Cardiff School of Sport
DISSERTATION ASSESSMENT PROFORMA:
Empirical 1
Student name:
Student ID:
Sophie Tucker
St10001475
SPE
Programme:
Dissertation title:
A Validation Study between Simulated Occupational Activity and the Multistage Fitness
Test
Supervisor:
Comments
Carl Beynon
Section
Title and Abstract (5%)
Title to include: A concise indication of the research question/problem.
Abstract to include: A concise summary of the empirical study undertaken.
Introduction and literature review (25%)
To include: outline of context (theoretical/conceptual/applied) for the question;
analysis of findings of previous related research including gaps in the literature and
relevant contributions; logical flow to, and clear presentation of the research
problem/ question; an indication of any research expectations, (i.e., hypotheses if
applicable).
Methods and Research Design (15%)
1
This form should be used for both quantitative and qualitative dissertations. The descriptors associated with both
quantitative and qualitative dissertations should be referred to by both students and markers.
To include: details of the research design and justification for the methods applied;
participant details; comprehensive replicable protocol.
Results and Analysis (15%) 2
To include: description and justification of data treatment/ data analysis procedures;
appropriate presentation of analysed data within text and in tables or figures;
description of critical findings.
Discussion and Conclusions (30%) 2
To include: collation of information and ideas and evaluation of those ideas relative
to the extant literature/concept/theory and research question/problem; adoption of a
personal position on the study by linking and combining different elements of the
data reported; discussion of the real-life impact of your research findings for coaches
and/or practitioners (i.e. practical implications); discussion of the limitations and a
critical reflection of the approach/process adopted; and indication of potential
improvements and future developments building on the study; and a conclusion
which summarises the relationship between the research question and the major
findings.
Presentation (10%)
To include: academic writing style; depth, scope and accuracy of referencing in the
text and final reference list; clarity in organisation, formatting and visual presentation
2
There is scope within qualitative dissertations for the RESULTS and DISCUSSION sections to be presented as a
combined section followed by an appropriate CONCLUSION. The mark distribution and criteria across these two
sections should be aggregated in those circumstances.
CARDIFF METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY
Prifysgol Fetropolitan Caerdydd
CARDIFF SCHOOL OF SPORT
DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONOURS)
SPORT AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION
2013-4
A VALIDATION STUDY BETWEEN SIMULATED
OCCUPATIONAL ACTIVITY AND THE MULTISTAGE FITNESS
TEST
PHYSIOLOGY & HEALTH
SOPHIE TUCKER
ST10001475
A Validation Study between Simulated Occupational Activity
and the Multistage Fitness Test
Cardiff Metropolitan University
Prifysgol Fetropolitan Caerdydd
Certificate of student
By submitting this document, I certify that the whole of this work is the result of my
individual effort, that all quotations from books and journals have been acknowledged, and
that the word count given below is a true and accurate record of the words contained
(omitting contents pages, acknowledgements, indices, tables, figures, plates, reference list
and appendices).
Word count:
11162
Name:
Sophie Tucker
Date:
20/03/2014
Certificate of Dissertation Supervisor responsible
I am satisfied that this work is the result of the student’s own effort.
I have received dissertation verification information from this student
Name:
Date:
Notes:
The University owns the right to reprint all or part of this document.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Number
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................. i
Abstract ............................................................................................................. ii
Abbreviations ................................................................................................... iii
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background information ............................................................................. 2
1.2 Rationale ................................................................................................... .2
1.3 Aims of the study........................................................................................ 3
1.4 Hypothesis ................................................................................................. 3
1.5 Scope ......................................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Review of Literature ................................................................................... 4
2.1 Components of fitness. ........................................................................... 5
2.2 Current and past fitness tests used within police recruitment................. .7
2.3 Reliability/ validity .................................................................................... 8
2.4 Current occupational fitness tests ........................................................... 9
2.5 Existing studies adopting alternative fitness testing………………………10
2.6 The 15 point Borg RPE Scale ................................................................. 12
2.7 Justification of Present Study .................................................................. 13
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Methodology ............................................................................................ 15
3.1 Ethics ......................................................................................................... 16
3.2 Recruitment/ subjects ............................................................................. ...16
3.3 Procedures. ............................................................................................. ..17
3.4 t-tests ...................................................................................................... ...19
3.5 Data management analysis .............................................................. .........20
Page Number
3.6 Reliability .................................................................................................. 21
CHAPTER FOUR
Results ........................................................................................................... 22
CHAPTER FIVE
Discussion of Results ................................................................................... ..29
5.1.1 Multistage Fitness test mean heart rate compared with simulation of job
demands ........................................................................................................ 30
5.1.2 Rate of perceived exertion during multistage fitness test and simulation of job
demands ....................................................................................................... 31
5.1.3 Comparison of RPE results and actual heart rate recorded from the MSFT
....................................................................................................................... 33
5.2 Validity .................................................................................................. 34
5.3 Future recommendations ...................................................................... 34
5.4 Limitations ............................................................................................. 35
CHAPTER SIX
6.0 Conclusion ................................................................. ………………..37
Reference List .............................................................................................. ..39
Appendices ....................................................................................... ...............A
Appendix A- Initial participant contact letter ................................................ ..A-1
Appendix B- Participant information sheet A ............................................... ..B-1
Appendix B- Participant information sheet B ................................................. B-2
Appendix C- Police support unit informed consent form ...............................C-1
Appendix D Statistical t tests ............................................................ .............D-1
Appendix E- Statistical Analysis of RPE...................................................... ..E-1
Appendix F- The multistage fitness test ........................................................ F-1
Appendix G- Map of distance covered during simulated training ................. G-1
Appendix H- Ethical approval form A ............................................................H-1
Appendix H- Ethical approval form B ............................................................H-2
Figures
Page Number
Figure 1: Mean minimum, mean average and mean maximum heart rate (± Standard
Deviation) for the multistage fitness test and two day training………………………………23
Figure 2: Individual mean minimum heart rates over the two day training and the mean
bleep test scores (± standard deviation)……………………………………………………….24
Figure 3: Individual mean heart rates over the two day training and the mean bleep test
scores (± standard deviation)……………………………………………………………………25
Figure 4: Individual mean maximum heart rates over the two day training and the mean
bleep test scores (± standard deviation)……………………………………………………….26
Figure 5: Individual mean maximum heart rates over the two day training compared with
rate of perceived exertion (BPM)……………………………………………………………….27
Figure 6: Individual mean average heart rates over the two day training compared with
Rate of perceived exertion (BPM)………………………………………………………………27
Figure 7: Individual mean heart rates following the multistage fitness test to level 6.3
compared with individual rate of perceived exertion (BPM)…………………………………28
Figure 8: A diagram to show the multistage fitness test……………………………………F-1
Figure 9: A map of the training course covered by PSU officers during training………..G-1
Page Number
Tables
Table 1: Normative data for the Multi-Stage Fitness Test……………………………………8
Table 2: Minimum standards for cardiovascular endurance assessments in the Royal
Marines, Royal Navy and Royal Air force (RAF)………………………………………………9
Table 3: The Borg Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) scale with percent MHR………….18
Table 4: Paired sample t-test between mean minimum HR and mean HR following
MSFT……………………………………………………………………………………………..D-1
Table 5: Paired sample t-test between mean HR and mean HR following MSFT………D-3
Table 6: Paired sample t-test between mean HR and mean HR following MSFT………D-5
Table 7: Paired sample t-test of mean minimum, mean and mean maximum HR compared
with HR following MSFT………………………………………………………………………..D-7
Table 8 - Paired sample t- test of perceived exertion (BPM) compared with mean and
mean maximum heart rate (BPM) from JST and the MSFT………………………………. E-1
Table 9: MSFT level, distance covered and speed…………………………………………F-1
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to say a huge thank you to my supervisor Carl Beynon,
without his encouragement, support and time throughout this year I am confident I would
have not completed this study to the best of my ability. I would also like to thank David
Wasley and Karianne Backx for their ongoing support over the past two years. Finally, I
want to thank Jay Hayes for providing me with the opportunity to work alongside a group of
PSU officers from the surrounding areas of Avon and Somerset during their training,
without this opportunity this study would not have been possible.
i
Abstract
The aim of this study was to establish whether current fitness tests used to determine
entry and re-qualification into the UK police force are a valid way of measuring the
required fitness for the demands of a job as a Police Support unit officer. The study
monitored the heart rates of fifteen randomly selected officers taking part in the multistage
fitness test (MSFT) and job simulated support unit training (JST), participants were asked
to provide a number from the Borg rate of perceived exertion (RPE) scale to gauge how
hard they felt they worked following training and the MSFT to the qualification level of 6.3.
