Research Article
To Investigate the Effects of Static Stretching and Dynamic Stretching on Power and Agility Performance in University Students
@INPROCEEDINGS{10.4108/eai.28-10-2022.2327413, author={Joel Chia and Dominan Cho}, title={ To Investigate the Effects of Static Stretching and Dynamic Stretching on Power and Agility Performance in University Students}, proceedings={Proceedings of the 8th ACPES (ASEAN Council of Physical Education and Sport) International Conference, ACPES 2022, October 28th -- 30th, 2022, Medan, North Sumatera, Indonesia}, publisher={EAI}, proceedings_a={ACPES}, year={2023}, month={6}, keywords={static stretching dynamic stretching power performance \& agility performance}, doi={10.4108/eai.28-10-2022.2327413} }- Joel Chia
Dominan Cho
Year: 2023
To Investigate the Effects of Static Stretching and Dynamic Stretching on Power and Agility Performance in University Students
ACPES
EAI
DOI: 10.4108/eai.28-10-2022.2327413
Abstract
Warming up before the start of any physical activity has been a common practice for many decades. It serves to prepare an athlete physically and mentally for optimal performance. Stretching is one of the main components of a warm up, and it is usually done in the form of static stretching or dynamic stretching. Static stretching has been demonstrated to impair performance, while dynamic stretching has been suggested to enhance performance. For this study, it was hypothesized that dynamic stretching would be more effective in enhancing power and agility performance in university students. 16 participants who trains or exercise at least twice per week volunteered for this study. A within-subject, randomized crossover design was employed, and participants had to undergo two intervention protocols – static stretching (SS) and dynamic stretching (DS), on two separate sessions. After each stretching protocol, participants had to perform a standing broad jump and 4x10m shuttle run test with three attempts each. Only the best attempt for each test was recorded for data analysis. Results demonstrated a significant difference (p ≤ 0.001) between the mean for standing broad jump between SS and DS, with DS having a higher mean (204.4 ± 39.11) than SS (196.0 ± 33.69). A significant difference (p = 0.017) was also demonstrated between the mean for the shuttle run test, with DS (11.11 ± 1.35) performing better than SS (11.33 ± 1.44).
