Date of Award

8-2025

Degree Type

Report

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

Kinesiology and Health Science

Committee Chair(s)

Dale R. Wagner (Committee Chair)

Committee

Dale R. Wagner

Committee

Edward M. Heath

Committee

Talin Louder

Abstract

Traditional hydrostatic weighing (HW) involves full body submersion at residual volume (RV), which may be uncomfortable. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate a more comfortable way to perform this method. HW with the head above water (HWHAW) was compared to the traditional method of HW with head below water (HWHBW) and to another method that also measures density by displacement, air displacement plethysmography (ADP). Equivalence was tested by comparing the body fat percentage (BF%), body volume (Vb), and body density (Db) of 27 subjects (15 M, 12 F) between the three methods. Results showed evidence of a significant mean difference in BF% when comparing HWHAW to both HWHBW (5.6 (90% CI 4.9 to 6.3) %fat, p < .001) and ADP (5.1 (90% CI, 4.0 to 6.1) %fat, p < .001). In addition, a statistically significant difference was reported in Vb between HWHAW to both HWHBW (0.890 (90% CI, 0.772 to 1.007) L, p < .001) and ADP (0.734 (90% CI, 0.487 to 0.980) L, p < .001). This trend continues when comparing Db from HWHAW to HWHBW (0.012 (90% CI, 0.011 to 0.014) kg/m3, p > .001) and to ADP (0.011 (90% CI, 0.009 to 0.013) kg/m3, p > .001). While HWHAW has a low standard error of estimate (SEE) when compared to HWHBW (1.7% BF), its total error is much larger (5.8% BF). This new method has potential; however, further studies are necessary to investigate the source of this larger total error (TE).

Download

Share

COinS

Copyright for this work is retained by the student. If you have any questions regarding the inclusion of this work in the Digital Commons, please email us at .