Paired sample t-tests revealed that there was a significant difference (p<.005) between the
mean minimum and mean average heart rates from the training and MSFT, but no
significant difference (p>.005) between the MSFT and mean maximum heart rates. The
police support unit qualification level of 6.3 in the MSFT was then compared with a table of
normative data which indicated that the current level discriminates against female officers;
suggesting that further research should be conducted to determine a potential increase in
the qualification level for male officers. The study also indicates the lack of aerobic fitness
demonstrated by the individual officers involved in the study, reporting a mean percentile
effort of 90-100% MHR according to the mean age of participants following the MSFT and
training.
Key words: *Police, *Fitness, *Validity, *Multistage fitness test, *Physical demands,
*Perceived exertion.
ii
Abbreviations
RPE- Rate of Perceived Exertion
BPM- Beats per Minute
JST- Job Simulated Training
MSFT- Multistage Fitness Test
PPE- Personal Protective Equipment
SD- Standard Deviation
KG- Kilogram
PTO- Police Training Officer
PSU- Police Support Unit
MHR- Maximum Heart Rate
iii
Chapter One
Introduction
1
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background information
Police officers current lack of fitness and validating minimum requirements for fitness
testing within the police is under constant debate within the media today (Gill, 2013;
BBC, 2014; as cited in Anderson et al, 2001). Anderson et al, (2001) highlights that
there is no doubt that the physical demands of police work are more demanding than
occupations of a deskbound nature, stating that officers must be physically capable to
perform the requirements of their job successfully in a way that ensures safety of all
concerned. Daily duties of a police officer have been broadly identified to require all
three of the following components; physical fitness, physical ability and the ability to
complete physical tasks (Anderson et al, 2001). Very few if any current officers working
within law enforcement disagree with the notion that physical fitness is paramount for
the effective and safe completion of essential policing duties (Williams, 2002: Hoffman
et al 2005). If police officers who are unable to perform such duties are not filtered out
during the recruitment process, this could result in injury, rapid employee turnover, and
of course endanger public and personal safety (Anderson et al, 2001). Previously,
officers capabilities for duty were determined by set requirements of height and weight,
suggesting that all officers had to be big, strong men (as cited in Anderson et al, 2001).
Over time this was recognised as discriminating against female candidates and the
decision was made to introduce set test requirements in order to determine individuals
fit for duty.
1.2 Rationale
Validity of fitness tests has been constantly tested over the years, some of which
questioned the validity of occupational fitness tests. Researchers such as Anderson et
al, (2001) have created studies to try and establish such validity. It is vital to ensure
validity of fitness tests within the police; Landy (1992) suggests that if qualification
levels are too relaxed within physical ability testing, this could endanger public safety,
Quigley (2008) agreed with this notion, stating that if officers appear to be unfit or
overweight, the public holds less confidence within their ability than officers who
appear physically fit and capable of their duties and that that poor physical fitness can
result in officers subjecting themselves more prone to injury. Setting qualification
requirements too low could result in current experienced officers who are fully capable,
reducing their current aerobic fitness levels in order to just scrape a qualifying score in
2
the tests and with requirements set too high, this could exclude experienced officers
who are fully capable of the job demands (Quigley, 2008).
1.3 Aims of the study
The purpose of this study is to research the validity of current fitness tests used
within the UK Avon and Somerset police force to deem police support unit (PSU)
officers fit for duty/ training. The main aim of this study is to establish whether
current fitness tests used within PSU training replicates the aerobic demands faced
within their daily duty as PSU officers.
1.4 Hypothesis
The null hypothesis for the study is:

Current qualification levels used in the MSFT are not a valid measure of PSU fitness
requirements for duty.
The alternative hypothesis for the study is:

Current qualification levels used in the MSFT are a valid measure of PSU fitness
requirements for duty.
1.5 Scope
The scope of the current study involves 15 police support unit officers based in police
forces surrounding the Avon and Somerset area. Officers will be completing their PSU
training on the 7th and 8th of November 2013 and will be randomly selected from a
range of forces, these forces include, Bath, Bristol, Somerset and Gloucestershire
constabularies.
3
Chapter Two
Review of literature
4
2.0 Review of literature
Current existing literature on job specific demands and validating fitness testing is minimal
for the police or any similar physically active occupations; such as the armed forces or fire
fighters. However, the majority of existing articles highlight the need to ensure that
individuals are ‘fit and able’ to complete the tasks or demands faced in their jobs (Williams,
2002; Hoffman et al 2005; Arvey et al, 1992; Biddle et al, 1992; Strating et al, 2010). This
study aims to research into the multistage fitness test (MSFT) and the level currently set
for officers working in a support unit position within the police.
2.1 Components of fitness
Physical fitness has been described by (Caspersen et al, 1985: p128) as ‘the ability to
carry out daily tasks with vigour and alertness, without undue fatigue and with ample
energy to enjoy leisure-time pursuits and meet unforeseen emergencies’. Physical fitness
is important for all officers working on duty, it determines an individual’s capability to carry
out strenuous job tasks, such as the chase and control of a suspect. It is also important to
minimise health threats such as obesity, heart disease and strokes - all of these would
affect individual job capabilities. A person’s physical ability is measured by determining
whether they are physically able to complete set tasks (American Physical Education
Association, 2010). Young (2005) described a physical task as the use of force, musclecoordination and strength. It is clear from these descriptions of physical fitness and
physical ability, that they interact with each other in such a way that you need physical
fitness to be able to complete a physical task, and you need physical ability to have
physical fitness. Physical tasks are faced regularly for an officer on duty. Both are required
not only for the successful completion of a police officer’s duty, but in every-day life as a
civilian.
Anderson et al (2001) and Quigley (2008) both identify the physical demands required by
police officers, predominantly used during the physical chase/control of suspects, these
were identified as; walking, climbing stairs, manipulating objects, twisting/ turning, pushing/
pulling, running, sprinting, bending, squatting, kneeling, lifting, and carrying. According to
Archer et al, (2009) physical fitness and fitness for health is not considered as a single
construct, this is because it can be divided in to several components; which include
aerobic endurance, muscular strength and endurance, power, speed, agility, body
composition and flexibility. Body composition relates to the percentage of body weight that
is fat, muscle and bone, when referring to body composition an officer would need to be in
5
proportion in order to be physically fit and able to complete their duties; if an officer is out
of proportion (obese), and carries too much body fat, this can hinder ability of other
components of fitness, such as speed, or flexibility (Kathleen et al, 2006). According to
Hoeger et al, (2011) agility is the ability to change direction and body position quickly,
officers would need agility in order to manipulate objects, twist/turn or run; often
recognized in the chase of a suspect (Quigley, 2008; Anderson et al, 2001). Balance is
‘the ability to maintain the body in proper equilibrium’ (Hoegar et al, 2011, p317), Hoegar
et al, (2011) highlights that balance is vital for activities such as wrestling; when one
opponent attempts to disturb the other opponents equilibrium, balance would be extremely
important for an officer in the physical control of suspects, manipulating objects, bending,
squatting, twisting and turning and running, it is vital for any officer to complete their duties,
if an officer is able to disturb a suspects equilibrium, the control of reluctant suspects
would be dramatically easier and so this alongside strength and power is a component
which would be highly beneficial for any officer. Aerobic endurance is described by Archer
et al, (2009) as the ability of the heart, lungs to deliver oxygen to the working muscles,
which then use this oxygen to generate work output, Anderson et al (2001) and Quigley
(2008) highlight the requirements of officers in a suspect chase and control situation as
running, walking, climbing stairs and manipulating objects, these are all activities which
require aerobic endurance. Muscular endurance is the body’s ability to endure repeated
muscular contractions over an extended period of time (Malina et al, 2004). Muscular
endurance would be useful for an officer in longer distance chases and during the control
of a suspect. Flexibility is the range of movement around a joint (Malina, et al, 2004), it is
another useful component for officers in a chase or control situation; if the range of
movement around the officers joints are limited, this will have a detrimental effect on their
physical fitness and ability. Power has been described as a combination of strength and
speed, Sharkey et al, (1978) highlighted a person to have more power if they are able to
do more work than someone else in the same unit of time. Sharkey et al, (1978)
highlighted the importance of power for athletes such as sprinters, with sprinting/ running
highlighted as a regular requirement for the chase and control of suspects, it is important
for officers to have a reasonable amount of power for the completion of the duties required
of them. Sharkey et al, (1978) states that speed requires rapid acceleration and the
contraction of fast-twitch muscle fibres and is measured by distance travelled over time.
