Weight Training." Medical Science in
Snorts and Exercise 14 (1982): 229-234.

42. Gettman, L. R., and M. L. Pollock. "Circuit Weight

Training: A Critical Review of its Physiological
Benefits." Yhys. Sportsmed. 9 (1981): 44-60. 9

43. Gettman, L. R., L. A. Culter, and T. A. Strathman.

"Physiologic Changes after 20 Weeks of Isotonic
Vs. Isokinetic Circuit Training." Journal of
Snorts Medicine and Physical Fitness 20 (1980):
265-274.
 98

. Gettman, L. R., J. J. Ayres, and M. L. Pollock.

"Physiologic Effects on Adult Men of Circuit
Strength Training and Jogging." Arch. Phys. Med.
Rehabil. 60 (March 1979): 115-120.

445. Gettman, L. R., J. J. Ayres, M. L. Pollock, and A.

Jackson. "The Effect of Circuit Weight Training
on Strength, Cardiorespiratory Function, and Body
Composition of Adult Men." Medicine and Science
in Sports and Exercise 10 (Fall 1978): 171-176.

,j46. Haskell, W. L. "The Effects of Three Endurance

Training Programs on Energy Metabolism."
(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of
Illinois, 1966.)
47. Hellebrandt, F. A. "Application of the Overload
Principle to Muscle Training in Man." American
Journal of Physical Medicine 37 (1958): 278-283.

48. Hellebrandt, F. A., and S. J. Houtz. "Mechanism of

Muscle Training in Man: Experimental Demonstra-
tion of the Overload Principle." The Physical,
Therapy Review. 36 (June 1956): 371-382.

49. Hettinger, T. Physiology of Strength. Springfield:

Charles C. Tomas Publisher, 1961.

50. Heusner, William. "The Theory of Strength Development

for Swimming and Other Sports, Part I."
Presented at the 1980 ASLA Clinic, New Orleans.

51. Hickson, R. C., M. Rosekoetter, and M. M. Brown.

"Strength Training Effects on Aerobic Power and
Short-Term Endurance." Medicine and Science 4.11
Sports and Exercise. 12 (1980): 333-339.

52. Hickson, R. C. "Interference of Strength Development

by Simultaneously Training for Strength and
Endurance." European Journal of Applied
Phvsiology 45 (1980): 255-263.

53. Hollering, A. L., G. L. Fox, R. L. Bargels, and D. K.

Mathews. "Metabolic Energy Sources as Affected
by a Seven-Week Program of Interval Training"
(Abstract). The Physiologist 14 (1971): 168.

54. Hurley, B. F., D. R. Seals, A. A. Ehsani, L. J.

Cartier, G. P. Dalsky, J. M. Hagberg, and J. 0.
Holloszy. "Effects of High Intensity Strength
Training on Cardiorespiratory Function."
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 16
(1984): 483-488.
 99

55. Jones, John William. "The Effect of Repetitions on

Strength Increases Produced by Progressive
Resistance Exercise." (Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, Indiana University, 1964).

56. Kiessling, K. H., K. Piehl, and L. G. Lundquist.

"Number and Size of Skeletal Muscle Mitochondria
in Trained Sedentary Men." In O. A. Larson and
R. O. Malmbourg (Eds.) Coronary Heart Disease a.n
Physical Fitness. Baltimore: University Park
Press, 1971, pp. 143-148.

57. Knuttjen, H. G. "Oxygen Debt, Lactate, Pyruvate and

Excess Lactate after Muscular Work." Journal of
Applied Physiology 17 (1962): 639-644.

58. Komi, P. V. "Neuromuscular Performance: Factors

Influencing Speed and Speed Production."
Scandinavian Journal of Sports Science 1(1979):
2-15.

59. Kraus, H. "Effects of Training on Skeletal Muscle."

In O. A. Larson and R. O. Malmborg (Eds.)
Coronary Heart Disease and Physical Fitness.
Baltimore: University Park Press, 1971, pp.
134-137.

