↓ Skip to main content

The difference between standing and sitting in 3 different seat inclinations on abdominal muscle activity and chest and abdominal expansion in woodwind and brass musicians

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The difference between standing and sitting in 3 different seat inclinations on abdominal muscle activity and chest and abdominal expansion in woodwind and brass musicians
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00913
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bronwen J. Ackermann, Nicholas O'Dwyer, Mark Halaki

Abstract

Wind instrumentalists require a sophisticated functioning of their respiratory system to control their air stream, which provides the power for optimal musical performance. The air supply must be delivered into the instrument in a steady and controlled manner and with enough power by the action of the expiratory musculature to produce the desired level of sound at the correct pitch. It is suggested that playing posture may have an impact on the abdominal muscle activity controlling this expired air, but there is no research on musicians to support this theory. This study evaluated chest and abdominal expansion, via respiratory inductive plethysmography, as well as activation patterns of lower and upper abdominal musculature, using surface electromyography, during performance of a range of typical orchestral repertoire by 113 woodwind and brass players. Each of the five orchestral excerpts was played in one of four randomly allocated postures: standing; sitting flat; sitting inclined forwards; and sitting inclined backwards. Musicians showed a clear preference for playing in standing rather than sitting. In standing, the chest expansion range and maximum values were greater (p < 0.01), while the abdominal expansion was less than in all sitting postures (p < 0.01). Chest expansion patterns did not vary between the three sitting postures, while abdominal expansion was reduced in the forward inclined posture compared to the other sitting postures (p < 0.05). There was no significant variation in abdominal muscle activation between the sitting postures, but the level of activation in sitting was only 2/3 of the significantly higher level observed in standing (p < 0.01). This study has demonstrated significant differences in respiratory mechanics between sitting and standing postures in wind musicians during playing of typical orchestral repertoire. Further research is needed to clarify the complex respiratory mechanisms supporting musical performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 21%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Other 6 9%
Researcher 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 16%
Arts and Humanities 7 10%
Psychology 4 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 18 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 June 2022.
All research outputs
#3,016,233
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,741
of 31,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,904
of 237,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#113
of 379 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 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 31,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 237,233 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 379 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 70% of its contemporaries.