More than one-half of university students in the United States and Canada are not active enough to gain health benefits. Enjoyment of exercise proposes a feasible solution to the absence of motivation surrounding physical activity. The purpose of this study is to compare the differences in reported enjoyment between upper and lower body cycling graded exercise to exhaustion (GXT). Seven university students (23 ± 3 years old; 26 ± 4 kg/m2) performed two randomized graded exercise tests on different days: one for upper body, one for lower body. Feeling Scale (FS) measured the affective response during exercise. Post-exercise enjoyment values were recorded 15 minutes after concluding GXT using the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES), which has been shown to be a valid and reliable measure of physical activity enjoyment. Paired t-tests were used to evaluate mean differences between upper and lower body GXT enjoyment scores. Rank biserial correlations and Cohen's d values were used to evaluate effect size for the non-parametric and parametric analyses. Alpha level was set a priori at p < 0.05. Means and standard deviations were calculated for PACES, age, and BMI. No significant differences were found for enjoyment (p=0.162) between upper (104.3 ± 12.6) and lower-body cycling (97.8 ± 15.3). Notable effect sizes were found for the PACES Total and several subscales (Enjoy/Hate, Pleasant, and Contentment). No significant differences were found for the FS at ventilatory threshold (p=0.586) or at maximal aerobic power (p=0.670) between the upper and lower body GXT trials. More research is needed to explore exercise enjoyment across different exercise modes and provide a more particular evaluation of PACES subscales. Further research should aim to compare enjoyment levels across different physical activity levels (e.g., low, moderate, high), between sexes and within diverse populations.

No description available.

Ensidigt bedriven styrketräning och idrotter kan leda till en förändradstyrkekvot mellan olika muskelantagonister och anses i vissa fall kunna ökarisken för skador och besvär. Syftet med denna studie var att undersökastyrkekvoten mellan press- och dragstyrkan hos tränade personer samtundersöka om det fanns några styrkeskillnader hos deltagarna i bänkpressjämfört med bänkrodd. Femton tränade deltagare inkluderades i studien därdeltagarna var i snitt 26 år gamla, 177 cm långa och vägde 81 kg. Deltagarnautförde ett testprotokoll som inkluderade ett test i bänkpress respektivebänkrodd, där deltagaren skulle utföra maximalt antal repetitioner på den vikti bänkpress deltagaren själv ansåg sig klara omkring 5–10 repetitioner. Totaltantal kg (antal repetitioner x belastning) i respektive övning dokumenteradesoch angavs som en styrkekvot (press/drag-kvot). Resultatet avundersökningen var att deltagarnas press/drag-kvot var 2,4:1, vilket innebäratt deltagarna var 140% starkare i press- än i dragstyrkan. Det fanns ensignifikant styrkeskillnad (p=0,002) i bänkpress jämfört med bänkrodd hosmajoriteten av deltagarna. Det fanns en relativt stor variation i styrkekvot(press/drag-kvot) bland deltagarna. Faktorer som träningserfarenhet ochfamiljaritet med testprotokollets övningar kan vara faktorer som kan förklaraspridningen i styrkekvot. Att styrkekvoten befanns vara 2,4:1 kan därför inteanvändas som en utgångspunkt i ett träningsupplägg då det inte går att utgåfrån att personen som skall instrueras har den styrkekvoten. Vidare skulleresultaten kunna användas som referensmaterial i framtida studier som avseratt undersöka styrkekvoten mellan press- jämfört med dragstyrkan. / Previous literature considers that both strength training and many sports maylead to an increased risk of athletes incurring injury due to an unbalanced, orchanged, strength ratio. The purpose of this study was therefore to examinethe strength ratio between press- and pulling strength of trained individualsas well as investigate whether there was any difference in strength betweenthe two exercises tested. Fifteen participants with strength trainingexperience were included in the study where the participants mean were 26years old, 177 cm tall, and weighed 81 kg. They performed a protocol thatconsisted of a test of bench press and bench row, respectively. For bothexercises, the participants performed the maximum number of repetitions fora weight that was based on the participants’ self-assessed 5-10 repetitionmaximum bench press. Total weight lifted (weight x repetitions) for eachexercise was measured and converted to a push/pull strength ratio. Meanpush/pull strength ratio for the participants was 2,4: 1. The participants wereon average 140% stronger in pressing strength than in pulling strength(P=0,002) In the current study, the participants were stronger in bench presscompared to bench row. Factors such as training experience and familiaritywith the exercises in the could possibly have influenced the spread amongthe participants, but that cannot be determined. The variation in the strengthratio of the participants can therefore not be used as a starting point in atraining program as it is not possible to assume that the instructor's strengthratio is 2.4: 1. The results could be used as a comparison in future studiesthat aim to examine the strength ratio between press strength compared topulling strength.

No description available.