Speed alongside power is another key component, it goes without saying that an officer
needs a certain amount of speed in order to chase down suspects, if an officer’s speed is
lacking, more suspects would out run officers in a chase and in turn they would be seen to
6
not being fit to carry out duties to a satisfactory standard. Muscular strength is defined as
‘the ability of the neuromuscular system to generate force’ (Chandler et al, 2008: p279) the
level of muscular strength depends on the ability of the nervous system to employ motor
units and also the capabilities of muscle fibres to contract (Chandler et al, 2008). The
importance of these components of fitness in regards to police work may vary in opinions,
but all play a certain amount of importance for the safe completion of the police
requirements identified by Anderson et al, (2001) and Quigley (2008). Certain components
dominate in importance; police work varies from day to day but components such as
balance, muscular strength, power and speed all play an important role for officers on
duty.
2.2 Current and past fitness tests used within Police recruitment
The multistage fitness test also known more commonly as ‘the bleep test’ was designed as
a screening test, to establish basic markers which underpin aerobic power, Table 1 shows
the normative results according to level achieved in the MSFT, which has been
constructed using Légers (1988) study and American College of Sports Medicine (2013)
normative guidelines. Légers (1988) study predicted the VO2 max of participants
completing the MSFT depending on age and suggested that for the mean age of
participants partaking in the study (38), qualifying at a level 6.3 produces a VO2 max of
38.6. This prediction of VO2 was then compared to the American College of Sports
Medicines (2013) normative data, which categorised the predicted VO2 scores into
achievement norms which range from superior, to very poor (L=level achieved).
The MSFT is highly recognised as being inexpensive and easy to control allowing the test
administrator to test several participants simultaneously (Winter et al, 2007). It is a
maximal exertion test, meaning the participant is tested to exhaustion or they work at a
maximal effort. PSU officers are required to reach level 6.3 in the MSFT in order to qualify
as fit for duty; those who are unable to attain this level cannot continue with their training
and are therefore deemed unfit for training.
At present there are no other tests used in the recruitment or training of an officer, tests
such as the seated 30kg push and pull previously used to measure strength/power have
recently been abolished due to the accusation of it being sexist due to most female upper
body strength coming from a females hips (Mootz & McCarthy, 1999). The multistage
fitness test has been found to be a suitably accurate estimate of aerobic power (Brewer et
al, 1988; Léger & Lambert, 1982 & Ramsbottom et al., 1988).
7
Table 1: Normative data for the Multi-Stage Fitness Tests.
Males aged
Superior
Excellent Good
Fair
Poor
20-29
L12
L11
L10/L9
L8/L7
L6
30-39
L12
L11/L10
L9/L8
L7
L6
40-49
L12/L11
L10/L9
L8
L6
L5
Females aged Superior Excellent Good
Fair
Poor
20-29
L10
L9/L8
L7
L6
L5
30-39
L9
L8
L7/L6
L5
L4
40-49
L9
L8/7
L6/L5
L4/L3
L2
(Léger et al, 1988: p 96; ACSM, 2013: p88-91)
2.3 Reliability/ Validity of fitness tests
The reliability of a fitness test depends on the consistency and stability of the test in
measuring what is intended, there are many confounding factors which may influence the
reliability of a test, some of which include; Individuals amount of sleep prior to testing,
medication currently being consumed, individual effort, clothing, warm up, emotional state,
environmental factors such as weather, surface and temperature/ humidity (Thomas et al,
2011).The MSFT is a maximal test, which means the results depend on the participants
motivation levels at the time, with high participant motivation levels, this test is considered
reliable for measuring VO2 max (James et al, 2005). Officers are required as part of their
job to pass the qualification level, so motivation levels should be relatively high, deeming
the MSFT as a reliable test to use in police support unit training.
Test validity is referred to as the degree in which the test actually measures what it claims
to measure, for example; if a multistage fitness test was used to test flexibility, it would not
be considered a valid test, as the test is designed to measure aerobic capacity. ‘Validity
refers to the soundness of the interpretation of scores from a test, the most important
consideration in measurement’ (Thomas et al, 2011, p193). There are four types of basic
validity: construct, logical, criterion and content. Construct validity measures to what
degree the test measures a theoretical idea, usually utilized by relating behaviour to test
scores. Criterion validity measures the degree to which the results/findings relate to a
recognised set standard. Content validity which measures the degree to which the test
samples what has been covered in the training or course prior (usually recognised in an
8
educational setting) and finally Logical or face validity which the American Research
association consider to be closely linked with content validity, it measures the degree to
which a test involves the routine or performance being measured (Thomas et al, 2011).
The following study aims to measure face/ content validity by testing heart rate recordings
of participants completing the multistage fitness test and comparing these with the heart
rates produced during their training; the results from these tests will determine whether the
current national level for PSU officers completing the multistage fitness test are contently
and logically valid for what is expected from support unit officers in the UK.
2.4 Current occupational fitness tests
In January 2013, the Royal Marines, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force (RAF) introduced
tougher fitness tests for candidates, these fitness tests consisted of; 2.4km (1.5 miles)
treadmill run, followed by a number of press ups and sit ups for candidates wanting to join
the RAF.
Table 2: Minimum standards for cardiovascular endurance assessments in the Royal
Marines, Royal Navy and Royal Air force (RAF).
Age Group
Men
Women
15-24
11 mins 13 secs
13 mins 15 secs
25-29
11 mins 38 secs
13 mins 50 secs
30-34
12 mins 08 secs
14 mins 28 secs
35-39
12 mins 34secs
15 mins 09 secs
These are differentiated from the Royal Marines pre-joining fitness test which require
individuals to complete two 2.4km runs (1.5 miles) each with the treadmill set at a 2%
incline. In order to pass these fitness tests individuals are required to complete the first run
in under 12 minutes 30 seconds, and complete the second immediately afterwards in less
than 10 minutes, this is regardless of individual age or gender. (Royal Air Force, 2014;
Royal Marines, 2014; and Royal Navy, 2014).
The fire service has several different physical tests; all of which are simulated around a
firefighters duties, these include, a ladder climb, which is used to measure confidence
working at height, ‘casualty evacuation’ which requires individuals to drag a 55kg casualty
backwards around a 30 meter course, which is used to test upper and lower body strength,
9
a ‘ladder lift/ lower simulation’, Where candidates are required to raise a bar 75cm off the
ground, to a height of 182cm and then back down to the 75cm support, the maximum load
to be added is 15kg again this test is used to test upper and lower body strength,
‘Enclosed spaces test’, this tests individual confidence, agility and potential claustrophobia,
candidates are required to negotiate themselves through a crawl way within a set time,
performing specific tasks during this test; all of these tests are to be completed wearing full
personal protective equipment (PPE), the remaining two tests are the equipment assembly
test, used to measure candidates dexterity and the equipment carry test, which tests
aerobic fitness- all of these tests will state required times to complete them in to pass, and
they may differ from force to force. It is important to note that the majority of these tests
are completed in full equipment and simulated around the demands faced in the job of a
firefighter (Haslam, 2014).
Prison officers wanting to work in the UK are required to complete several individual tests
used to measure, agility, strength, aerobic endurance, upper body, arm and forearm
strength and speed; these are tested using; the speed agility run test, multistage fitness
test, dynamic and grip strength test and finally the shield test. The requirements for these
tests vary, depending on what position individuals are applying for; regular prison officers
are required to complete the multistage fitness test to a level 5, and this is increased to a
level 7 if individuals are applying for the riot squad (Gov, 2012).
