CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Sports Performance and TrainingCardiovascular and exercise physiologyMuscle metabolism and nutrition

Influence of two different modes of resistance training in female subjects

HISAEDA, HIKARU, MIYAGAWA, KYOKO, KUNO, SHIN-YA, FUKUNAGA, TETSUO, MURAOKA, ISAO·1996·Ergonomics
DOI 10.1080/00140139608964505
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In resistance training, it has been empirically accepted that muscle hypertrophy is developed by low intensity and high volume training, while muscle strength and power are developed by high intensity and low volume training. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the influence of two different modes of resistance training on isokinetic strength and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) in females. Eleven females, who had no experience in resistance training, participated in this study and were randomly divided into two groups. The former consisted of 4-5 sets of 15-20 RM (repetition maximum) with sufficient rest between sets (Group H), while the latter consisted of 8-9 sets of 4-6R M with 90 s of rest between sets (Group S). The former was assumed to be appropriate for muscle hypertrophy and the latter muscle strength, respectively. All subjects completed isotonic knee extension exercise three times a week for 8 weeks. Measurements were made on quadriceps muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and isokinetic torques at 0, 60, 180, and approximately 300 degrees before training, at the fifth week and the end of training period. Muscle CSA was defined as the sum of CSA measured at 30, 50 and 70% of femur length. After training, muscle CSA had significantly increased in both groups: 3.3 +/- 0.7% (p < .05) for group H and 3.6 +/- 1.1% (p < .05) for group S, respectively. While the changes in isokinetic torque were 43.4 +/- 47.5% (p < .05) for group H and 27.4 +/- 31.3% (p < .…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00140139608964505

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Findings on isokinetic strength are conflicting; some studies show a benefit of heavy load training, others show a benefit to low-load training, and yet others show no differences between conditions.

    “the findings from available evidence are conflicting; some studies show a benefit of heavy load training [27,28], others show a benefit to low-load training [29] and yet others show no differences between conditions on this metric [30,31].”

    From Loading recommendations for muscle strength, hypertrophy, and local endurance: a re-examination of the repetition continuum. (2021) · cites this paper as [30]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
HISAEDA, H., MIYAGAWA, K., KUNO, S.-Y., FUKUNAGA, T., & MURAOKA, I.
Affiliations
  • Waseda University (JP)
  • The University of Tokyo (JP)
Venue
Ergonomics
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1996-06
Volume
39
Issue
6
Pages
842-852
ISSN
  • 0014-0139 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-5847
DOI
10.1080/00140139608964505
OpenAlex
W2092225288
Cited by
44
References
8
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3
FWCI
0.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ergonomics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
Keywords
resistance training, training mode, muscle hypertrophy, muscle strength, muscle cross-sectional area, isokinetic torque, quadriceps, knee extension, repetition maximum, training volume and intensity
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Isometric Contraction, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Weight Lifting, Weight-Bearing, Muscle, Skeletal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review