Periodization models in the research of the muscle strength in athletes, theoretical-methodological reductions or non-critical positivism in sport-scientific periodics

M. Ćosić
{"title":"Periodization models in the research of the muscle strength in athletes, theoretical-methodological reductions or non-critical positivism in sport-scientific periodics","authors":"M. Ćosić","doi":"10.5937/fizkul1902174c","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Periodization is a theoretical and practical construct of sports training that relates to the programming of training activities in mutually dependent periods of time in order to induce specific physiological adaptations. During training and competition processes, it is used to achieve results at the specific competition. The theoretical and practical foundations of the periodization process can also be studied from the aspect of its impact on biomotor abilities. In this context, the general position for the study of periodization include research covering the impact of different periodization models on muscle strength (the subject of this paper). Based on an analysis of the content, meaning, methodological orientation, and conclusion within a selected number of published studies/papers, it cannot be ascertained whether periodized training models, in the muscle strength area, give better results than the non-periodized model, or which periodized model gives better results at all. The above-mentioned dilemmas regarding the subject of this work have also been confirmed in several review papers and meta-analyses. However, by examining the methodological and theoretical context of these studies, a number of dilemmas are evident, primarily those related to the sample of the subjects. Namely, none of the analyzed studies focused only on the athletes as a target group, but instead, the results of the research performed on athletes were analyzed in relation to a group of recreational or non-trained subjects. Also, there is a discrepancy in the terminology of the applied periodization models, which opens up the question regarding the existence of a clear theoretical concept and methodological-organizational construct that aims to achieve a competitive result. It can be assumed that a clear analysis of the original context of the phenomenon of periodization, harmonization of methodical and methodological steps in the process of learning, clear distinction towards existing definitions and terminology, resulted in the optimization of the learning process that will lead to recognition of the periodization model, which will result in optimization of the training-competitive preparations goals. Therefore, the problem of this paper derived from the theoretical and methodological inconsistency of the researchers in areas covering the influence of different periodization models on athletes' strength. The aim of the paper was to analyze and determine the facts of the methodological and theoretical construct of periodization, the conclusions of various studies, which can be said to - despite publication in important international journals - lead to confusion in the area of the conclusion about the influence of different periodization models on the strength of athletes. After examining more than 80 papers published in refereed journals, and by selection in relation to the theoretical-methodological context and the context of deductive conclusions, 10 studies have been selected, in which the influence of different periodization models on the strength of athletes, while performing exercises with arms and legs, were compared. The results indicate that the applied periodized models, especially the block model, showed a higher degree of sensitivity towards the development of athletes' strength, but several important questions were also raised regarding the validity of the conclusions on this subject. However, the outcome and the purpose of this research is to present a more comprehensible definition of the periodization phenomenon and its models, as well as to identify the effects of the experimental factor in the function of the biomotor response of the subjects to the training stimuli.","PeriodicalId":30424,"journal":{"name":"Fizicka Kultura","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fizicka Kultura","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/fizkul1902174c","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Periodization is a theoretical and practical construct of sports training that relates to the programming of training