The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Adaptations in coactivation after isometric resistance training
Abstract
Twenty sedentary male university students were randomly assigned to an experimental or a control group. The experimental group trained the knee extensors of one leg by producing 30 isometric extension maximal voluntary contractions (MVC) per day, three times per week for 8 wk. After 8 wk of training, extensor MVC in the trained leg increased 32.8% (P less than 0.05), but there was no change in vastus lateralis maximal integrated electromyographic activity (IEMGmax). The most important finding was that the degree of hamstring coactivation during extension MVC decreased by approximately 20% (P less than 0.05) after the 1st wk of training. Less pronounced adaptations occurred in the untrained leg: extension MVC force increased 16.2% (P less than 0.05), hamstring coactivity decreased 13% (P less than 0.05) after 2 wk of training, and vastus lateralis IEMGmax was unchanged. The same measures in legs of the control group were not changed during the study. There were no changes in flexion MVC, biceps femoris IEMGmax, or the degree of quadriceps coactivity during flexion MVC in either leg of the control or experimental group. A reduction in hamstring coactivity in the trained and untrained legs indicates that these muscles provide less opposing force to the contracting quadriceps. We conclude that this small but significant decrease in hamstring coactivation that occurs during the early stages of training is a nonhypertrophic adaptation of the neuromuscular system in response to static resistance training of this type.
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.
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
Jones, D. A., & Rutherford, O. M. (1987) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1987.sp016721 · Cited by 403
Electromyographic changes during strength training and detraining
HAKKINEN, K., & KOMI, P. V. (1983) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/00005768-198315060-00003 · Cited by 394
Cited by
Folland, J. P., & Williams, A. G. (2007) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.2165/00007256-200737020-00004 · Cited by 1,347
Van Cutsem, M., Duchateau, J., & Hainaut, K. (1998) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7793.1998.295by.x · Cited by 777
Häkkinen, K., Kallinen, M., Izquierdo, M., Jokelainen, K., Lassila, H., Mälkiä, E., Kraemer, W. J., Newton, R. U., & Alen, M. (1998) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/jappl.1998.84.4.1341 · Cited by 776
Developing Maximal Neuromuscular Power: Part 1 – Biological Basis of Maximal Power Production
Cormie, P., McGuigan, M. R., & Newton, R. U. (2011) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.2165/11537690-000000000-00000 · Cited by 774
Contralateral effects of unilateral strength training: evidence and possible mechanisms
Carroll, T. J., Herbert, R. D., Munn, J., Lee, M., & Gandevia, S. C. (2006) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00531.2006 · Cited by 499
Metadata
- Authors
- Carolan, B., & Cafarelli, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Physiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 1992-09-01
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 911-917
- ISSN
- 0161-7567 (ISSN-L)
- 8750-7587
- 1522-1601
- OpenAlex
- W2109197715
- Cited by
- 431
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 2.91
- 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: Adaptations in coactivation after isometric resistance training. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jappl.1992.73.3.911
- The paper
- Carolan, B., & Cafarelli, E. (1992). Adaptations in coactivation after isometric resistance training. Journal of Applied Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1992.73.3.911
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.