Table 2.

Onset latency of the electromyograms during stance and marching in place perturbation.

	Group	Δ pre/post [%]	Pt	d	P	${\mathrm{\eta }}_{\mathrm{p}}^{\mathrm{2}}$
Protocol 1: Stance perturbation
RF	RBT	-16 ± 13	<0.01	1.70	F(1,17) = 7.852, p = 0.012	0.316
	CBT	+1 ± 23	0.44	0.05
BF	RBT	-11 ± 10	<0.01	1.60	F(1,17) = 0.151, p = 0.703	0.009
	CBT	+8 ± 31	0.15	0.36
SOL	RBT	-5 ± 9	0.02	0.75	F(1,17) = 18.478, p < 0.001	0.521
	CBT	-12 ± 12	<0.01	1.44
Protocol 2: Marching in place perturbation
RF	RBT	-14 ± 9	<0.01	2.22	F(1,17) = 4.621, p = 0.046	0.214
	CBT	+1 ± 25	0.45	0.04
BF	RBT	-12 ± 14	<0.01	1.25	F(1,16) = 2.436, p = 0.138	0.132
	CBT	+8 ± 22	0.06	0.55
SOL	RBT	-2 ± 8	0.17	0.33	F(1,17) = 0.004, p = 0.947	<0.001
	CBT	+2 ± 18	0.31	0.17

Mean changes from pre to post in EMG onset latency (%) for the protocols 1 and 2. iEMG data are normalized to baseline values. Significant changes in response to the training intervention (TTEST, P_t) with effect sizes (Cohen’s d, d) as well as time interactions (rmANOVA, P) with effect sizes (Partial Eta Squared, ${\mathit{\eta }}_{\mathit{p}}^{\mathit{2}}$ ) are illustrated in bold in the right columns with P_t and P < 0.05.