Reliability and Accuracy of Handheld Stopwatches Compared With Electronic Timing in Measuring Sprint Performance
Hetzler, RK, Stickley, CD, Lundquist, KM, and Kimura, IF. Reliability and accuracy of handheld stopwatches compared with electronic timing in measuring sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res 22(6)1969-1976, 2008-This study assessed reliability of split times obtained by handheld stopwatches (HHSs)...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of strength and conditioning research 2008-11, Vol.22 (6), p.1969-1976 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1976 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1969 |
container_title | Journal of strength and conditioning research |
container_volume | 22 |
creator | Hetzler, Ronald K Stickley, Christopher D Lundquist, Kelly M Kimura, Iris F |
description | Hetzler, RK, Stickley, CD, Lundquist, KM, and Kimura, IF. Reliability and accuracy of handheld stopwatches compared with electronic timing in measuring sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res 22(6)1969-1976, 2008-This study assessed reliability of split times obtained by handheld stopwatches (HHSs) compared with electronic timing (ET) during a 200-m sprint. Two HHS timing methods were compared with ETsingle-split timers (SST) and multiple-split timers (MST). Twenty-six timers without previous experience were given instruction and completed practice trials until good agreement was achieved between ET and HHS. Trained runners (8 males, 10 females) were timed for each 25-m interval on a standard 200-m course. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and intraclass correlation models were used to determine reliability. A total of 248 split times were analyzed. No significant differences were found between the three timing methods (p > 0.99), and calculated intraclass correlation values were high (0.988). Mean error between SST, MST, and ET (−0.04 ± 0.24 and −0.05 ± 0.24 seconds, respectively) indicated faster HHS times, though not significantly. However, absolute errors were considerably larger (0.15 ± 0.20 and 0.16 ± 0.19 between SST, MST, and ET, respectively). The HHS-recorded splits were faster than ET in 67.3% of splits and slower in 29.4%. The distribution of errors made the development of a reliable correction factor to convert HHS to ET impossible. It was concluded that on the basis of the small mean error and high intraclass correlations, the use of HHSs may be a viable alternative to ET in collecting group data. However, on the basis of the absolute error between HHS and ET, when high degrees of precision are required, ET should be used, and reliable correction of HHS to ET values is not possible. It was further concluded that HHS times should be reported without attempting correction and interpreted in light of the shortcomings of the HHS method. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318185f36c |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69767614</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1669463161</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c427c-c0159e3fb76b868ac77d0df559ffbd42c1de794995b16700b16cad36ea5c8bec3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9v1DAQxS1ERUvhGyBkceCWYsfxnxyrVaGgolbdIo6RMxmTFCcOdqLVfntc7UpIPXDxs0e_eRrPI-QdZxdc8vrTt-3mgrWMCxTccCOdUPCCnHEpRFGVRr_Md6aqwjDOT8nrlB4ZK6WU4hU55abWRnFxRuZ79INtBz8se2qnjl4CrNHCngZHr3OhR9_R7RLmnV2gx0Q3YZxtxI7-HJaeXnmEJYZpAPowjMP0iw4T_Y42rfHpsZ2zLPQOowtxtBPgG3LirE_49qjn5Mfnq4fNdXFz--Xr5vKmgKrUUADjskbhWq1ao4wFrTvWOSlr59quKoF3qOuqrmXLlWYsn2A7odBKMC2COCcfD75zDH9WTEszDgnQezthWFOjaq204lUGPzwDH8MapzxbU3LBpNJlnaHqAEEMKUV0Tf7YaOO-4ax5iqPJcTTP48ht74_eazti96_puP8MmAOwC37BmH77dYex6dH6pf-_9180JJqA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>213056729</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reliability and Accuracy of Handheld Stopwatches Compared With Electronic Timing in Measuring Sprint Performance</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Hetzler, Ronald K ; Stickley, Christopher D ; Lundquist, Kelly M ; Kimura, Iris F</creator><creatorcontrib>Hetzler, Ronald K ; Stickley, Christopher D ; Lundquist, Kelly M ; Kimura, Iris F</creatorcontrib><description>Hetzler, RK, Stickley, CD, Lundquist, KM, and Kimura, IF. Reliability and accuracy of handheld stopwatches compared with electronic timing in measuring sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res 22(6)1969-1976, 2008-This study assessed reliability of split times obtained by handheld stopwatches (HHSs) compared with electronic timing (ET) during a 200-m sprint. Two HHS timing methods were compared with ETsingle-split timers (SST) and multiple-split timers (MST). Twenty-six timers without previous experience were given instruction and completed practice trials until good agreement was achieved between ET and HHS. Trained runners (8 males, 10 females) were timed for each 25-m interval on a standard 200-m course. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and intraclass correlation models were used to determine reliability. A total of 248 split times were analyzed. No significant differences were found between the three timing methods (p > 0.99), and calculated intraclass correlation values were high (0.988). Mean error between SST, MST, and ET (−0.04 ± 0.24 and −0.05 ± 0.24 seconds, respectively) indicated faster HHS times, though not significantly. However, absolute errors were considerably larger (0.15 ± 0.20 and 0.16 ± 0.19 between SST, MST, and ET, respectively). The HHS-recorded splits were faster than ET in 67.3% of splits and slower in 29.4%. The distribution of errors made the development of a reliable correction factor to convert HHS to ET impossible. It was concluded that on the basis of the small mean error and high intraclass correlations, the use of HHSs may be a viable alternative to ET in collecting group data. However, on the basis of the absolute error between HHS and ET, when high degrees of precision are required, ET should be used, and reliable correction of HHS to ET values is not possible. It was further concluded that HHS times should be reported without attempting correction and interpreted in light of the shortcomings of the HHS method.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1064-8011</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1533-4287</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318185f36c</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18978613</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: National Strength and Conditioning Association</publisher><subject>Adult ; Data collection ; Electrical Equipment and Supplies ; Equipment Design ; Female ; Handheld computers ; Humans ; Male ; Methods ; Protocol ; Reliability ; Reproducibility of Results ; Running ; Sports Equipment ; Time ; Timing differences</subject><ispartof>Journal of strength and conditioning research, 2008-11, Vol.22 (6), p.1969-1976</ispartof><rights>2008 National Strength and Conditioning Association</rights><rights>Copyright Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Nov 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c427c-c0159e3fb76b868ac77d0df559ffbd42c1de794995b16700b16cad36ea5c8bec3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c427c-c0159e3fb76b868ac77d0df559ffbd42c1de794995b16700b16cad36ea5c8bec3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18978613$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hetzler, Ronald K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stickley, Christopher D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lundquist, Kelly M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimura, Iris F</creatorcontrib><title>Reliability and Accuracy of Handheld Stopwatches Compared With Electronic Timing in Measuring Sprint Performance</title><title>Journal of strength and conditioning research</title><addtitle>J Strength Cond Res</addtitle><description>Hetzler, RK, Stickley, CD, Lundquist, KM, and Kimura, IF. Reliability and accuracy of handheld stopwatches compared with electronic timing in measuring sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res 22(6)1969-1976, 2008-This study assessed reliability of split times obtained by handheld stopwatches (HHSs) compared with electronic timing (ET) during a 200-m sprint. Two HHS timing methods were compared with ETsingle-split timers (SST) and multiple-split timers (MST). Twenty-six timers without previous experience were given instruction and completed practice trials until good agreement was achieved between ET and HHS. Trained runners (8 males, 10 females) were timed for each 25-m interval on a standard 200-m course. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and intraclass correlation models were used to determine reliability. A total of 248 split times were analyzed. No significant differences were found between the three timing methods (p > 0.99), and calculated intraclass correlation values were high (0.988). Mean error between SST, MST, and ET (−0.04 ± 0.24 and −0.05 ± 0.24 seconds, respectively) indicated faster HHS times, though not significantly. However, absolute errors were considerably larger (0.15 ± 0.20 and 0.16 ± 0.19 between SST, MST, and ET, respectively). The HHS-recorded splits were faster than ET in 67.3% of splits and slower in 29.4%. The distribution of errors made the development of a reliable correction factor to convert HHS to ET impossible. It was concluded that on the basis of the small mean error and high intraclass correlations, the use of HHSs may be a viable alternative to ET in collecting group data. However, on the basis of the absolute error between HHS and ET, when high degrees of precision are required, ET should be used, and reliable correction of HHS to ET values is not possible. It was further concluded that HHS times should be reported without attempting correction and interpreted in light of the shortcomings of the HHS method.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Electrical Equipment and Supplies</subject><subject>Equipment Design</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Handheld computers</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Protocol</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Running</subject><subject>Sports Equipment</subject><subject>Time</subject><subject>Timing differences</subject><issn>1064-8011</issn><issn>1533-4287</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU9v1DAQxS1ERUvhGyBkceCWYsfxnxyrVaGgolbdIo6RMxmTFCcOdqLVfntc7UpIPXDxs0e_eRrPI-QdZxdc8vrTt-3mgrWMCxTccCOdUPCCnHEpRFGVRr_Md6aqwjDOT8nrlB4ZK6WU4hU55abWRnFxRuZ79INtBz8se2qnjl4CrNHCngZHr3OhR9_R7RLmnV2gx0Q3YZxtxI7-HJaeXnmEJYZpAPowjMP0iw4T_Y42rfHpsZ2zLPQOowtxtBPgG3LirE_49qjn5Mfnq4fNdXFz--Xr5vKmgKrUUADjskbhWq1ao4wFrTvWOSlr59quKoF3qOuqrmXLlWYsn2A7odBKMC2COCcfD75zDH9WTEszDgnQezthWFOjaq204lUGPzwDH8MapzxbU3LBpNJlnaHqAEEMKUV0Tf7YaOO-4ax5iqPJcTTP48ht74_eazti96_puP8MmAOwC37BmH77dYex6dH6pf-_9180JJqA</recordid><startdate>200811</startdate><enddate>200811</enddate><creator>Hetzler, Ronald K</creator><creator>Stickley, Christopher D</creator><creator>Lundquist, Kelly