2.5 Existing studies adopting alternate fitness testing
From 1983-1993, the Cooper institute conducted a study which randomly sampled around
1,700 officers from different law enforcements across the United States of America (USA).
The results proved to be deplorable, suggesting that in comparison with the general public,
officers’ average fitness levels were below the criterion in body fat, aerobic fitness,
flexibility, abdominal and upper body strength. In fact, the data revealed that the officers
were less fit in the majority of areas, than at least half of the citizens in the U.S.A despite
the fact that the physical requirements of their duties as a police officer require that they
must be physically more fit than the average person Kathleen et al, (2006).
A test which has been designed in the USA to predict an officers capability to carry out
expected duties regardless of disability, gender or age was designed by The Cooper
Institute, this institute has worked with developing fitness programmes in policing and the
military since 1976 and states that its mission is to ‘help influence fitness programmes
10
throughout the USA’. The test recommended by The Cooper Institute consisted of the
following; 1.5 mile run, 300 metre run, vertical jump, 1 repetition max bench press and/ or
1 minute push up and 1 minute sit up. Tests which are used in the USA to simulate job
demands have to meet strict regulations. Some may argue that this test discriminates
against females and may be part of the reason the requirements are set at such a low
level in the UK. Generally females are deemed less physically strong and fit than males;
this due to female muscular development lacking compared to development in males,
female hormones have been proven to build more fat and less muscle and subsequently
as a result, females generally have more body fat and less lean muscle mass than males
(Lawrence Wilson, 2010).
Previous research conducted by Anderson et al (2001) focused on a large number of
participants (267) from these participants 19% were female. The study conducted two
questionnaires for officers to complete to the best of their knowledge, the first one
concerning their average duties and the second questionnaire on their most physically
demanding critical incident, both up to 12 months prior. Observational data was collected
from every 1 out of 2 officers; in total 121 videos over a ten hour shift were recorded, this
method allowed observations to be based on facts rather than recall of the past 12
months, making the results for every second officer more accurate. The study lacked
reliability as questionnaires used were for the collection of data up to 12 months prior
meaning that their recall of events could have been inaccurate, with this, If participants
were fully aware of the aims of the study prior to the completion of the questionnaire, they
could have answered in an untruthful manner to formulate a specific result, as none of the
officers were analysed in person prior to the study. The study focused on a large number
of participants which allowed for a higher dropout rate and more data to analyse over the
time period of the study.
Strating et al, (2010) conducted a study aiming to take a first step at standardizing the
administration of a job-related test to assess a person’s ability to complete specific
physical demands required within police work in the Netherlands, the principle research
questions aimed to achieve an outcome of whether test scores are related to gender, age
and function, and also whether the scores achieved, related to BMI (body mass index) and
the number of hours spent under physical exercise. The study used 6999 police officers
from 26 Dutch police forces, predominantly male officers (80%), the PCT (a test which
measures the physical competencies for performing front line core police tasks) simulated
a scenario where a police officer encounters a person violating the law, leading onto a foot
11
chase simulated by running 226.5 metres (m), whilst climbing an obstacle 1m 10
centimetres (cm) tall and jumping over low obstacles followed by physically overpowering
the offender simulated by pushing a 200 kilogram (kg) cart three times over a distance of
6m followed by pulling the cart back 6m, and finally evacuation: carry to safety, simulated
by the officer lifting and carrying a 5kg ball 18 times for 3m at a time and dragging a 48kg
dummy casualty for 5m. Although this task aimed to simulate a scenario faced within core
police work, some could argue that the results of this task would differ in a real life
scenario due to an adrenaline rush and other important factors relating to a chase and
control of real life suspects. The participants results were categorised into three tables
displaying their results, Table 2 showed PCT score by gender, Table 3 presented mean
test score by age and function, women and men (<40, between 40 and 55 and >55) and
finally Table 4 which recorded the mean test score of women and men, core police tasks
and remaining function groups presented in quartiles and related to BMI and weekly hours
of sport/exercise (BMI was calculated with anything more than 30 considered to be
seriously overweight). This is another disadvantage to this study as BMI does not account
for muscle mass within participants (Naheed Ali, 2012), meaning that some officers could
falsely be categorised as overweight. The officers completing the study were asked how
many hours of sport or exercise they completed within a week and these were entered into
the table with their BMI scores, similar to Anderson et al, (2001), these results rely on
honesty and accurate recall, and officers could be dishonest when providing this
information to formulate different results. The results of the Strating et al, (2010) study
suggested women performed the physical competence test significantly more slowly than
men, and that the mean test score related to age, and a higher BMI was associated with
less hours of sport/ exercise per week and slower test performance, in both men and
women.
2.6 The 15 point Borg RPE scale
The Borg 15 point Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) is a scale used to measure physical
activity intensity (see table 3). Perceived exertion is used to highlight how hard individuals
feel/ believe they are working, based on the physical signs experienced during physical
activity; these include sensations such as increased heart rate, perspiration, and
breathing, defining a measure of perceived exertion as ‘the degree of heaviness and strain
experienced in physical work as estimated according to specific rating method’ (Borg
1998; p9). Borg (1998) highlights that a individuals perception of exertion ratings could
12
provide equally good estimates of their heart rate intensity during training, reporting a high
correlation between a persons perceived exertion rating (x10) and a individuals actual
heart rate, For example, if a person perceives themselves to be working at level 14 on the
15 point scale (see Table 3) then the persons heart rate should roughly be around 140
beats per minute, (14x10). Borg reported extremely high correlations between RPE and
Heart rate, by using Heart rate as a parallel test, it reported reliability coefficients above
.90 (Borg, 1998).
In regards to test validity, participants are relied heavily upon to provide honest reports of
exertion, therefore it is fundamental for individuals partaking in the study to be provided
clear and concise instructions on utilizing the scale appropriately and accurately, this test
relies solely on judgement and this is taken for granted. Borg (1998) reported that most
experiments utilizing the Borg scale within a well-controlled setting obtain high constants of
validity.
2.7 Justification of Present Study
Biddle and Shepherd Sill (1992) highlight that validating cut offs for physical ability tests
within the police force are complicated; Landy (1992) agreed with this statement,
suggesting that if cut off scores are too relaxed, this could endanger public safety,
alongside this; officers who are physically fit and able for their duties may reduce their
current training regime to ‘scrape a pass’ with the new requirements. However, If the cut
off is too strict, this may unjustifiably penalize qualified individuals who previously have
proved they are fully capable of their duties as well as reduce the confidence society holds
of having experienced officers in these roles (Collingwood et al, 2004). Quigley (2008)
explains that physical fitness has a direct impact on how people perform within their jobs,
highlighting the importance for officers to remain physically fit. He also stated that poor
fitness results in officers being more prone to injury whilst on duty, unfit officers are
threatened with a loss of respect from the community and this sometimes is purely based
on their appearance. He moves on to say highlight that the public would have more
confidence that an officer is capable of their job if they appear physically fit, than that of an
officer who appears unfit or overweight. Moore (2006) agrees with this statement,
suggesting that officers who are physically fit hold more confidence in their own ability to
handle a job which also helps them to relax which in turn will relieve unnecessary stress in
an already highly stressful environment.
13
This study will focus on a sample of officers completing the training non-specific to neither
gender nor age, this is because the sample being used will be of officers completing the
test in order to re-qualify and the fitness test and level expectation is not specific to age or
gender. Hoover (1992) established that police organizations had an increased trend
establishing ‘job simulation tests’ by including tasks and exercises carried out by police
officers in their duties; an example of a job related fitness test was used in the study
conducted by Strating et al (2010). Hoover deemed these tests unreliable, due to the lack
of benchmarked standards to compare the results with. Brewer et al, (2004) posed a
similar view, highlighting that the benchmarks are difficult to authenticate, and although
they may appear job related, they failed to establish the reasons behind the officer’s
performance.
