Hypothesis: Even though the 1.5 mile run test will not produce the highest average VO2 max, the results of the 1.5 mile run test will produce the most accurate VO2 max results as the test puts the most physiological demand on the body compared to the Queens College/McArdle Step Test and the Rockport One Mile Walk Test.
Discussion:
The Queens College/McArdle Step Test, the Rockport One Mile Walk Test, and the 1.5 Mile Run Test are three different field tests that were performed in this lab that were used to measure and predict an individual’s aerobic capacity. The measurement of aerobic capacity, or VO2 max, is a valid way to assess an individual’s cardiorespiratory fitness level. VO2 max refers to the maximal amount of oxygen consumption measured …show more content…
However, based on the data, these three field tests did not produce the same estimate of aerobic capacity. Data showed that the class average of VO2 max for the McArdle step test was 45.92 ml/kg/min. For the Rockport 1-mile walk, the class average of VO2 max was 47.92 ml/kg/min. Lastly, for the 1.5 mile run, the class average of VO2 max was 45.24 ml/kg/min. The Queens College/McArdle Step Test and the Rockport One Mile Walk Test tested for submaximal VO2 while the 1.5 mile run tested maximal effort. Different field tests can produce different results due to the linearity of heart rate-oxygen consumption or exercise intensity relationship, similar maximum heart rates for all subjects, day-to-day heart rate variation, and assumed constant economy and mechanical efficiency during activity. Different field tests can also produce different results due to various other factors including human errors, maximal effort, motivational factors, and limitations. For example, if an individual miscalculated his or her heart rate after any of the three field tests, their VO2 max result was most likely skewed. In the 1.5 mile run, if an individual did not put forth his or her best effort, the results may not have been as accurate compared to if the individual put forth his or her best effort. The 1.5 mile run also had motivational factors involved. For example, if an individual is …show more content…
One advantage of the 1.5 mile run was that the test was easy to conduct and required minimal equipment as the test took place on an indoor track. A second advantage is that the test could be performed in groups which may have provided motivation and encouragement for the subjects throughout the test. In addition, before the 1.5 mile run, all of the subjects were told to complete the test as fast as possible as the test should be a maximal effort. If an individual is aerobically trained, they may have a greater advantage over an individual who is anaerobically trained as they are able to sustain a high intensity level for a longer amount of time. However, maximal effort can also be a disadvantage to some individuals as well. For example, some individuals could have started the 1.5 mile run with maximal effort and then slowly declined throughout the test if they were unable to maintain a steady pace. If individuals were unable to recognize that they needed to maintain a steady pace, they could be at a disadvantage. Secondly, if a subject did not complete the test to his or her greatest ability, the results of the test would not be as accurate. The results could have reflected inappropriate pacing or lack of motivation rather than poor VO2 max. In addition, if an individual has orthopedic, cardiovascular, or some other health concern, the individual would be at a disadvantage for the
Discussion:
The Queens College/McArdle Step Test, the Rockport One Mile Walk Test, and the 1.5 Mile Run Test are three different field tests that were performed in this lab that were used to measure and predict an individual’s aerobic capacity. The measurement of aerobic capacity, or VO2 max, is a valid way to assess an individual’s cardiorespiratory fitness level. VO2 max refers to the maximal amount of oxygen consumption measured …show more content…
However, based on the data, these three field tests did not produce the same estimate of aerobic capacity. Data showed that the class average of VO2 max for the McArdle step test was 45.92 ml/kg/min. For the Rockport 1-mile walk, the class average of VO2 max was 47.92 ml/kg/min. Lastly, for the 1.5 mile run, the class average of VO2 max was 45.24 ml/kg/min. The Queens College/McArdle Step Test and the Rockport One Mile Walk Test tested for submaximal VO2 while the 1.5 mile run tested maximal effort. Different field tests can produce different results due to the linearity of heart rate-oxygen consumption or exercise intensity relationship, similar maximum heart rates for all subjects, day-to-day heart rate variation, and assumed constant economy and mechanical efficiency during activity. Different field tests can also produce different results due to various other factors including human errors, maximal effort, motivational factors, and limitations. For example, if an individual miscalculated his or her heart rate after any of the three field tests, their VO2 max result was most likely skewed. In the 1.5 mile run, if an individual did not put forth his or her best effort, the results may not have been as accurate compared to if the individual put forth his or her best effort. The 1.5 mile run also had motivational factors involved. For example, if an individual is …show more content…
One advantage of the 1.5 mile run was that the test was easy to conduct and required minimal equipment as the test took place on an indoor track. A second advantage is that the test could be performed in groups which may have provided motivation and encouragement for the subjects throughout the test. In addition, before the 1.5 mile run, all of the subjects were told to complete the test as fast as possible as the test should be a maximal effort. If an individual is aerobically trained, they may have a greater advantage over an individual who is anaerobically trained as they are able to sustain a high intensity level for a longer amount of time. However, maximal effort can also be a disadvantage to some individuals as well. For example, some individuals could have started the 1.5 mile run with maximal effort and then slowly declined throughout the test if they were unable to maintain a steady pace. If individuals were unable to recognize that they needed to maintain a steady pace, they could be at a disadvantage. Secondly, if a subject did not complete the test to his or her greatest ability, the results of the test would not be as accurate. The results could have reflected inappropriate pacing or lack of motivation rather than poor VO2 max. In addition, if an individual has orthopedic, cardiovascular, or some other health concern, the individual would be at a disadvantage for the