activities in mutually dependent periods of time in order to induce specific physiological adaptations. During training and competition processes, it is used to achieve results at the specific competition. The theoretical and practical foundations of the periodization process can also be studied from the aspect of its impact on biomotor abilities. In this context, the general position for the study of periodization include research covering the impact of different periodization models on muscle strength (the subject of this paper). Based on an analysis of the content, meaning, methodological orientation, and conclusion within a selected number of published studies/papers, it cannot be ascertained whether periodized training models, in the muscle strength area, give better results than the non-periodized model, or which periodized model gives better results at all. The above-mentioned dilemmas regarding the subject of this work have also been confirmed in several review papers and meta-analyses. However, by examining the methodological and theoretical context of these studies, a number of dilemmas are evident, primarily those related to the sample of the subjects. Namely, none of the analyzed studies focused only on the athletes as a target group, but instead, the results of the research performed on athletes were analyzed in relation to a group of recreational or non-trained subjects. Also, there is a discrepancy in the terminology of the applied periodization models, which opens up the question regarding the existence of a clear theoretical concept and methodological-organizational construct that aims to achieve a competitive result. It can be assumed that a clear analysis of the original context of the phenomenon of periodization, harmonization of methodical and methodological steps in the process of learning, clear distinction towards existing definitions and terminology, resulted in the optimization of the learning process that will lead to recognition of the periodization model, which will result in optimization of the training-competitive preparations goals. Therefore, the problem of this paper derived from the theoretical and methodological inconsistency of the researchers in areas covering the influence of different periodization models on athletes' strength. The aim of the paper was to analyze and determine the facts of the methodological and theoretical construct of periodization, the conclusions of various studies, which can be said to - despite publication in important international journals - lead to confusion in the area of the conclusion about the influence of different periodization models on the strength of athletes. After examining more than 80 papers published in refereed journals, and by selection in relation to the theoretical-methodological context and the context of deductive conclusions, 10 studies have been selected, in which the influence of different periodization models on the strength of athletes, while performing exercises with arms and legs, were compared. The results indicate that the applied periodized models, especially the block model, showed a higher degree of sensitivity towards the development of athletes' strength, but several important questions were also raised regarding the validity of the conclusions on this subject. However, the outcome and the purpose of this research is to present a more comprehensible definition of the periodization phenomenon and its models, as well as to identify the effects of the experimental factor in the function of the biomotor response of the subjects to the training stimuli.
运动员肌肉力量研究的周期化模型,运动科学期刊的理论方法还原或非批判实证主义
周期化是运动训练的理论和实践结构,涉及到在相互依赖的时间段内规划训练活动,以诱导特定的生理适应。在训练和比赛过程中,它被用来在特定的比赛中取得成绩。周期化过程的理论和实践基础也可以从其对生物运动能力的影响方面来研究。在此背景下,周期化研究的一般立场包括研究不同的周期化模型对肌肉力量的影响(本文的主题)。通过对部分已发表研究/论文的内容、意义、方法取向和结论的分析,我们无法确定在肌肉力量方面,周期化训练模型是否比非周期化训练模型的效果更好,或者哪种周期化训练模型的效果更好。上述关于本工作主题的困境也在几篇综述论文和荟萃分析中得到证实。然而,通过检查这些研究的方法和理论背景,一些困境是显而易见的,主要是与受试者的样本有关。也就是说,没有一项被分析的研究只将运动员作为目标群体,而是将对运动员进行的研究结果与一组娱乐或非训练的受试者进行了分析。此外,所应用的周期化模型的术语也存在差异,这就提出了一个问题,即是否存在一个明确的理论概念和旨在取得竞争结果的方法组织结构。可以假设,对周期化现象的原始背景进行清晰的分析,协调学习过程中的方法和方法论步骤,明确区分现有的定义和术语,导致学习过程的优化,从而导致对周期化模型的识别,从而导致训练-竞赛准备目标的优化。因此,本文的问题源于研究人员在不同时期模型对运动员力量影响方面的理论和方法上的不一致。本文的目的是分析和确定分期的方法和理论结构的事实,各种研究的结论,可以说,尽管在重要的国际期刊上发表,但在关于不同分期模型对运动员力量的影响的结论方面导致了混乱。在审查了在评审期刊上发表的80多篇论文之后,通过与理论方法背景和演绎结论背景相关的选择,选择了10项研究,其中比较了不同分期模型对运动员在进行手臂和腿部运动时力量的影响。结果表明,应用的周期化模型,尤其是块模型,对运动员力量的发展表现出较高的敏感性,但也提出了关于这一主题结论的有效性的几个重要问题。然而,本研究的结果和目的是为周期化现象及其模型提供一个更容易理解的定义,并确定实验因素在被试对训练刺激的生物运动反应功能中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信