14
Chapter Three
Methods
15
3.0 Methods
3.1 Ethics
Ethical approval was sought and approved from Cardiff Metropolitan University in June
2013.
3.2 Recruitment/ Subjects
Permission to undertake the study was authorised by both Cardiff School of Sport and a
police training officer (PTO) working for Avon and Somerset police. On the date of the job
simulated training (JST) officers were informed in the briefing at the start of the day that
they may be selected at random to partake in the study; they were provided with the
opportunity to opt out at this stage and names were removed from the list of willing
participants accordingly. This allowed the selection process to run. The study used 15
officers who were randomly sampled on the day of the study, as this is a realistic sample
of the officers completing the course. The participants who were selected for the study
consisted of 12 male and 3 female police support unit officers, recruited by the UK Avon
and Somerset police force, the age range for these officers was 27-51. Participants were
selected randomly using systematic sampling from a list of officers taking part in their
Police Support Unit (PSU) training on the 7th and 8th of November 2013, officers were
selected by choosing 1 participant every 5 officers from the list provided. According to
Marshall (1996), studying a random sample allows the best opportunity to generalize the
results to the population. Random selections of officers were selected in order to achieve a
non-biased result from officers working for Avon and Somerset during the period of the
study. If the participants were hand selected using a purposive method- this could falsely
determine the result of the study as sometimes it does not take into account the overall
population of participants, Macnee & McCabe (2008: p130) agree with this, highlighting
that using this method “is likely to include specific characteristics which in turn limit the
capability to generalise the population”. The age of the officers were not taken into
consideration when selecting participants, again the selected participants were those who
were working for Avon and Somerset police and completing their training at the time of the
study. Overall the study used 15 participants due to equipment availability and willingness
of subjects. Participants were initially approached via contact with a PTO via post, (See
appendix A) which briefly explains the outline of the study, alongside a participant
information sheet (see appendix B) to outline the aims of the study alongside any other
useful information in which participants may wish to know, and finally consent forms (see
16
appendix C) which were handed out to all officers on the date of the study. Participants
were briefed on the use of heart rate monitors before they were requested to provide or
decline consent. It was important to highlight to the participants that they are participating
towards this study freely and can withdraw at any time; O’Donoghue (2010) specifies that
this is important in any research study so that individuals do not feel pressured.
3.3 Procedures
The data collection was held in Bridgewater over a two day training camp on the 7th and 8th
of November 2013. In accordance with Strating et al (2010); the current study aimed to
produce mean scores in the form of heart rate recordings from a random sample of officers
completing a two day Police Support Unit training course. Heart rate data were recorded
during the two day JST and following the completion of the MSFT, two separate heart rate
monitors were utilized during the collection of the data, these were the Suunto memory
belt and the Polar RS400 wrist watch and chest belt; which were decided upon due to the
capability of the monitors recording internally for long periods of time. The study used
heart rate monitors to monitor and record heart rate output during the multistage fitness
test to the required level of a 6.3 and also during the Police support unit training. The Borg
RPE scale was used to determine perceived exertion of participants following the MSFT
and JST. All officers were assisted in correctly fitting the monitors to ensure they were in
full working order prior to the data being recorded; officers wearing the polar belts were
linked up with a separate watch which allowed them to check the equipment was working
throughout the day.
The results of these recordings were compared with the Borg Rate of Perceived Exertion
(RPE) scale (Table 3), (Borg, 2008: p8) describes perceived exertion as ‘the feeling of how
heavy and strenuous a physical task is’, the scale ranges from 6-20, and according to Paz
& West (2008) it aims to measure perception of exertion during physical training by
providing a scale of 6-20, where the participant is asked to score themselves on how
strenuous they felt they worked; the numbers of the scale range from 6 to 20. With the
lower rating of ‘6’ indicating minimal amount of effort, and ‘20’ symbolizes most effort. The
Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion scale was used in addition to the heart rate recordings
as this allowed the results to be compared with a perception scale and converted into %
max heart rate (see Table 2) which determined how hard officers personally felt they
worked (BPM) with accurate heart rate records. Each officer who took part in the study
was briefed accordingly prior to any of the research being conducted. Recording actual
17
heart rate during the training and testing allowed for more reliable results in comparison to
the study conducted by Anderson et al (2001) where data collection was based on recall of
events. The training was over a two day period and could not be interrupted due to the
nature of the course; this provided enough evidence for the requirement of large memory
internal recording monitors, thus the decision to use the Suunto and Polar memory belts.
Table 3: The Borg rate of perceived (RPE) scale with % maximum heart rate.
RPE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
% MHR
20
30
40
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
>100
(Allen & Gapni, 2013; p35-36)
The first day of training began with the multi stage bleep test, this test was designed by
Léger and Lambert (1982), during the test officers were required to run between two lines
which were marked on the floor 20 metres apart. The multistage fitness test was played
through a CD player which bleeped to indicate when participants should be hitting the line
and turning 180 degrees to run back towards the other line marked on the floor, as the test
continues the bleeps become closer together so that individuals need to increase their
speed to hit the bleeps in time, any participant falling short of the bleeps would receive a
warning and if they continue to miss the bleeps then would be asked to stop. The test
begins at a speed of 8.5km/h increasing by 0.5 km/h with each level that follows. The
progression through the levels is indicated by three simultaneous bleeps. A table to show
the distance, speed and time of the different levels surrounding the multistage fitness test
is displayed, please see (appendix E). Officers are required to run until level 6 with an
additional 3 shuttles which in total accounts for 1080 meters, if officers are hitting the
18
bleeps in correct time, they will be required to continuously run for 6 minutes and 40
seconds in total.
Officers were then split into groups, these were QP1, QP2 and QP3, the groups were split
up to allow small enough groups for the training to commence; this involved two specific
street tactic courses, and finally a course on controlling a suspect, each group separately
completed each training course, (please see Appendix G for a map of the course).
Following the training, each officer linked to a heart rate monitor were asked to provide a
number from the Borg scale of 6-20 to determine how hard they felt they worked during
their training.
On the final day, officers were re-installed with the same monitor as the previous training
day, this was to ensure that the tests were valid and reliable, if heart rate monitors were
not fitted to the same participant on day two as day one, the results would not reflect
accurate heart rates for specific individuals and therefore may determine a bias untrue
result. Officers were briefed on the day’s proceedings by their commanding officer. The
day consisted of a live scenario where they faced other officers acting as yobs; their task
was to control the group as they would in a real life situation, again due to the nature of the
scenario officers could not be interrupted, meaning that the Borg scale had to be used
directly after the scenario task had been completed. The mean minimum, mean average
and mean maximum heart rates recorded over the two day training will be compared with
their heart rate directly following the completion of the multistage fitness test in order to
determine whether the test used accurately reflects the exertion of their job as a PSU.
The study was non-evasive and low budget, making it beneficial for the researcher and
participants.
3.4 t-tests
There are three types of t-tests, these are; the one sample t-test, the independent samples
t-test and finally the paired samples t-test. The one sample t-test is used to compare
sample means against a hypothesized mean in order to make suggestions about the
population mean in comparison to the hypothesized mean. The independent sample t-test
is used to compare two independent samples in terms of numerical dependant variables,
independent samples are taken from different samples of participants which may vary in
size. The independent variable is capable of influencing the other, and the dependent
19
variable is capable of being influenced by the other. The paired sample t-test which will be
utilized within this study is a test to compare the means of two samples which are taken
from the same group of participants (O'Donoghue, 2012). For example; this study aims to
compare the heart rates of the same group of officers during the multistage fitness test,
and the live training. O’Donoghue, (2012) suggested that the similarity of variances is
tested from these variables using Levene’s test, which states that if a p value is 0.05 or
greater then there are no significant differences between the variables, and if p is less
than 0.05 then the variable is considered to be significantly different. The study conducted
by Strating et al, (2010) used a similar method, testing the significant difference between
means of the timed results of participants completing the physical competence test, The
relationships between the mean test scores per gender, age and function group were
analysed to show any relationship between the categories; demonstrating a significant
difference between the mean test scores of males and females who were categorised into
‘core police tasks’ and ‘remaining function groups’. Another study which adopted a similar
approach to testing statistic was conducted by Arvey & Landon, et al (1992), which
compared mean variables in order to generate assumptions on the development of
physical abilities testing in the police, it found that eight physical ability tests were
significantly related to two important constructs underlying job performance by using a
similar test to measure significance in relation to variables.
