Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Evaluation of electromyography normalisation methods for the back squat
Author(s): Balshaw, Tom
Hunter, Angus
Contact Email:
Keywords: Resistance exercise
Absolute reliability
Relative reliability
Issue Date: Apr-2012
Citation: Balshaw T & Hunter A (2012) Evaluation of electromyography normalisation methods for the back squat, Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 22 (2), pp. 308-319.
Abstract: The aim of the study was to evaluate maximal isometric (dynamometer based {MVC-NORM} and isometric squat {MIS-NORM}) and sub-maximal EMG normalisation methods (60%-NORM, 70%-NORM, 80%-NORM) for dynamic back squat exercise (DSQ-EX). The absolute reliability (limits of agreement {LOA}, coefficient of variation {CV%}), relative reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient {ICC}) and sensitivity of each method was assessed. Ten resistance-trained males attended four sessions. Session one assessed maximum back squat strength (three repetition maximum {3RM}). In the remaining three sessions Vastus lateralis (VL) and Bicep femoris (BF) EMG were measured whilst participants completed normalisation tasks and DSQ-EX sets at 65%, 75%, 85% and 95% of 3RM. MIS-NORM produced lower intra-participant CV% compared to MVC-NORM. 80%-NORM produced lower intra-participant CV% than other sub-maximal methods for VL and BF during eccentric and concentric phases. 80%-NORM also produced narrower 95% LOA results than all other normalisation methods. The MIS-NORM method displayed higher ICC values for both muscles during eccentric and concentric phases. The 60%-NORM and 70%-NORM methods were the most sensitive for VL and BF during eccentric and concentric phases. Only normalisation methods for the concentric action of the VL enhanced sensitivity compared to unnormalised EMG. Overall, dynamic normalisation methods demonstrated better absolute reliability and sensitivity for reporting VL and BF EMG within the current study compared to maximal isometric methods.
DOI Link:
Rights: The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Hunter_2012_Evaluation_of_electromyography_normalisation_methods.pdf694.73 kBAdobe PDFUnder Permanent Embargo    Request a copy

Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.

This item is protected by original copyright

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.