unit 5 power point

Unit 5 Research Project

Worthing College Sports ScienceGeorgia Short

2015

Assessment Criteria Pages 3-17 & 27-38

• P2: carry out sport science or exercise science-based research

• P3: collect and record data from the research project conducted

• M2: correctly analyse collected data, describing techniques used

• D1: correctly analyse data, explaining techniques used

• P4: produce a full research report using a standard scientific structure

To investigate the affect of lower body flexibility on speed for 16-20 year old female football or

rugby, participation or performance level athletes

P2: Carry out / P4: Produce

AbstractThe aim of the investigation was to investigate the affect of lower body flexibility on speed for 16-20 year old female football or rugby, participation or performance level athletes. Lower body flexibility measurements and speed measurements were obtained from 8 female footballers and 8 female rugby players all aged between 16-20. The measurements obtained were from a sit and reach test, and the ROM of the ankle and knee joints by the use of a goniometer. Results indicate increase in lower body flexibility decreases speed with the strongest component for both sports being the hip flexibility (- 0.466) There was also found to be differences between the sports with total knee and ankle ROM having a greatest effect on footballers with nearly no effect on rugby players (-0.055). Results show there may be a need for specific flexibility training for the different sports. Therefore the implications for further research are that women’s sports are a priority area for research, looking into flexibility and speed.


Contents: GeneralPage 3- AimPage 4- Abstract- Contents: GeneralPage 6- Contents: AppendicesPage 7- Contents: Figures and TablePage 8- AcknowledgementsPage 9- IntroductionPage 10- Literature Review and ReferencesPage 11- Project HypothesisPage 12- Method Page 13- Data CollectionPage 14- Data Analysis Page 15- ResultsPage 16- DiscussionPage 17- ConclusionPage 18- Assessment CriteriaPage 19- Review 1/3Page 20- Review 2/3Page 21- Review 3/3Page 22- Future Recommendations 1/5Page 23- Future Recommendations 2/5Page 24- Future Recommendations 3/5Page 25- Future Recommendations 4/5Page 26- Future Recommendations 5/5Page 27- Appendix


Contents: Appendices

Page 27- Appendix Title PagePage 28- Appendix 1 (standardised instructions general)Page 29- Appendix 2 (standardised instructions goniometer test)Page 30- Appendix 3 (standardised instructions sit and reach test)Page 31- Appendix 4 (standardised instructions flying 30 metre sprint)


Contents: Figures and Tables

Page 32- Figures and TablesPage 33- Figures and Tables 1 (chart of all data)

Page 34- Figures and Tables 2 (The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (All))

Page 35- Figures and Tables 3 (The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (Footballers))

Page 36- Figures and Tables 4 (The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (Rugby Players))

Page 37- Figures and Tables 5 (The Effect of Total Knee ROM on Speed (All))

Page 38- Figures and Tables 6 (The Effect of Total Ankle ROM on Speed (All))

Page 39- Figures and Tables 7 (Lower Body Flexibility Effect on Speed (All))

Page 40- Figures and Tables 8 (Lower Body Flexibility Effect on Speed (Footballers))

Page 41- Figures and Tables 9 (Lower Body Flexibility Effect on Speed (Rugby Players))


Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my participants for taking part in the research. I would also like to thank Brooke Marshall and Phoebe Thorpe for assisting me in collecting my data. This project would not have been possible with out them.


Introduction

My aim is to investigate the affect of lower body flexibility on speed for 16-20 year old female football or rugby participation or performance level athletesI chose to do this aim as I am interested in the results and how this may benefit football and rugby players because I have access to these players and wanted to help benefit my friends game; whether she needs more or less lower body flexibility.The project timescale was that the research and literacy review were completed by 27th February, the testing by mid- March and the final write up completed by 27th March


Literature Review and References

My literacy review can be found here


https://worthingsportscience.wordpress.com/author/georgiashorttt/

Project Hypothesis

1. The more lower body flexibility a person has overall, the slower they will be.

2. Flexibility in the hip will have the greatest effect on speed for both sports compared to the total ROM in the knee and ankle.