3.5 Data Management Analysis
The mean heart rate results were presented on a table similar to the tables used in the
study conducted by Strating et al (2010). The data recorded was inputted into Microsoft
Excel in order to calculate and visually illustrate the mean minimum, mean average and
mean maximum for each individual over the two day training period; the results were used
and compared to the heart rates recorded for individuals following the completion of the
multistage fitness test. Excel was used to formulate data into a graph form, in order to
accurately analyse the results, the graphs created display the mean minimum, mean
maximum and average mean heart rates for all participants over the two day training, and
these are plotted alongside the mean heart rate and standard deviation of the multistage
fitness tests. The results also demonstrate the mean heart rates for each individual
separately in a graph, and these are contrasted with the average multistage fitness test
score and standard deviation in the tests. The mean results were transferred from Excel
20
into SPSS which is a statistical analysis package, allowing the researcher to perform
complex statistical analysis on data quickly and effectively (Hinton & Brownlow, 2004).
From the SPSS software, data was input to form a paired sample t-test which was utilized
to compare the mean heart rates of participants recorded from the multistage fitness test,
with the mean heart rates recorded from the same participants completing the simulated
training scenario. The independent variable is the type of activity participants are
completing (multistage fitness test to a level 6.3 and JST) and the dependant variable is
the numerical variable in the form of participant heart rates whose mean is being
compared between the two independent variables of training and the multistage fitness
test, results were deemed significantly different if p <.000 and highlighted no significant
difference if p >.005.
The Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) was collected from individuals following completion
of the multistage fitness test (MSFT) to the level of 6.3, RPE was also collected following
the last day of the job simulated training (JST). This data was collected in order to analyse
officers perceptions against the factual heart rate recordings during the testing and
training, it was compared with a table created by Allen & Gapni (2013), which displays the
15 point RPE scale (see Table 3), highlighting what percentage of maximum heart rate
(MHR) individuals should be working at, at the RPE level they provided, (for example: if
subject A perceived themselves to be working at an RPE level 8 during the MSFT, they
should be working at 40% of their MHR) Max heart rate was calculated using the formula:
220-Age (Boone, 2014). These results were compared and converted into bar charts to
highlight the difference between the RPE, fitness testing and training. The data was
converted into SPSS where a further paired sample t-test was conducted to analyse
significance between RPE and actual heart rates.
3.6 Reliability
Validity and reliability was paramount throughout the collection of data; to ensure results
were true to each individual participant, each heart rate monitor was numbered and
recorded next to the participants name prior to the testing; this was to ensure that the
participant received the same monitor on day two as day one, in order to accurately reflect
any differences in heart rate over the two day training, the participants initials were
recorded next to the monitor number.
21
Chapter 4
Results
22
4.0 Results
Average HR Bleep
Mean maximum
Standard deviation
Mean
Mean minimum
Figure 1: Mean minimum, mean average and mean maximum heart rate (± SD) for the
multistage fitness test and two day training.
Paired sample t tests were conducted on the above data (see appendix D), the first two t
tests used to compare the mean minimum and mean average heart rate from the 15
subjects tested on the day with the mean heart rate from the multistage fitness test (bleep
test), reported significant difference (p <0.05).
23
A paied sample t-test was conducted on the mean maximum heart rate during the JST and
reported no significant difference (p >0.05) with the heart rates following the MSFT to level
6.3. In Figure 2 and Figure 3 mean differences are illustrated with a line for the average
heart rate (± SD) being significantly higher than any of the individual bars which represent
the mean minimum and mean average heart rates for the individuals who participated in
the study.
Average HR Bleep
Standard deviation
Figure 2: Individual mean minimum heart rates over the two day training and the mean (±
SD) bleep test scores.
24
Average HR Bleep
Standard deviation
Figure 3: Individual mean heart rates over the two day training and the mean (± SD) bleep
test scores
Figure 3 represents the mean heart rate from the fifteen individuals who participated within
the study, again the bars show significant difference from the average including standard
deviation of the multistage fitness test (bleep test), this illustrates that there is a difference
between the results.
25
Average HR Bleep
Standard deviation
Figure 4: Individual mean maximum heart rates over the two day training and the mean
bleep test scores (± SD).
Figure 4 shows the mean maximum heart rate taken from the participants during the two
day JST, this graph shows the bar to be significantly higher than the heart rates displayed
in the previous two graphs (Figure 2; Figure 3), it also illustrates similarities with the
statement made from the t-test that there is no significant difference between these two
results.
26
Figure 5: Individual mean maximum heart rates over the two day training compared with
rate of perceived exertion (BPM).
Figure 6: Individual mean average heart rates over the two day training compared with
Rate of perceived exertion (BPM).
27
Figure 7: Individual mean heart rates following the multistage fitness test to level 6.3
compared with individual Rate of perceived exertion (BPM).
Figure 5 and 6 both display individual mean maximum and mean average heart rate in
comparison to the Borg RPE scale, they both highlight individual perception of effort to be
much lower than what their true effort recorded.
Figure 7 shows individual heart rates following the completion of the MSFT to the required
level of 6.3 in comparison to the Borg RPE scale. Following the data analysis, a further
paired sample t-test was used (see Appendix E) to highlight significance between the RPE
and actual heart rates during training and the MSFT, all of which reported a significant
difference between the results (p <0.05).
28
Chapter 5
Discussion
29
5.0 Discussion
This chapter highlights key findings from the heart rate data recorded in the simulated
operational duty and testing of fifteen police officers randomly sampled from Avon and
Somerset police force, officers were completing their Police Support Unit testing and
training on the 7th and 8th of November 2013. The main purpose of this study was to
investigate the current level requirements for police support unit officers, with an aim to
determine whether the current qualifying level of 6.3 in the multistage fitness test was a
valid way of testing aerobic power typically faced in the daily duties of Police Support unit
officers.
5.1.1 Multistage Fitness test mean heart rate compared with simulation of job
demands
The results reported that individual officers completing the multistage fitness test recorded
an average heart rate of 168 ± 12 beats per minute. Paired sample t-tests were conducted
on the results, reporting a significant difference (p <0.05) between the mean minimum and
mean average heart rates recorded over the two day JST the mean minimum reported an
average heart rate of 62 ± 8 beats per minute and the mean heart rate recorded an
average of 102 ± 13 beats per minute. The overall mean heart rate recorded from the two
day training (102 bpm) suggests that considering the average heart rate officers reported
during their training, that the multistage fitness test qualification level is set slightly too high
for an acceptable cut off for PSU officers average duty demands, as the mean heart rate
following the MSFT was much higher, averaging 168 bpm. However, the mean heart rate
over the course of the multistage fitness test was not considered, the heart rate was
recorded immediately after the completion of the MSFT to the required level of 6.3, which
reported to be participants maximum heart rate during the test. Individuals mean maximum
heart rate was analysed from the two day simulated job specific training (JST), this data
was again used to formulate a sample paired t test in order to highlight any significance
between the mean MSFT heart rate and the mean maximum heart rate from the JST, this
reported no significant difference between the results (p >0.05) this highlights that the
aerobic power/endurance intensities faced within the multistage fitness test almost
replicates the aerobic intensities required for overall simulated PSU duties.
The average age of the individuals taking part in the study was 39, according to the table
of normative results devised by Wood (2011) and Mackenzie (1999) (see Table 1) this
suggests that achieving a level 6.3 in the multistage fitness test represents an ‘average’
30
achievement level for female officers but a ‘poor’ achievement for male officers
surrounding the average age, this highlights that the current qualification level used to
determine officers fitness for duty is dramatically reduced for male officers to account for
the ‘average’ achievement level set for female officers. In such a recognisably active role
(Anderson et al, 2001), standardizing valid cut offs for male officers in the region of poor
would reduce public confidence within the capabilities of existing police officers which
according to Anderson et al, (2001) risks injury to officers health, produces a rapid
employee turnover and also endangers public safety. Drawing conclusions from this
information such as; if male officers fitness requirements are set as a poor qualification
standard, criminals may have more confidence in committing the crimes if they are faced
by officers who are categorically unfit and rated in the category of ‘poor’ for their fitness,
which in turn may allow criminals an easy get away and potentially risking a higher crime
rate due to criminals escaping such situations easily.
