The Effects Weight ,Gender ,and Leg Circumference Have On Jump Height

Jacob Wilson ,Partners: Rebecka Tackett, Brandon Ash, Christian Wilson

Bsc228 Lab report 1
Thursday March 12,2015

Introduction: Statistics are important in physiology because they provide a way of recording
and comparing data in an organized and critical way. Statistics accomplish those goals by
allowing the correlation of two or more measurements with one-another where there would not
otherwise be an obvious correlation. Consistency is also important because then the data is all
measured under one standard. (Lab Exercise 1) The median, mode, and standard deviation were
found for the data collected in the experiment ,though there was no mode for the females.
Females tend to have a higher fat content than that of males (Abidin, N., & Adam, M)
,which is relevant because fat adds to weight without adding to jumping ability. There is also a
difference in muscle composition between males and females. (Widmaier, E., & Raff, H.) Muscle
adds to weight also ,but muscle is what provides the force necessary for jumping. The difference
in muscle composition is relevant because this adds to the weight and also adds to the force for
the jump. The different muscle masses would cause differences in leg circumferences since
muscle takes up space and has mass. So the larger the leg circumference is ,the more muscle
mass is present ,meaning the jump height would be greater. There are clear differences in the
results of both sexes in the experiment ,which is demonstrated in the collected data.
The experiment allowed data to be collected for vertical jump height, weight, and leg
circumference. Two hypotheses were formed. The first hypothesis was that as leg circumference
increases vertical jump height increases ,because leg circumference reflects muscle content. The
second hypothesis was that males have a higher jump height than that of females on average.
Methods: The experiment allowed appropriate data to be collected from 21 different subjects.
Ten of the subjects were female and eleven were male. For the experiment the procedures
outlined in Laboratory Exercise 1 were followed ,with the exception of in part 1 each subject

divided into groups of four and didnt divide into sub-sets and a tape measurer was used in place
of a string.
Results: Figure 1 shows the ranges for the jump heights for both the male and female
demographic. The figure shows that the male subjects had a larger range of jump height than that
of the female subjects. The males smallest jump height was 12.25 and the smallest female jump
height was 6.5cm ,meaning that there was a 5.75cm difference between the two jump heights.
The largest jump height for the males was 56.00cm and the largest female jump height was
23.00cm. The difference between the two jump heights was 33.00cm. The male standard
deviation was 16.25cm which was nearly four times the females standard deviation at 4.52cm.
Figure 3 showed the distribution of the male subjects leg circumferences in ranges of
5cm. The overwhelming majority ,70%, of the subjects fell within the range of 35.1cm to 40cm.
only one of the males in the experiment had a leg circumference of 40.1cm to 45cm and 2 of the
subjects fell within the 30.1cm-35cm. Figure 4 showed the distribution of the female subjects leg
circumferences in ranges of 5cm also. The majority of the female subjects fell within the 30.1cm
to 35cm range ,whereas only about one-third of the female subjects fell within the 35.1cm to
40cm range. Males had a larger leg circumference than females on average.
Figure 5 shows the height jumped vs. calf circumference for the male subjects. The figure
also includes a trendline to show the slope of the data as the calf circumference increases across
the graph. Figure 2 shows the height jumped vs. calf circumference for the female subjects that
were in the experiment. The y-axis on the female figure is smaller to reflect the smaller vertical
jump height of the female subjects. Figure 2 also includes a trendline that shows the slope of the
data. The males had a higher vertical jump height than that of the females ,which is most likely a
result of differences in muscle composition. (Widmaier, E., & Raff, H.)

