Graduation Term


Document Type


Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)


School of Kinesiology and Recreation

Committee Chair

Kelly R. Laurson


The manipulation of exercise volume, intensity, and order is associated with producing different musculoskeletal changes. These resistance training program variables affect mechanical tension and metabolic stress associated with resistance training, therefore affecting strength and hypertrophic outcomes. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of two different volume-equated total body exercise protocols over 9 weeks using compound exercises on muscular strength, muscle thickness, and fat-free mass. METHODS: Eight well-trained men were randomly assigned to a hypertrophy-style protocol (HG) performing 3 sets of 10 repetitions with 90 seconds rest between sets (n = 4) or a strength-style protocol (SG) performing 7 sets of 3 repetitions with 3 minutes rest between sets (n = 4). All subjects underwent pre-, mid-, and post-testing in body composition analysis via air displacement plethysmography and muscle thickness ultrasound imaging of four different sites: forearm flexors (FF), forearm extensors (FE), rectus femoris (RF), and vastus lateralis (VL). Imaging was done at two separate areas of each muscle site: proximal and distal. One repetition maximum (1RM) testing for the barbell back squat and barbell bench press was also conducted. RESULTS: After 9 weeks, maximal back squat increased 16.1 ± 9.2% for SG and 5.5 ± 1.7% for HG with no significant differences observed in SG (ES = 0.84) compared to HG (ES = 0.31) (p = 0.70). For the bench press, an increase of 16.0 ± 13.1% was observed in SG and 6.9 ± 2.7% for HG with no significant differences observed in SG (ES = 0.72) compared to HG (ES = 0.36) (p = 0.17). Results for muscle thickness measurements are as follows: proximal FF = 2.87 vs. -6.35%, distal FF = -0.55 vs. -3.72%, proximal FE = 7.99 vs. -2.49%, distal FE = 19.42 vs. -2.05%, proximal RF = 3.89 vs. -0.04%, distal RF = 4.64 vs. -4.85%, proximal VL = -2.81 vs. 8.84%, distal VL = 10.30 vs. 5.34%. With the exception of the proximal forearm flexors, there were no significant differences in muscle thickness measurements between groups. There were no significant differences in changes to fat-free mass between groups or over the course of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: When training volume is roughly volume-equated, a total-body exercise protocol produces changes in maximal strength, most measures of muscle thickness, and fat-free mass that are not significantly different between strength- and hypertrophy-style resistance training routines.


Page Count