Footedness influence on stability measures

On footedness and ankle’s Dynamic Joint Stiffness relation

“…Even changing the way, the relation between footedness and DJS is assessed, which increase the data relating DJS with footedness, the expected differences in objective measures of human behaviour like DJS fail to be observed. As in our earlier work (Atalaia et al, 2015a(Atalaia et al, , 2015b(Atalaia et al, , 2015c(Atalaia et al, , 2015dAtalaia & Abrantes, 2015) and in other authors opinion (Grouios et al, 2009;Previc, 1991), footedness can be task dependent (an then we need to consider that the variability is not only observed as kinematic but also as kinetic) or really do not exists at all. Due to its importance in different knowledge fields, defining if footedness exists or not and if it's related to task specificity, will orientate future studies with more samples not from a wider subject's sample but from the same subject as human variability is, in our opinion, subject-specific.…”

“…In our idea, footedness can be influence by cultural and social aspects as it was described earlier, and even by the subject's own perception of his dominant limb. Because of the inherent difficulty to separate true footedness from this conditioning, we hypothesized that this logical path for variable confrontation can favour the lack of findings reported in our earlier reports (Atalaia, Abrantes, & Castro-Caldas, 2015a, 2015b, 2015c, 2015dAtalaia & Abrantes, 2015). One those, we could justify, in some amount, the lack of findings as footedness assessment normally assumes dominant and non-dominant limb by the subject's own perception more than based on a preferable motoric behaviour that overpasses the subject will to perform a task with one or other lower limb.…”

“…In the present study, and to be able to compare the results by applying different methods, we used the same sample as used in our previous works (Atalaia et al, 2015a(Atalaia et al, , 2015b(Atalaia et al, , 2015c(Atalaia et al, , 2015dAtalaia & Abrantes, 2015). This sample was composed by 31 subjects (20 females, mean age 23.0±2.98 years; mean weight = 60.3±9.8 kg; mean height = 163±6.3 cm; and 11 males; mean age 23.64±2.25 years; mean weight = 74.4±11.6 kg; mean height = 176.1±5.1cm), volunteers, with no history of lower limb injuries or other aspects that could influence the data collection or interpretation.…”