Figure 6 shows the female jump height vs. the body weight/leg circumference ratio. The
figure shows that ,overall, as the ratio increases the jump height decreases. It is worth noting that
the majority of the subjects fell in about a 2:1 ratio ,with only two subjects not in that area.
Figure 7 shows the male jump height vs. the body weight/leg circumference ratio. The figure
shows that as the ratio increases the jump height also increases. The male body weight to leg
circumference ratio varied more than the females ,with the majority falling between 2.0:1 to
2.5:1.
Discussion: The results tended to show that males had a larger leg circumference and higher
vertical jump height than that of females. They also showed that vertical jump height was higher
for males with a leg circumference between 35.1cm and 40cm. Figures 4 and 5 showed that
overall as leg circumference increased vertical jump height decreased. The largest leg
circumferences did not seem to be able to jump as high as the mid-range leg circumferences. The
reason for the difference might be due to the largest leg circumferences having a higher caliper
reading ,which measures fat content, and the lower leg circumferences having a lower muscle
content. It is worth noting that the trendline for figure 5 decreases slower than that of figure 4.
Vertical jump height appears to be dependent on other factors moreso than leg circumference.
These other factors could be variables such as total body weight and jumping technique. The
total body weight for each subject was measured in the experiment. The males tended to weigh
more than the females ,which seems to correlate with the jump heights achieved by both sexes.
Subjects who have a history of sports would have an advantage at jumping because of technique.
Many sports ,such as basketball, require jumping and the additional practice would have affected
the jump heights achieved in the experiment.

Comparing the data collected from the males and females shows overlap in the range for
jump height. On average though the males had a higher jump height. In fact, in the experiment
the maximum male jump height was 56.00cm whereas the maximum jump height for females
was only 23.00cm. The difference in jump height could be reflective of differing muscle
composition of males and females ,since having more muscle will generate more force for the
jump. Other factors that could have affected jump height things such as the males might have
been wearing footwear better suited for jumping at the time the experiment was performed or
some of the subjects could have had previous leg injuries. In order to improve the experiment the
subjects should all be wearing the same type of clothing and screened to make sure none of the
subjects had previous leg injuries. The females also had on average a smaller leg circumference
than the males. The average for the females was 34.22cm and the average for the males was
36.75cm. The size difference was most likely due to the muscle mass differences between the
two sexes.
In conclusion the experiment tended to support the second hypothesis but not support the
first. Of course, more data should be collected for more accuracy, since the experiment utilized a
rather small pool of people. The data seems to show that vertical jump height relies more upon
technique and muscle mass than on leg circumference.

Figure 1: Range of Jump Height for Males and Females.

Males Standard Deviation: 16.25cm Males Mean: 29.94cm
Females Standard Deviation: 4.52cm Females Mean: 17.99cm
3

0
10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Jump Height (cm)

Figure 2: Female Jump Height to Calf Circumference

25
20
15

Height Jumped (cm)

10
5
0
20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

Femal Adjusted Calf Circumfrence (cm)

40

Figure 3: Frequency of Male Calf Circumference

8
7
6
5
4

Frequency

3
2
1
0

Male Leg Circumfrence (cm)

Figure 4: Frequency of Female Calf Circumference

8
7
6
5
4

Frequency

3
2
1
0

Female Adjusted Calf Circumfrence (cm)

Figure 5: Male Jump Height to Calf Circumference

60
50
40

Height Jumped (cm) 30

20
10
0
33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

Male Adjusted Calf Circumfrence (cm)

Figure 6: Female Jump Height to Weight/Calf Size Ratio

25
20
15

Height Jumped (cm)

10
5
0
1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.1

Body Weight to Calf Size Ratio

2.2

Figure 7: Male Jump Height to Weight/Calf size Ratio

60
50
40

Height Jumped (cm) 30

20
10
0
1.8

1.9

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

Male Body Weight to Calf Size Ratio

2.6

Works Cited:
Abidin, N., & Adam, M. (n.d.). Prediction of Vertical Jump Height from Anthropometric Factors in
Male and Female Martial Arts Athletes. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3684376/
Laboratory Exercise 1
Widmaier, E., & Raff, H. (2013). Vander's human physiology: The mechanisms of body
function. (10th ed., p. 619-620). Boston: McGraw-Hill.