The mean maximum heart rates reported no significant difference from the heart rates
reported following the MSFT, when comparing this to the table of normative results (table
1), this suggests that the aerobic endurance levels faced by officers during the simulated
job specific training was also at an ‘average’ level for female but a ‘poor’ level for male
participants, this may suggest that if these same officers are faced with a high intensity
situation, such as a foot chase, officers would be experiencing aerobic and potentially
anaerobic endurance to a much higher intensity than they face in their regular duties, and
with some participants heart rates reporting up to 210 beats per minute (BPM) during
training and 186 bpm following the level 6.3 on the bleep, this could become a real
problem, not only for officers health but also the public safety. Officers would be more
likely to become injured or be out run by criminals in a chase situation, the shadow home
secretary Oliver Letwin seemed to agree with this notion, after fitness test qualification
levels were changed due to a report of discrimination against females he reported in an
interview; ‘are we to imagine that criminals are going to oblige by becoming less fit as
well?’ (Taylor, 2003). This contributes to recent statements made on police officers lack of
fitness (BBC News, 2014., Gill, A. 2013., BBC News, 2012 and Shaw, 2012).
5.1.2 Rate of perceived exertion during multistage fitness test and simulation of job
demands
On average, the participants reported their rate of perceived exertion significantly lower
than their heart rate output throughout their JST and following the MSFT. The individual
31
RPE scores (6-20) were converted into heart rates using the table designed by Allen &
Gapni, (2013) (See Table 3). A paired sample t-test was conducted on the heart rates
converted using table 3 and the mean average and mean maximum output reported from
the monitors, both reporting a significant difference (p<.005).
All participants were required to score their perceived exertion from the Borg RPE scale at
the same time following the MSFT and training activities, this allowed no time for
discussion which may have formulated results, so responses were true to their best
knowledge, however, at the start of the training, individuals were briefed by their
commanding officer on the events of the testing and training prior to the researcher
providing any information on the study or days proceedings, this could have had a
detrimental effect on the memory of the individuals reporting the scores back to the
researcher following the day’s activities. The representation of the different levels of the
Borg 15 point RPE scale was highlighted to all participants prior to the MSFT at the
beginning of day one, for example, providing a level of 6 reports very, very little effort, this
could have been misinterpreted from its meaning of little or no work by individuals who felt
that they did not work hard during the MSFT, providing extreme examples to highlight their
lack of effort during the test.
Figure 6 shows the mean heart rates recorded from participants during the simulated job
specific training, compared with their RPE heart rates, although the t test reported
significant difference between the scores, the graph produced from these results highlights
that even though the RPE scores all report lower than the actual heart rates, they are
much more correlated than the results of the RPE following the MSFT. Participants also
reported the RPE during the job simulated training, this was much higher than what they
reported following the MSFT, even though the heart rate results reported no significant
difference between the MSFT and mean maximum training. Suggesting that even though
participants worked at a similar intensity during the bleep test to the mean maximum
intensity throughout the training days, that they felt as though they didn’t work as hard
during the MSFT, this may be due to a number of reasons, to which could include; during
the training officers were required to wear full personal protective equipment (PPE) which
consisted of a helmet, body armour, boots, overalls, batons, shields and anything else they
were required to carry to protect themselves. This was only a requirement during the two
day job simulated training, whereas during the MSFT, officers had no uniform
requirements, allowing individuals more choice to wear normal training clothes and a
choice of footwear, some of the officers wore shorts and a t-shirt, which meant that they
32
had much less to carry during the MSFT than in the training, the police body armour
weighed 6-7kg meaning that this may have acted as a slight resistance to officers during
their training. According to Kokkinos (2010) carrying less weight reduces the intensity of an
activity of the same physical demand.
Secondly the environment differentiated during the training, the MSFT was conducted
indoors, on a flat concrete surface, officers were required to run between two lines, one 20
meters apart from the other, pivoting 180 degrees at the sound of the bleep and returning
to the opposing line, this may have felt a short distance to officers as they were completing
shuttles rather than travelling over distance. The job simulated training was held out
outside, on rough terrain in some areas; this included uneven turfed fields and rocky
uneven banks, the distance of the area officers covered during training was around 4 miles
and officers were required to change speed and direction regularly on uneven surfaces. A
map of the training course is displayed in Appendix G. Finally officers may have
experienced a certain level of adrenaline during the live scenario based training, the
training simulated live scenarios where fictitious ‘yobs’ were hurling objects such as bricks
and shooting rubber bullets at the officers, this understandably may have increased
individuals adrenaline which according to Boone (2013) increases heart rate output.
5.1.3 Comparison of RPE results and actual heart rate recorded from the MSFT
Although very little information was provided to participants regarding the study aims prior
to the data collection and collection of RPE, a significant amount of officers highlighted
their strong opposing views towards the MSFT prior to the study, this included the specific
individuals who recorded extremely high heart rates during the testing (in excess of 170
bpm). The general opinion gathered was that it did not replicate any part of their training,
and the physical exertion experienced in the MSFT did not compare with the most
physically exerted experience they have faced on duty as a police officer. These strong
opinions may have affected individual’s honesty with providing accurate scores when
rating their exertion levels, Palys & Lowman (2000;2002;2006) highlight honesty to be
essential for valid and reliable research to be conducted, relating back to the study
conducted by Anderson et al, (2001) which used questionnaires focusing on recall of past
events and honesty of participants, if participants provide bias answers to formulate
specific results this can deem any research as unreliable.
33
5.2 Validity
When comparing the current standard set for police officers to attain during their police
support unit training and the table of normative results by Wood (2011) & Mackenzie,
(1999) (Table 1), this information deems the current qualification level of 6.3 as
discriminating towards female officers; the table suggests that as a female officer your
aerobic fitness must be at an ‘average’ level to achieve the minimum qualification level
stated to deem officers fit for duty and regain entry/ train as a PSU officer, yet as a male
officer attaining a level 6.3 is categorised as a ‘poor’ achievement, suggesting that male
officers fitness levels are required to be at a poor standard to reach the minimum
qualification level, as averse to females achieving an average standard. Anderson et al,
(2001) has highlighted police work to be much more demanding than other occupations of
a more ‘sedentary’ nature, agreeing with the concept which is being suggested by this
study; that current qualification levels are set too low for male officers training as a PSU
officer in the United Kingdom.
It is vital that fitness requirements for all officers on duty (including PSU officers) must be
set at an acceptable level to ensure public and personal safety, officers who are unfit are
more likely to become injured, outrun by criminals and inevitably this ends up with officers
not being able to complete the demands faced in their jobs. To look at this in another
perspective, referring to alternative jobs; if employees are unable to carry out job
demands, this can lead to termination of employment.
5.3 Future recommendations
As a future recommendation, this study has highlighted the current level to be prejudice
against female officers, there is no doubt that males dominate females in terms of physical
fitness, and this is backed up by several studies and books (Vogal et al, 1986; Rooney,
2013). The job demands of police support unit officers, heavily involves controlling
suspects and crowds, and this alone should be enough to propose a raise in the current
standards set for officers in the UK. Female officers are required to qualify at an average
achievement level on the MSFT, and this should be no different for a male officer, the
study proposes that male officers should be required to reach the same ‘average’
qualifying category, which when referring back to the table displayed in table 1, would
raise the required minimum qualification level to a 6.10 in the MSFT for male officers. A
study which reported a similar argument was the study conducted by Arvey et al, (1992)
34
which suggested separate regression lines for males and females if tests such as the grip
strength test were going to be adopted into the selection process
It is clearly represented in the table of average heart rates following the MSFT to a level
6.3 and training (Figure 1), that the current fitness of the majority of participants was
considerably poor, suggesting that regular/weekly aerobic and anaerobic training should
be made compulsory for all officers, in order to boost current fitness levels and in turn
allow officers to hit the required standards during fitness testing without heart rates
reaching a dangerously high levels.