3. The football girls will show a stronger correlation with lower body flexibility than the rugby girls.


Method• I will be using opportunity sampling to recruit my participants for my research; this will be 8 female

footballers and 8 female rugby players, all aged between 16-20 and of participation or performance level.

• I will not be getting my participants to take a PARQ test before carrying out two kinds of flexibility tests and a speed test; this is because they are all currently training/playing and therefore it can be assumed they are fit and healthy for testing.

• I will read a set of standardized instructions to the participants so they are clear as to what I’m measuring and how they are to conduct the test (see appendix 1)

• My first flexibility test will be measuring the flexibility at the ankle and then the knee by using a goniometer. This will measure the difference between full extension and full flexion at the joints. The goniometer standardized instructions will be read to the athlete (see appendix 2)

• The other flexibility test will be a sit and reach test which will determine flexibility at the hips, this is a maximal test and therefore will be conducted three times and the best score taken. (see appendix 3)

• I will then also be carrying out a simple sprint test; standing start, over 30 meters. This will be completed three times, and the average score taken. (see appendix 4)

• I will then put all data into excel and by creating a range of graphs in order to make comparisons. • The initial testing of all tests will be completed and typed up by the 13th of March. The graphs and

comparisons will be made by the 18th of march.• My write up will be completed by the 27th of March.

P3: Collect and record / M2: Correctly analyse & describe techniques / D1: Correctly analyse & explain techniques

Data Collection

I will be collecting primary data, firstly, by myself or my assistant conducting laboratory based experiments and collecting the flexibility tests; recording the results on paper. We will then conduct field based experiments to record the best speed from three tests of each of these participants over a 30m sprint from standing start. The sprint data I collect will be continuous and will be recorded to two decimal places. We take the best because the sprint test is a maximal test. As this is all numerical data, it is quantitative and easy to make comparisons. I will later collate my data within excel spreadsheet. I am collecting comparative and nominal data as I will be comparing the two groups of footballers and rugby players. All my data collated together overall will be ordinal.


Data Analysis

By using the best speed score from 3 attempts (because the sprint test is a maximal test) I will firstly compare this to the flexibility scores as a whole. By collating the data into an excel spread sheet and creating a scatter graph I will conduct a line of best fit. Then I will compare each component of flexibility separately and I will be looking to see which component lower body flexibility has the greatest effect on speed. Finally I will use the scatter graph to compare the flexibility and speed to see if there is a difference between rugby and football players.


ResultsAll results have been typed up and can be viewed as a chart. (See figure and table 1). After creating graphs for each of my objectives to give a visual view and then have calculated the line of regression for each of my objectives. The line of regression models the relationship between the x and y variables, this shows how far the points are from the trend line (line of best fit). This allows me to compare each component to see the relationship it has with speed. A perfect correlation would give a score of +/- 1, a strong score of +/- 0.8/0.9, medium around +/- 0.4-0.7 , weak from +/- 0.1-0.3. A score of 0 is no correction whatsoever. LINE OF REGRESSION SCORESThe Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (All) -0.375 (See figure and table 2)The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (Footballers) -0.523 (See figure and table 3)The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (Rugby Players) -0.055 (See figure and table 4)The Effect of Total Knee ROM on Speed (All) -0.368 (See figure and table 5)The Effect of Total Ankle ROM on Speed (All) -0.273(See figure and table 6)Hip Flexibility Effect on Speed (All) -0.466 (See figure and table 7)Hip Flexibility Effect on Speed (Footballers) -0.511 (See figure and table 8)Hip Flexibility Effect on Speed (Rugby Players) -0.397 (See figure and table 9)


