The reasoning behind assessing push-up tests – an in depth analysis
The result's identifiers
Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60162694%3AG38__%2F24%3A00560244" target="_blank" >RIV/60162694:G38__/24:00560244 - isvavai.cz</a>
Result on the web
<a href="http://www.efsupit.ro/images/stories/iulie2023/Art%20209.pdf" target="_blank" >http://www.efsupit.ro/images/stories/iulie2023/Art%20209.pdf</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2023.07209" target="_blank" >10.7752/jpes.2023.07209</a>
Alternative languages
Result language
angličtina
Original language name
The reasoning behind assessing push-up tests – an in depth analysis
Original language description
A good exercise does not necessarily make for a good measurement tool and using such a tool may lead to wrong conclusions if used for scientific measurement and personal evaluation, yet it happens when using push-up tests which are subjective and lack reliability. This study examined the reasons behind the questionable reliability of push-up testing. Material and Methods: Fifty videorecorded 30-second push-up test performances were evaluated by 10 highly experienced raters in two separate assessment trials. The assessment involved counting the number of acceptable repetitions and identifying any technical flaws in the execution of the exercise. The collected evaluations were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods. Results: Statistical analysis (p ≤ 0.05) revealed significant inter-rater differences in counting in both trials. Comparable counting was only found among raters who marked the same technique as "perfect" and overall concordance on perfect execution was 79.4%. Intra-rater counting reliability ranged from r = 0.57 to r = 0.92. Three main areas of technique deterioration were identified: incomplete arm extension (10.2% of denied repetitions), inadequate arm flexion (7%), and failure to keep the body straight and rigid (6.3%), which was also the most disputed between the raters. Additionally, male raters were more lenient towards the technique imperfections of female subjects. Many miscalculations were also detected, often correlated with perfect technique execution (88% of cases). The second most common cause of miscalculating was raters' willingness to count a repetition that was interrupted mid-execution due to time constraints. Conclusions: The study findings indicate that push-up assessment is highly subjective and should be avoided in scientific or personal evaluations that require a higher level of precision. The reliability of the assessment heavily depends on the individual administering the test, and the average evaluator demonstrates only moderate reliability. To mitigate gender-based bias, considering a female evaluator for female examinees is recommended. Therefore, caution is advised when relying on push-up tests when more reliable alternatives are available.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—
Classification
Type
J<sub>SC</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the SCOPUS database
CEP classification
—
OECD FORD branch
30306 - Sport and fitness sciences
Result continuities
Project
—
Continuities
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Others
Publication year
2023
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Data specific for result type
Name of the periodical
Journal of Physical Education and Sport
ISSN
2247-8051
e-ISSN
2247-806X
Volume of the periodical
23
Issue of the periodical within the volume
7
Country of publishing house
RO - ROMANIA
Number of pages
8
Pages from-to
1706-1713
UT code for WoS article
—
EID of the result in the Scopus database
2-s2.0-85166965125