1981
DOI: 10.1080/00140138108559236
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Feedback and maximum voluntary contraction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
21
0

Year Published

1983
1983
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
2
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This result was in accordance with those of previous studies that reported enhancement of muscle force exerted during MVC with visual feedback (Peacock et al, 1981; Baltzopolous et al, 1991;Jung et al, 2004). Baltzopolous et al (1991) and Campenella et al (2000) have reported that knee extension force during MVC under VFB condition resulted in 8% higher than that of control condition.…”
Section: Effect Of Vfb On Exerted Torquesupporting
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This result was in accordance with those of previous studies that reported enhancement of muscle force exerted during MVC with visual feedback (Peacock et al, 1981; Baltzopolous et al, 1991;Jung et al, 2004). Baltzopolous et al (1991) and Campenella et al (2000) have reported that knee extension force during MVC under VFB condition resulted in 8% higher than that of control condition.…”
Section: Effect Of Vfb On Exerted Torquesupporting
confidence: 83%
“…For example, physical performance was known to be improved by presenting physical motion or its error information (Schiffman et al, 2002). Further, presenting muscle force to subjects during MVC reported to enhance the muscle force (Peacock et al, 1981;Baltzopolous et al, 1991;Jung & Hallbeck, 2004). Since the muscle force exerted during MVC is enhanced by presenting feedback information to subjects, MVC is considered to be greatly affected by cortical activation regions related to process that information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This was also the case for the fF-group (*** p = 0.001), whereas there was no difference in the CON-group (p = 0.58). The onset and the duration of the suppression were not different within the protocols, which was also true for the onset of the MEP and the background EMG activity pF-Group (n = 7) fF-Group (n = 8) CON-Group (n = 8) compared with when no feedback was presented (Peacock et al 1981;Hopper 2003). Furthermore, aF was also shown to influence the training outcome when applied during several weeks of tennis training (Moran et al 2011) and during rehabilitation (Langhorne et al 2009).…”
Section: Interpretation Of Feedback Influences Motor Behaviormentioning
confidence: 56%
“…In 16 physiotherapy students combined auditory and visual feedback resulted in approximately a 10% increase in knee extensor strength over the "no feedback" condition whilst either technique alone had a smaller effect. 23 We routinely used auditory feedback and found that neither simple visual feed-back nor the setting of an artificially high target force made any systematic difference to most patients at least for the knee extensors. The occasional patient was apparently aided but some seemed distracted and did, if anything, less well.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%