Table 3.

Statistical results. Note: I-FRT = instability free-weight resistance training, S-MRT = stable machine-based resistance training, S-MRT_HIP = stable machine-based adductor/abductor training; FES-I = Fall Efficacy Scale. DSST = Digit Symbol Substitution Test; DMT = Digit Memory Test; Stroop = Stroop Colour-Word Test; TMT = Trail Making Test; TuT = Time under Tension; *no pre-post measures, thus only t-tests were calculated; BF = Bayes Factor; p ≤ 0.05.

	ANOVA					planned contrasts				95%-CI (dunb)
	df	F	p	d		df	t	p	dunb
FES-I	2,65	0.84	0.436	0.32
					Unstable vs. Stable	65	0.92	0.364	−0.24	−0.75, 0.28
					S-MRT vs. S-MRTHIP	65	0.90	0.373	0.27	−0.30, 0.85
DSST	2,65	3.95	0.024	0.53
					Unstable vs. Stable	65	2.81	0.007	0.73	0.21, 1.27
					S-MRT vs. S-MRTHIP	65	0.08	0.937	−0.02	−0.60, 0.55
DMT	2,65	6.05	0.004	0.66
					Unstable vs. Stable	65	3.48	< 0.001	0.91	0.38, 1.45
					S-MRT vs. S-MRTHIP	65	0.09	0.928	0.02	−0.55, 0.60
Stroop	2,61	2.36	0.103	0.42
					Unstable vs. Stable	61	2.09	0.041	0.55	0.01, 1.09
					S-MRT vs. S-MRTHIP	61	0.66	0.510	−0.20	−0.79, 0.40
TMT	2,65	0.94	0.394	0.34
					Unstable vs. Stable	43	0.68	0.502	0.17	−0.34, 0.69
					S-MRT vs. S-MRTHIP	45	1.20	0.233	0.33	−0.24, 0.91
t-tests
Load*					S-MRT vs. I-FRT	43	15.24	< 0.001	4.34	3.34, 5.46
					S-MRT vs. S-MRTHIP	45	9.19	< 0.001	2.64	1.88, 3.48
					I-FRT vs. S-MRTHIP	42	9.86	< 0.001	2.72	1.98, 3.52
TuT*					S-MRT vs. I-FRT	43	2.98	0.006	1.11	0.32, 1.96
					S-MRT vs. S-MRTHIP	45	6.29	< 0.001	2.31	3.35, 1.39
					I-FRT vs. S-MRTHIP	42	9.05	< 0.001	3.27	4.50, 2.20