DiscussionAll results gained were negative, this shows that all components have an effect on speed, the greater the flexibility an athlete has cause a decrease in speed of the athlete, although some components have a much stronger regression line than others. This wasn’t expected after carrying out research and completing my literacy review. I was expecting positive correlations between all components of flexibility and speed.The results indicate that total knee and ankle flexibility has the greatest effect on footballers speed. There was a medium negative correlation of -0.523 between the two. The more flexible the football player is the faster they are. However total knee and ankle flexibility had the least correlation between all aspects on the rugby players showing near to no correlation at all, -0.055. This shows there are significant differences between the sports. The sit and reach test, measuring flexibility in the hip shows a medium negative correlation against speed. Again there are differences between the two sports however there is less of a difference. The Rugby players showed a weak negative correlation, this indicates that hip flexibility has a greater effect on their speed than total knee and ankle ROM.The component of flexibility that had the greatest effect on speed for both rugby and footballers was the lower body component which was what I expected to find. However it only had the greatest effect on rugby players when looking at the sports separately.


Conclusion

My aim was to investigate the affect of lower body flexibility on speed for 16-20 year old female football or rugby, participation or performance level athletes. From looking at my literacy review I was expecting to find that the more flexible the athletes lower body was the slower they would be. However I found the opposite. My results support my second hypothesis as a general however when broken down to separate sports only supports the rugby players.The third hypothesis is also supported by my results how ever total ROM for knee and ankle had a much greater difference than lower body flexibility.


Assessment Criteria Pages 19-26

• P5: carry out a review of the research project conducted, describing strengths, areas for improvement and future recommendations.

• M3: carry out a review of the research project, explaining strengths, areas for improvement and future recommendations.

• D2: carry out a review of the research project, justifying future recommendations for further research.

Review (1/3)I think that the project conclusions met the project aim quite well. I was able to gain results for all my hypotheses and my objectives even if they were not what I was expecting. My first objective was to find the body component which had the greatest effect on speed and this was the lower body flexibility; obtained by from the sit and reach test. (-0.466)My second objective was to see the effect total lower body flexibility had, there was a -0.375 for total knee and ankle ROM which was a weak correlation, showing a slight relationship with speed.The third objective was to see if there was a difference between rugby and football players. I found more than one difference after conducting the tests. Flexibility of the ankle and the knee has a much stronger correlation to footballers (-0.523) then to rugby players , who have almost no correlation(-0.055). There was also slight differences between lower body flexibility and speed between the sports however this was less significant.

P5: Describe / M3: Explain / D2: Justify

Review (2/3)

The strengths of the research project were that I made sure the ROM tests in the ankle and knee were conducted in the same manner. There was various ways to conduct these test but to make sure I got the most accurate results I made sure all the athletes were given a set of standardized instructions (see appendix 2)Another strength of the research project was that the sit and reach test was conducted three times and because it was a maximal test the highest score was taken. I think that the whole research project is both valid and reliable. It is valid because I was able to measure what I set out to and reliable as I believe with the method and standardized instructions would easily be followed to gain the same results.


Review (3/3)One area of improvement for this research project would be to break down the flexibility tests more to see if there are specific muscles which have the greatest effect. This would allow more research into each area. I would also make sure that the sprint test was carried out three times as it is maximal test and I didn’t have enough time to do this. I took the tests before training sessions and therefore was on a time limit. The goniometer tests took a long time and therefore the sprint test were only conducted once.I would also use a flying sprint test as I don’t think 30 metres was long enough to get an accurate measure of the athletes true maximum speed. I would monitor the warm up more accurately as the footballers went about the warm up in a different way to the rugby girls. This would improve the reliability of the research in the future.


Future Recommendations (1/5)

If the project was to be completed again I would use more participants, I think that 16 participants was okay as this was a primary study. It allowed me to look for significance without wasting too much time or money however as there was trends found it should be repeated on a wider scale. The secondary research would allow the researchers to conduct more tests to see if there are any stronger relationships between certain aspects of lower body flexibility and speed. I would look into the different positions the participants play and see whether this effects the type and amount of flexibility or speed required. Although my research was sport specific, certain positions on each team require the athletes to play in different manners; the goal keep for example needs flexibility, however doesn’t need to move round the pitch to make attacks.

