| Title |
The mind–muscle connection in resistance training: friend or foe?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-016-3341-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Israel Halperin, Andrew D. Vigotsky |
| Abstract |
The results of Calatayud et al. (Eur J Appl Physiol, 2015. doi: 10.1007/s00421-015-3305-7 ) indicate that focusing on the pectoralis major and triceps brachii muscles during bench press exercise selectively enhanced their activation, and thus suggest a training strategy. However, the authors did not discuss the well-established negative effects that focusing on specific muscle groups has on exercise performance. For proper perspective of the results and their practical utility, it is helpful to note the interplay between negative and positive effects of different focus conditions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 24% |
| Spain | 2 | 12% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 12% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Sweden | 1 | 6% |
| Denmark | 1 | 6% |
| Israel | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 65% |
| Scientists | 4 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 20% |
| Unknown | 14 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 34 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2023.
All research outputs
#3,268,751
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#985
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,122
of 312,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#12
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,187 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.