SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Rene' K. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 1984; 28(11): 1006.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1984, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/154193128402801117

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The primary purpose of this study was to provide a contemporary comparison of college female and male voluntary range of joint mobility. This was achieved by comparing the data collected in this study with that collected in an identical study in which male participants were used. Data were gathered from college females to determine their voluntary range of joint movement. One hundred female students at Texas ASM University participated in the study. The instruments used to take the measures were two hand-held bubble level electrogoniometers. Thirty-two movements of eight different joints of the body were measured.
A second goal was to update and broaden the data base of female voluntary flexibility. This goal was met by reporting the data gathered from the female college sample and providing pertinent design information. In addition, the current female data were compared against present design standards. Finally, the present study data and that of the identical male study were combined to allow a comparison with an earlier study of sex differences in joint mobility.
Results of this study indicate that females are generally more flexible than males. Significant differences were found to exist in twenty-six of the thiry-two comparisons made between this study and the corresponding male study. In twenty-four of these comparisons, females were found to have greater flexibility. The differences in joint mobility reported were attributed to real differences between the sexes since the methodologies were identical and the samples were drawn from equivalent populations.
Comparisons between this study and the current design standards yielded conflicting results due to differences in methodologies and samples. Significant differences were found to exist in the comparisons made between the present data combined with the current male data and an earlier study concerning sex differences in flexibility. These differences were also attributed to differences in methodologies. Both comparisons drew the same conclusion, however: females are generally more flexible than males.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print