P4: Produce / P5: Describe / M3: Explain / D2: Justify

Future Recommendations (2/5)The benefits of the proposed changes would make the research more accurate. The more participants there are the more representative of the population, gender, ethnicity, religion and age can all effect the results and the more participants the research has the more true the statistical analysis is. By having more results you would be able to see if there is an optimum lower body flexibility level; the graph may plateau at a certain number. However there may also be results that indicate that after the optimum level, athletes speed starts to increase again and flexibility has the opposite effect. Although my research was sport specific, certain positions on each team require the athletes to play in different manners; the goal keep for example needs flexibility, however doesn’t need to move round the pitch to make attacks. This would allow the researchers to compare the ROM needed for certain positions and may lead to different position sessions being conducted within a sport.



A future recommendation would be to conduct the research on boys. By carrying out the research with the same variables would enable researchers to identify the differences between aspiring male and female athletes. The control variable would have to be kept the same this includes the same population; athletes of participation/performer level, rugby/footballers and of age 16-20, the same variables and the same measures. This would allow researchers to see if there are any specific gender differences. It could show how flexibility affects the different genders in different ways and lead to different training sessions being planner for the different genders.



Another future recommendation that would benefit the research would be looking into a wider variation of sports. This would allow researchers to compare track, racket and aesthetic sports instead of just field based contact sports. There may be patterns within sports that would be interesting to look at and show trainers how much flexibility training young aspiring athletes should be taking part in.This research may also lead to flexibility tests of a young age to see what sport what be most suitable to the athletes.



My final future recommendation for this project would be to look at a range of age group variations. As people age, the tissue around joints tends to thicken, this can decrease the joint's range of motion; even though speed increases as we age. It would be interesting to look to see if there is an optimum age where flexibility has a positive effect on the speed of an athlete and whether the causes a decrease.


Research Project Appendices

Appendix 1

• Standardised instructions: • I will be conducting 3 different tests on you today.

The first will be goniometer tests, this is on both knees and ankles, and will measure the range of movement (ROM) in the joints. The second will be a sit and reach test, this is to measure your lower body flexibility. The third is a 30metre sprint. Before conducting the tests you will need to complete a short warm up, this is to prevent injury.

Appendix 2

Standardised Instructions: Goniometer TestsThe goniometer test will be conducted on both knees and ankles. It requires measuring full extension and full flection at the joints. I will firstly require you to stand up straight, with feet flat on the floor, this will allow me to measure full extension at the knees. I will then require you to lay on your front and kick your knees back as far as possible, this will allow me to record your full flection. For the ankles you will sit flat on the ground, removing shoes as they restrict the movement, you will then point your toes, I will measure the full extension of both ankles. Then you pull your toes back towards your body and hold, this will allow me to measure full flection.

Appendix 3

Standardised Instructions: Sit and ReachYou need to sit with your legs fully extended on the ground and your feet placed flat against the edge of the sit and reach box. Place both hands together and slowly stretch over and slide your hands along the top of the box. My assistant or I will record your score. Complete this three times.

Appendix 4

Standardised Instructions: 30m standing start sprint testYou will stand at the first cone and be given the commands on your marks, get set, go. On the command go, the assistant will start the stopwatch simultaneously as you sprint to the cone on the other side. You will then get a 1 minute rest before completing the test again. You will complete the sprint test a total of three times and your fastest score will be taken.

