Table 2.
Comparisons of the trunk muscles EMG measures through the four experimental conditions.
| Variables | Experimental Conditions | One-Way ANOVA | ES | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
p-Values (F-Value) |
(d) | |
| RMS-EMG –L5 (%) | 23 (10) | 46 (18) | 18 (10) | 31 (10) | <0.01 (9.726) | 1.41 |
| * 2 > 1, 3 and 4 | ||||||
| RMS-EMG-L3 (%) | 14 (7) | 24 (11) | 10 (6) | 18 (8) | < 0.01 (5.678) | 0.80 |
| * 2 > 1 and 3 | ||||||
| RMS-EMG-RA (%) | 18 (9) | 30 (14) | 14 (7) | 24 (12) |
< 0.01 (4.554) * 2 > 1 and 3 |
0.83 |
| RMS-EMG-OE (%) | 23 (10) | 40 (13) | 18 (8) | 30 (13) |
< 0.01 (7.680) * 2 > 1 and 3 |
0.92 |
Note: Mean values and standard deviation in parenthesis. Bold character = significant differences on conditions factor from ANOVA (p < 0.05). *Post Hoc analysis (Tukey test) to localize the differences between conditions. Experimental conditions: 1 = steel barrel–empty; 2 = steel barrel–full; 3 = recyclable barrel–empty; 4 = recyclable barrel–full. RMS: Root Mean Square, EMG: electromyography, ES: Effect Size.