60. Kuisinitz, Ivan and Clifford Kenney. "Effects of

Progressive Weight Training on Health and
Physical Fitness of Adolescent Boys." Research
Quarterly 29 (October 1958): 294-301.

61. Lamb, D. R. Physiology of Exercise. New York:

McMillan Co., 1978.

62. Leighton, Jack R. "A Study of the Effectiveness of

Ten Different Methods of Progressive Resistance
Exercise on the Development of Strength,
Flexibility and Bodyweight." Journal of American
41
, 11 1

22 (May-June 1967): 78-84.

63. MacDougall, D., and D. Sale. "Continuous Vs. Interval

Training for the Endurance Athlete." In
Patterson (Ed.) Sports Science Periodical on
Research and Technology in Sport. Ottawa: The
Coaching Association of Canada, December 1980,
pp. 1-9.
 100

64. Marcinzk, Edward J., James A. Hodgdon, Karen

Mittleman, and James T. Dorzen. "Aerobic/
Calisthenic and Aerobic/Circuit Weight Training
Programs for Navy Men." Medicine and Science in
Snorts and Exercise 17: 482-487.

65. Mayhew, J. L., and P. M. Gross. "Body Composition

Changes in Young Women with High Resistance
Weight Training." The Research Quarterly 45
(December 1974): 433-440.

66. McCloy, C. H. "Endurance." The Physical Educator 5

(March 1948): 9-23.

x'67'. Messier, Stephen P., and Mary E. Dill. "Alterations

in Strength and Maximal Oxygen Uptake Consequent
to Nautilus Circuit Weight Training." Research
Quarterly for Exerg;se and Sport 56 (1985):
345-351.

68. Nagle, Francis J., and Leslie W. Irwin. "Effects of

Two Systems of Weight Training on Circulo-
respiratory Endurance and Related Physiological
Factors." The Research Quarterly 31 (December
1960): 607-615.

69. Nagle, Francis J. "The Effects of Two Systems of

Weight Training on Circulo-Respiratory Endurance
and Related Physiological Factors." (Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation, Boston University School
of Education, 1959.)

70. Nelson, A. "Aerobic Training in Power Sports."

National Strength and Conditioning Association
Journal (October 1984): 10-15.

71. O'Shea, J. P. "Maximizing Athletic Power through the

Squat." Paper presented at the 6th National
Convention of National Strength and Conditioning
Association, Los Angeles, Calif., May 13 -15,
1983.

72. O'Shea, J. P., and J. Wegner. "Power Weight Training

and the Female Athlete." The Physician and
Snortamedicine 9 (June 1981): 109-120.

73. O'Shea, J. P. "Quality Strength Training for Optimal

Performance for the Discus, Javeline, Shot and
Hammer Throw." In E.J. Burke (Ed.) Toward an
Understanding of Human Performance. Ithaca, N.
J.: Movement Publication, 1980.
 101

74. O'Shea, J. P. "Super Quality Strength Training for

the Elite Athlete." Track and Field Quarterly
Review 79 (Winter 1979).

75. O'Shea, J. P. Scientific Principles and Methods of

Strength Fitness. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley
Publishing Co., 1976.

76. O'Shea, J. P. "Effects of Selected Weight Training

Programs on the Development of Strength and
Muscular Hypertrophy." The Research Quarterly 37
(March 1966): 95-102.

77. O'Shea, J. P. "The Effects of Selected Weight

Training Programs on the Development of Strength
and Muscle Hypertrophy." (Master's Thesis,
Michigan State University, 1962.)

78. O'Shea, J. P. and Wegner, J. "Power Weight Training

and the Female Athlete." The Physician and
SDortsmedicine 9 (June 1981): 109-120.

79. O'Shea, J.P. "Interval Weight Training."

(Unpublished class article, Oregon State
University, 1985).

