Absolute Reliability, Relative Reliability, and Criterion-Related Validity of Two Reactive Agility Tests Using Two Types of Stimuli in Elite Male Volleyball Players

Abstract

Abstract Introduction. Agility is an important physical quality required in team sports including volleyball. The aims of this study were to quantify the reliability of two reactive agility drills: (a) the arrow reactive agility test (ARAT) and (b) the square upper body reactive agility test (SUBRAT). Their relationship was assessed with the T-Test, lower limbs’ power was evaluated using sprint and vertical jump performance, while lower and upper body maximal strength was evaluated with the back squat and bench press, respectively. Material and Methods. A total of 14 elite male volleyball athletes participated in this investigation. All subjects performed three trials for each reactive agility test on two separate days. All assessments were conducted at the same time of the day and in the same order. Data was analysed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), SEMs, SWCs, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results. The heteroscedasticity coefficient for the ARAT and the SUBRAT was r = −0.103 (95% CI, −0.728-0.523; p = 0.727) and r = 0.08 (95% CI, −0.55-0.70; p = 0.80), respectively. The systematic bias ± the 95% LOAs were of −0.02 ± 0.10 seconds for the ARAT and 0.03 ± 1.15 seconds for the SUBRAT. Conclusions. The main findings of this investigation showed that the ARAT is a reliable and valid test to assess the lower limb reactive agility component of elite male volleyball athletes. The SUBRAT, on the other hand, is not as reliable as the ARAT and, therefore, might not be a recommended test to assess upper body reactive agility.