M</creator><creator>Kimura, Iris F</creator><general>National Strength and Conditioning Association</general><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Ovid Technologies</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200811</creationdate><title>Reliability and Accuracy of Handheld Stopwatches Compared With Electronic Timing in Measuring Sprint Performance</title><author>Hetzler, Ronald K ; Stickley, Christopher D ; Lundquist, Kelly M ; Kimura, Iris F</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c427c-c0159e3fb76b868ac77d0df559ffbd42c1de794995b16700b16cad36ea5c8bec3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Electrical Equipment and Supplies</topic><topic>Equipment Design</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Handheld computers</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Protocol</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Running</topic><topic>Sports Equipment</topic><topic>Time</topic><topic>Timing differences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hetzler, Ronald K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stickley, Christopher D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lundquist, Kelly M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimura, Iris F</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of strength and conditioning research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hetzler, Ronald K</au><au>Stickley, Christopher D</au><au>Lundquist, Kelly M</au><au>Kimura, Iris F</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reliability and Accuracy of Handheld Stopwatches Compared With Electronic Timing in Measuring Sprint Performance</atitle><jtitle>Journal of strength and conditioning research</jtitle><addtitle>J Strength Cond Res</addtitle><date>2008-11</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1969</spage><epage>1976</epage><pages>1969-1976</pages><issn>1064-8011</issn><eissn>1533-4287</eissn><abstract>Hetzler, RK, Stickley, CD, Lundquist, KM, and Kimura, IF. Reliability and accuracy of handheld stopwatches compared with electronic timing in measuring sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res 22(6)1969-1976, 2008-This study assessed reliability of split times obtained by handheld stopwatches (HHSs) compared with electronic timing (ET) during a 200-m sprint. Two HHS timing methods were compared with ETsingle-split timers (SST) and multiple-split timers (MST). Twenty-six timers without previous experience were given instruction and completed practice trials until good agreement was achieved between ET and HHS. Trained runners (8 males, 10 females) were timed for each 25-m interval on a standard 200-m course. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and intraclass correlation models were used to determine reliability. A total of 248 split times were analyzed. No significant differences were found between the three timing methods (p > 0.99), and calculated intraclass correlation values were high (0.988). Mean error between SST, MST, and ET (−0.04 ± 0.24 and −0.05 ± 0.24 seconds, respectively) indicated faster HHS times, though not significantly. However, absolute errors were considerably larger (0.15 ± 0.20 and 0.16 ± 0.19 between SST, MST, and ET, respectively). The HHS-recorded splits were faster than ET in 67.3% of splits and slower in 29.4%. The distribution of errors made the development of a reliable correction factor to convert HHS to ET impossible. It was concluded that on the basis of the small mean error and high intraclass correlations, the use of HHSs may be a viable alternative to ET in collecting group data. However, on the basis of the absolute error between HHS and ET, when high degrees of precision are required, ET should be used, and reliable correction of HHS to ET values is not possible. It was further concluded that HHS times should be reported without attempting correction and interpreted in light of the shortcomings of the HHS method.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>National Strength and Conditioning Association</pub><pmid>18978613</pmid><doi>10.1519/JSC.0b013e318185f36c</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1064-8011 |
ispartof | Journal of strength and conditioning research, 2008-11, Vol.22 (6), p.1969-1976 |
issn | 1064-8011 1533-4287 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69767614 |
source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
subjects | Adult Data collection Electrical Equipment and Supplies Equipment Design Female Handheld computers Humans Male Methods Protocol Reliability Reproducibility of Results Running Sports Equipment Time Timing differences |
title | Reliability and Accuracy of Handheld Stopwatches Compared With Electronic Timing in Measuring Sprint Performance |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T05%3A08%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reliability%20and%20Accuracy%20of%20Handheld%20Stopwatches%20Compared%20With%20Electronic%20Timing%20in%20Measuring%20Sprint%20Performance&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20strength%20and%20conditioning%20research&rft.au=Hetzler,%20Ronald%20K&rft.date=2008-11&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1969&rft.epage=1976&rft.pages=1969-1976&rft.issn=1064-8011&rft.eissn=1533-4287&rft_id=info:doi/10.1519/JSC.0b013e318185f36c&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1669463161%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=213056729&rft_id=info:pmid/18978613&rfr_iscdi=true |