Research Project Figures and Tables

Figures and Tables 1

Name Sport

Right Side Left Side

Combined Knee ROM (deg)

Combined Ankle

ROM (deg)

Total Knee and

Ankle ROM (deg)

Standing Start 30m

Sprint (secs)

Sit and Reach (cm)

Knee Ankle Knee Ankle

Extension (deg)

Flexion (deg)

ROM (deg)

Extension (deg)

Flexion (deg)

ROM (deg)

Extension (deg)

Flexion (deg)

ROM (deg)

Extension (deg)

Flexion (deg)

ROM (deg)

Brooke Football 182 56 126 142 86 56 182 55 127 166 68 98 253 154 407 4.01 20

Phoebe Football 188 60 128 160 82 78 186 52 134 155 84 71 262 149 411 4.5 20

Helena Football 179 78 101 145 98 47 180 74 106 152 97 55 207 102 309 5.43 13

Katie Football 180 64 116 135 90 45 180 63 117 134 98 36 233 81 314 4.51 16

Pippa Football 181 73 108 152 95 57 180 71 109 153 96 57 217 114 331 4.31 22

Dani Football 180 61 119 152 85 67 180 59 121 162 85 77 240 144 384 4.01 25

Caz Football 180 60 120 146 90 56 181 78 103 148 85 63 223 119 342 4.13 22

Hannah Football 182 64 118 131 90 41 181 65 116 135 89 46 234 87 321 4.35 7

Maddy Rugby 180 59 121 179 80 99 180 63 117 160 82 78 238 177 415 4.28 25

Katie Rugby 180 59 121 157 84 73 181 56 125 155 86 69 246 142 388 4.81 31

Becky Rugby 180 38 142 150 67 83 180 39 141 141 94 47 283 130 413 4.01 27

Elise Rugby 182 55 127 140 92 48 183 62 121 141 94 47 248 95 343 4.52 17

Ashleigh Rugby 180 59 121 144 84 60 181 59 122 140 88 52 243 112 355 4.1 28

Alice Rugby 180 58 122 146 86 60 180 58 122 149 85 64 244 124 368 3.73 28Harmony Rugby 180 56 124 148 89 59 180 59 121 145 86 59 245 118 363 4.76 14

Caz Rugby 180 60 120 146 90 56 181 78 103 148 85 63 223 119 342 4.13 22


300 320 340 360 380 400 420 4400

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.01

4.5

5.43

4.514.31

4.014.134.35 4.28

4.81

4.01

4.52

4.1

3.73

4.76

4.13

The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (All)

Total Knee and Ankle ROM (deg)

Spee

d (s

ecs)


300 320 340 360 380 400 4200

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.01

4.5

5.43

4.514.31

4.014.134.35

The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (Footballers)


Spee

d (s

ecs)


320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 4200

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.28

4.81

4.01

4.52

4.1

3.73

4.76

4.13

The Effect of Total Knee and Ankle ROM on Speed (Rugby Players)


Spee

d (s

ecs)


190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 2900

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.01

4.5

5.43

4.514.31

4.014.134.35 4.28

4.81

4.01

4.52

4.1

3.73

4.76

4.13

The Effect of Total Knee ROM on Speed (All)

Total Knee ROM (deg)

Spee

d (s

ecs)


60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2000

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.01

4.5

5.43

4.514.31

4.014.134.35 4.28

4.81

4.01

4.52

4.1

3.73

4.76

4.13

The Effect of Total Ankle ROM on Speed (All)

Total Ankle ROM (deg)

Spee

d (s

ecs)


5 10 15 20 25 30 350

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.01

4.5

5.43

4.514.31

4.014.134.35 4.28

4.81

4.01

4.524.1

3.73

4.76

4.13

Hip Flexibilitys Effect on Speed (All)

Sit and Reach Flexibility (cm)

Spee

d (s

ecs)


6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 260

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.01

4.5

5.43

4.514.31

4.014.134.35

Hip Flexibilty Effect on Speed (Footballers)

Lower body flexibilty (cm)

Spee

d (s

ecs)


10 15 20 25 30 350

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.28

4.81

4.01

4.524.1

3.73

4.76

4.13

Hip Flexibilty Effect on Speed (Rugby Players)

Lower body flexibilty (cm)

Spee

d (s

ecs)

unit 5 power point

Engineering

tables page

data page

appendix title page

results page

appendices page

abstract page

references page

method page