80. Patterson, C., ed. Official Rules of the

International Power-lifting Federation, effective
November 6, 1968 - October 1, 1984.

81. Penman, K. A. "Human Striated Muscle Ultrastructural

Changes Accompanying Increased Strength without
Hypertrophy." The Research Quarterly 4_,_(1970):
418-424.

82. Perrine, J. J., and V. R. Edgerton. "Muscle

Force-Velocity and Power-Velocity Relationship
under Isokinetic Loading." Medicine and Science
in Sports and Exercise 10 (1978): 159-166.

83. Peronnet, F., and R. J. Ferguson. "Interval

Training." In A. W. Taylor (Ed.) The Scientific
Aspects of Sports Training. Springfield: Charles
C. Thomas, 1976.

84. Peterson, J. "Total Conditioning: A Case Study."

Athletic Journal 56 (1975): 40-55.

85. Pickney, David S. "The Comparative Effects of a

Beginning Basketball Class and a Weight Training
Class on Physical Fitness." (Unpublished
Master's Thesis, Brigham Young University, 1960).
 102

86. Pollock, M. L. "How Much Exercise Is Enough?" The

Phvsican and Sports Medicine 6 (June 1978).

87. Pollock, M. L., L. R. Gettman, and C. A. Milesis.

"Effects of Frequency and Duration of Training on
Attrition and Incidence of Injury." Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise 9 (1977): 31-36.

88. Popham, W. J., and K. A. Sirotnik. Educational

Statistics. 2nd Ed. New York: Harper and Row
Publishers, 1973.

89. Razor, J. E. "A Comparison of the Effects of Mental

and Physical Practice as a Means of Increasing
Strength." (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,
Indiana University, 1966.)

90. Robinson, S. Physiology of Exercise in Medical

Physiology. Edited by Bard (eleventh edition).
St. Louis: C. V. Mosby Company, pp. 494-525,
1961.

91. Roskamm, H. "Optimum Patterns of Exercise for Healthy

Adults." Canadian Medical Association Journal 96
(1967): 895-900.
92. Saltin, B. "Intermittent Exercise: Its Physiology and
Practical Application." John K. Emens Lecture,
Ball State University, Muncie, Ind., February 20,
1975.

93. Sorenson, Marcus B. "A Comparison of the Effects of

Conventional, High Repetition and Modified High
Repetition Weight Training Program on Strength
and Cardiovascular Endurance." (Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation, Brigham Young University,
1973.)

94. Steinhaus, A. H. Toward an Understanding of Health

and Physical Education. Dubuque, Iowa: William
C. Brown Co. Publ., 1963.

95. Steinhaus, Arthur H. "The Physiologists Speak on

Weight Lifting.1 Journal of Physical Education
35 (September-October 1938): 16-17.

96. Stiggins, C. "Exercise Methods Notebook No. 1: The

Bench Press." National Strength and Conditioning
Association Journal 4 (June-July 1982): 61.
 103

97. Stiggins, C. "Exercise Methods Notebook No. 2: The

Squat." National Strength and Conditioning
Association Journal 4 (August-September 1982):
62.
98. Stone, M. H. et al. "A Theoretical Model of Strength
Training." National strength and Conditioning
Journal It (August-September 1982): 36-39.

99. Stone, M. H. "Considerations in Gaining a

Strength-Power Training Effect (Machine Vs. Free
Weight)." National Strength and Conditioning
Association Journal 4 (February-March 1982):
22-24.

100. Sung Tai Chung. "Motor Psychophysics Training: Its

Effect on the Development of Dynamic Muscular
Power Strength in Male College Athletes and
Non-athletes." (Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, Oregon State University, 1983.)

101. Swegan, Donald B. "The Comparison of Static

Contraction with Standard Weight Training in
Effect on Certain Movement Speed and Endurance."
(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Pennsylvania
State University, 1957.)

