The purpose of this study was to evaluate a cadence curl-up test in a college population as compared to the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD) 1-min sit-up test (Association for Research and Professional Councils and Societies, 1985) and the Robertson 1-min curl-up test (Robertson & Magnusdottir, 1987). A cadence curl-up test, referred to as the GT curl-up test, was set at 25 repetitions per minute. A total of 205 college students completed three trials consisting of one AAHPERD sit-up trial and two GT curl-up trials. A subsample (n = 85) completed the Robertson curl-up test as a fourth trial. Trials were counterbalanced with 7 days rest between each test. To evaluate content validity, electromyography signals from selected muscle sites were measured on 6 participants for each of the three tests. Mean scores and standard deviations for the GT curl-up test, AAHPERD sit-up test, and Robertson curl-up test were M = 46.2, SD = 17.8; M = 46.4, SD = 10.2; and M = 69.7, SD = 14.1), respectively. Pearson product moment correlations among the three tests were low to moderate (r < or = .50). The intraclass correlation reliability estimate for the GT curl-up test was 0.92. In 1-min speed tests, repeated rapid trunk flexion can adversely affect technique and has raised safety concerns (Jette, Sidney & Cicutti, 1984; Faulkner, Sprigings, McQuarrie, & Bell, 1989; Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research, 1994). The Robertson test also requires the use of a curl-up frame. In the GT cadence test these drawbacks are minimized due to a slower, more controlled movement with an objective endpoint that is not dependent on special equipment. Moreover, our EMG findings supported previous reports that curl-up exercise with feet unanchored minimizes rectus femoris involvement. Based on the results of this study, the CT curl-up test was found to be a reliable field test with logical validity supporting its relevance as an index of abdominal muscular endurance among college students.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sparling et al. (1997) studied this question.