The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Relationships between Ground Reaction Force Impulse and Kinematics of Sprint-Running Acceleration
Abstract
The literature contains some hypotheses regarding the most favorable ground reaction force (GRF) for sprint running and how it might be achieved. This study tested the relevance of these hypotheses to the acceleration phase of a sprint, using GRF impulse as the GRF variable of interest. Thirty-six athletes performed maximal-effort sprints from which video and GRF data were collected at the 16-m mark. Associations between GRF impulse (expressed relative to body mass) and various kinematic measures were explored with simple and multiple linear regressions and paired t-tests. The regression results showed that relative propulsive impulse accounted for 57% of variance in sprint velocity. Relative braking impulse accounted for only 7% of variance in sprint velocity. In addition, the faster athletes tended to produce only moderate magnitudes of relative vertical impulse. Paired t-tests revealed that lower magnitudes of relative braking impulse were associated with a smaller touchdown distance (p < 0.01) and a more active touchdown (p < 0.001). Also, greater magnitudes of relative propulsive impulse were associated with a high mean hip extension velocity of the stance limb (p < 0.05). In conclusion, it is likely that high magnitudes of propulsion are required to achieve high acceleration. Although there was a weak trend for faster athletes to produce lower magnitudes of braking, the possibility of braking having some advantages could not be ruled out. Further research is required to see if braking, propulsive, and vertical impulses can be modified with specific training. This will also provide insight into how a change in one GRF component might affect the others.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
In the citing paper
“Indeed, the power output and, most likely, the magnitude and rate of strains experienced by the bones during sprinting, are greater than those during endurance running predominately due to the horizontal rather than vertical impulses [32].”
From Hip and spine bone mineral density are greater in master sprinters, but not endurance runners compared with non-athletic controls (2018) · cites this paper as [32]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mero, A., & Komi, P. V. (1986) · European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology · doi:10.1007/bf00421652 · Cited by 247
Cited by
Seitz, L. B., Reyes, A., Tran, T. T., de Villarreal, E. S., & Haff, G. G. (2014) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0227-1 · Cited by 346
Thomas, C., Comfort, P., Chiang, C.-Y., & A. Jones, P. (2015) · Journal of Trainology · doi:10.17338/trainology.4.1_6 · Cited by 150
Piasecki, J., McPhee, J. S., Hannam, K., Deere, K. C., Elhakeem, A., Piasecki, M., Degens, H., Tobias, J. H., & Ireland, A. (2018) · Archives of Osteoporosis · doi:10.1007/s11657-018-0486-9 · Cited by 50
Metadata
- Authors
- Hunter, J. P., Marshall, R. N., & McNair, P. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Biomechanics
- Publisher
- Human Kinetics
- Published
- 2005-02
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-43
- ISSN
- 1065-8483 (ISSN-L)
- 1543-2688
- OpenAlex
- W2167101421
- Cited by
- 454
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Relationships between Ground Reaction Force Impulse and Kinematics of Sprint-Running Acceleration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1123/jab.21.1.31
- The paper
- Hunter, J. P., Marshall, R. N., & McNair, P. J. (2005). Relationships between Ground Reaction Force Impulse and Kinematics of Sprint-Running Acceleration. Journal of Applied Biomechanics. https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.21.1.31
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.