102. Tanny, A. "Biomechanics of the Squat." Muscle and

Fitness. (December 1982): 28-29.

103. Terjung, R. L. et al. "Effects of Running to

Exhaustion on Skeletal Muscle Mitochondria: A
Biochemical Study." American Journal of
Physiology 223 (1972): 549-554.

104. Thoden, J. S., B. A. Wilson, and J. D. MacDougall.

"Testing Aerobic Power." Physiological Testing
of the Elite Athlete (1980): 47-49.

105. Walker, Glenn. "A Comparison of Two Methods of

Progressive Weight Training and the Development
of Muscular Strength and Cardiovascular
Endurance." (Unpublished Master's Thesis,
Brigham Young University, 1969.)

106. Wilmore, J. H., R. B. Parr, R. H. Girandola, et al.

"Physiological Alternatives Consequent to
Circuit Weight Training." Medical Science in
Sports and Exercise 10 (1978): 79-84.
 104

107. Wilmore, J. H., P. Parr, P. Vodak, T. Barstow, T.

Pipes, P. Ward, and P. Leslie. "Strength,
Endurance, BMR, and Body Composition Changes
with Circuit Weight Training" (Abstract).
Medical Science in Sports and Exercise 8 (1976):
59-60.

108. Wilmore, J. H. "Alterations in Strength, Body

Composition and Anthropometric Measurements
Consequent to a 10-Week Training Program."
Medical Science in Sports and Exercise 6 (1974):
133-138.

109. Wilson, Arthur L. "The Effects of Weight Training on

the Physical Fitness of Young Men."
(Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of
Illinois, 1947).
APPENDICES
 105

APPENDIX A

SAMPLE WORKOUTS
Interval Weighs Training Program
Phase 3 (May 12-23)

Training Protocol

Bench Press - Increase load to 70 percent of your 1 RM.

Reduce reps to 5.
,Squat - Increase load to 80 percent of your 1 RM.
Reduce reps to 5.
Record resting heart rate.

Training Outline

Warm-up: 3 minutes of rope jumping.

Bench Press
Set 1: 50% of RM 15 reps
1 Set 3: 70% of RM 4-5 reps
1

Rope jump 2 min. Rope jump 2'

Rest 1 1/2' Rest 1 1/2'

Set 2: 70% of 1 RM 4-5 reps Set 4: 50% of 1 RM 15 reps

Rope jump 2' (narrow grip)
Rest 1 1/2' Pest 5'

$quat.
Set 1: 60% of RM 15 reps
1 Set 3: 80% of RM 4-5 reps
1

Rope jump 1 1/2' Rope jump 1 1/2'

Rest 2' Rest 2'

Set 2: 80% of 1 RM 4-5 reps Set 4: 60% of 1 RM 15 reps

Rope jump 1/2' 1 Pest 5'
Rest 2'

Circuit Training

14-15 reps - 30 second rest between exercises

Curls Dumbell exercises
Lat-machine Sit-ups

Rope jump 1/2', Rest 2'

1

Repeat circuit twice, end of workout

**IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU STICK CLOSELY TO THE

ALLOTED TIME FOR THE REST PERIODS.
 106

APPENDIX B

SAMPLE WORKOUT
(CIRCUIT WEIGHT TRAINING PROGRAM)

Exercise % body weight Reps

1. Squat 75 15

2. Lock-knee Deadlifts 50 12

3. Bench Press (narrow grip) 60 15

4. Leg Extension 40 20

5. Toe Raise 25 25

6. Seated Dumbbell Curl 20 15

7. Front Squat 60 15

8. Leg Curl 30 15

9. Sit Ups 40

10. Leg Press 60-70 15

11. Hack Squat 50 15

12. Ladder Walk - 1

 107

APPENDIX C

INFORMED CONSENT RELEASE

In consideration of the benefits to be derived and the

data to be generated, the undersigned, a student of Oregon

State University, agrees to participate in the research
project, "The Effects of Six Weeks of Interval Weight

Training on Strength, Power, and Cardiovascular Function,"

under the direction of J. P. O'Shea, Professor of Physical

Education, Oregon State University.

The undersigned states that he or she has read an outline

of the proposed study, including the possible risks and

benefits, and is participating voluntarily and consents to
following the testing and training program outlined. The

undersigned also agrees to the use of the data generated

as the above agencies may desire.

At any time during the study, if circumstances should

arise and the undersigned cannot complete the study, he or

she is free to discontinue.

Participant

Date
 108

APPENDIX D

AGE AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SUBJECTS

Experimental Group

Subject Age Height Weight

(cm) (kg)

1 20 174 90

2 19 176 65

3 20 191 84

4 20 182 75

5 18 184 73

6 20 179 75

7 19 179 78

8 21 174 79

Control Group

Subject Age Height Weight

(cm) (kg)

1 18 182 87

2 19 175 82

3 19 177 74

4 18 180 83

5 26 178 72

6 19 173 62

7 25 174 75

8 19 178 74
 109

APPENDIX E

RAW DATA FOR THE WEIGHT LIFTING GROUPS

The Control Group

Vertical Max Max VO22 Max Maximal

Sub- Bench Squat Jump VO (ml/kg, Ve Ventilatory
,ject Test (kg) (kg) (cm) (1/min) min) (BTPS) Equivalent

1 Pre 125 143 58 5.08 58.69 153.74 30.26

Post 120 134 61 4.86 55.98 147.75 30.4

2 Pre 100 170 59 4.31 52.03 142.39 33.66

Post 100 180 64 4.06 49.35 130.73 32.2

3 Pre 75 107 58 4.23 58.5 128.43 30.36

Post 82 116 61 4.66 62.72 144.97 31.11

4 Pre 68 130 54 5.14 62.48 122.82 23.89

Post 75 136 57 5.12 61.55 134.18 26.21

5 Pre 70 93 51 3.95 55.35 124.72 31.57

Post 77 114 53 4.18 57.84 122.81 29.38

6 Pre 43 66 37 3.55 56.19 85.59 24.11

Post 52 93 46 3.6 58.24 79.29 22.03

7 Pre 70 118 67 3.71 47.59 113.47 30.58

Post 73 143 70 3.55 47.48 99.06 27.9

8 Pre 61 116 55 4.63 62.88 140.46 30.34

Post 68 125 61 4.66 62.9 125.63 26.96
 110

APPENDIX E - Continued

The Experimental Growl

Vertical Max Max VO22 Max Maximal

Sub- Bench Squat Jump VO, (ml /kg/ Ve Ventilatory
ject Test (kg) (kg) (cm) (1/min) min) (BTPS) Equivalent

1 Pre 95 148 53 4.52 51.13 131.92 29.19

Post 102 170 56 4.9 54.44 144.73 29.46

2 Pre 61 100 57 3.44 54.26 100.91 29.33

Post 70 123 60 3.61 55.16 114.63 31.95

3 Pre 77 107 58 4.91 57.08 138.88 28.29

Post 91 141 61 4.96 60.12 130.85 26.38

4 Pre 77 116 56 4.98 68.05 146.14 29.35

Post 91 139 57 4.74 63.59 155.52 32.81

5 Pre 82 109 49 5.03 68.59 149.7 29.96

Post 84 143 50 4.74 64.77 146.79 30.97

6 Pre 132 145 59 4.2 56.78 125.77 29.95

Post 136 177 65 4.15 55 121.89 29.39

7 Pre 70 111 48 4.75 59.64 123.46 25.99

Post 73 145 52 4.32 62.02 129.45 26.86

8 Pre 77 123 55 4.2 56.35 130 30.95

Post 100 173 56 4.65 58.79 132.19 28.43