Brooks et al, (2000) reported that current fitness tests are subject to scrutiny when they
discriminate against a group, stating that the majority of physical fitness tests will have a
contrasting impact on women due to inherent physical differences between the sexes.
Brooks et al, (2000) also states that current fitness levels may be set so low that few will
fail, this is so that they don’t discriminate against females. Sharf, (1999) reported Lannings
standard of 1.5 mile run in 12 minutes had a disparate impact on women, but also stated
that current fitness test requirements for job specific fitness testing is a minimal
requirement necessary for the successful performance of the specific job in question.
However, Brooks et al, (2000) also suggested that using different requirement or
qualification scores dependant on race, colour, religion, sex, or national origin would be
considered unlawful employment practice, even though science has proved on average
that males are naturally physically stronger and fitter than females. Brooks et al, (2000)
also highlights that any administrator who uses different selection standards for female
applicants, would have to prove that business necessity justifies this decision. This is due
to the impact on male officers, as those individuals who couldn’t reach the standards set
for the male population may argue that they could reach the standards for females and
they are carrying out the same job. The suggestion of different qualification standards
based on sex can be supported by the table of normative data surrounding the MSFT
(Table 1) which highlights different qualification levels for males and females being
categorised into the average achievement ratings (e.g. poor, below average, average etc.).
5.4 Limitations
The main recognised limitation of this study was the size of the sample, in order to
enhance this research to further validate results, it is recommended that the participation
numbers are increased, and although the sample was a random sample from officers
surrounding Avon and Somerset police, the number of female participants was significantly
35
lower than the male participants (3:12). Officers were required to wear two types of heart
rate monitors due to lack of availability, this meant some officers were required to wear a
belt around the chest, and some had to wear a belt and a wrist watch, the officers who
wore the wrist watch found that sometimes it got in the way of their personal protective
equipment and was a hindrance to them on the day of the training, in future research it is
recommended that any heart rate monitors used are all from the same manufacturer and
are specifically worn around the chest area, with no other wrist attachment.
The training/ testing day proceedings were slowed during the heart rate monitor
distribution, this was due to lack of knowledge on the officers half, on the devises being
attached to their person, Full instruction was provided prior to the heart rate monitors being
attached, but some officers were still unsure of the correct method to link up the heart
rates, in future research, it may be useful for the researcher to meet with participants prior
to the study being conducted to explain and demonstrate any of the equipment being
utilized during the research study.
.
36
Chapter 6
Conclusion
37
6.0 Conclusion
6.1 Findings of the study
In light of this research, the qualifying level of 6.3 in the MSFT appears overall to be a valid
indicator of the aerobic fitness faced in police duties, however, results highlighted that on
average during the simulated occupational activities, the mean maximum heart rate of the
participant’s heart rate was slightly higher than the reports from the MSFT. The results
disclosed that officers perceptions of exertion was much higher during the simulated
occupational training than what was reported following the MSFT even though heart rates
recorded no significant different between the mean maximum and MSFT heart rates, this
may have been due to the change in surfaces underfoot, and officers were required to
complete all training in full personal protective equipment. The study also reported that in
comparison to the table of normative results (table 1) the officers who completed the
required level of 6.3 categorised as a poor achievement for male officers and an average
achievement for female officers, some of these heart rates reported extremely high
readings in comparisons with their age, although overall the average age of participants
was 39 and the mean heart rate reported from the MSFT was 168 beats per minute.
Overall, participant’s maximum heart rate was calculated using (220-age) which meant
that on average, participant’s maximum heart rate was 181 beats per minute, percentage
effort was calculated using mean MHR x percentage (90%) (181 x 0.90) which highlighted
that on average the majority of officers were working at an intensity above 90% MHR
during the MSFT, which has been identified as a poor achievement for males and average
for females, this highlights the need for current fitness levels to improve, for the safe
completion of duties, preventing injury, and preventing a decrease in public safety.
The study has highlighted the qualification level for PSU officers as discriminatory towards
female officers and suggests that further research is conducted to assess standardising a
new alternative level for male PSU officers due to the achievement of the level being
categorised as poor for males and average for females, the results of the study have also
highlighted that regular fitness training may need to be adopted in the UK police force to
decrease the overall poor fitness levels reported by the study, again future research may
need to be conducted on a larger sample of officers to deem this statement as reliable.
38
References
39
References
Allen, W.J and Gapni, G. (2013). Feeling fit: Exercise and dietary tips for healthy living.
USA: Xlibris Corporation. p35-36.
American College of Sports Medicine (2013). ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and
Prescription. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. p88-91.
American Physical Education Association. (2010). American Association for Health,
Physical Education, and Recreation,. The Journal of Health and Physical Education.
13 (1), p418-60.
Anderson, S.G., Plecas, D., & Seggar, T. (2001). Police officer physical ability testing: Revalidating a selection criterion. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &
Management. 24 (1), p8-31.
Archer, D. & Coulson, M. (2009). Practical Fitness Testing. London: A&C Black Publishers
ltd. p17-26.
Arvey, R.D., Landon, T.E., Nutting, S.M., and Maxwell, S.E. (1992). Development of
physical ability tests for police officers: A construct validation approach.. Journal of
Applied Psychology. 77 (6), p996-1009.
Arvey, R.D., Nutting, S.M., Landon, T.E. (1992). Validation Strategies for Physical Ability
Testing in Police and Fire Settings. Public Personnel Management. 21 (3), p301-11.
BBC News. (2012). Fit officers 'more capable'. Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk17380848. Last accessed 8th March 2014.
BBC News. (2014). Hundreds fail new compulsory police fitness test. Available:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26157384. Last accessed 8th November 2013.
40
Biddle, D. and Shepherd, N.S. (1992). Protective Service Physical Ability Tests:
Establishing Pass/Fail, Ranking, and Banding Procedures. Public Services. 21 (2),
p217-25.
Boone, T. (2013). Exercise Physiology. Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. p50129.
Borg, G. (1998). Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales . Leeds: Human Kinetics. p9-52.
Borg, G. (1982) Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 14 (5), p. 377-81
Borg, G.A., Noble B.J., Jacobs, I., Ceci, R., and Kaiser, P. (1983). A category-ratio
perceived exertion scale: relationship to blood and muscle lactates and heart
rate. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., 15 (6), p. 523-28
Borg, G. (1970) Perceived Exertion as an indicator of somatic stress. Scandinavian journal
of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2 (2), p. 92-98
Brooks E, M., J.D. (2000). Law Enforcement Physical Fitness Standards. Code of Federal
Regulations Section. 1 (3), p6-11.
Haslam, C. (2014). National Firefighter Physical Tests. Available:
http://www.fireservice.co.uk/recruitment/physical. Last accessed 26th February 2014.
Caspersen, C.J., Powell, K.E., and Christenson, G.M. (1985). Physical activity, exercise,
and physical fitness: definitions and distinctions for health-related research. Public
health reports, 100, p126-131.
Chandler, J, T. and Brown, J.L.E. (2008). Conditioning for strength and human
performance. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. p275-280.
41
Collingwood, T., Hoffman, R., and Smith, J. (2004). Underlying Physical Fitness Factors
for Performing Police Officer Physical Tasks. Police Chief, 71(3), 32-37.
Dagoon, D.J., Lopez, P.L.F., Beldia, D.M., Pangan, J.R. and Cabag, C.R. (1993).
Physical Education, Health and Music. Phillipines: Rex Printing Company. Inc..
p358-400.
Gill, A. (2013). Police fitness tests should be scrapped. Available:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24012858. Last accessed 8th March 2014.
Gov. (2012). About HM Prison Service. Available: http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/hmps.
Last accessed 26th February 2014.
Gray, D., Cook, H., Saffery, G., and Baker, R. (2004). BTEC First: Public Services
(uninformed). Portsmouth: Heinemann. p131.
Hinton, R.P., Brownlow, C., McMurray, M., Cozens, B. (2004). SPSS explained.
Routledge. USA. p4-100.
Hoeger, K.W., and Hoeger, A.S. (2010). Fitness and Wellness. 9th ed. Wadsworth:
Yolanda Cossio. p60-80.
Hoeger K.W., and Hoeger S.A. (2011). Principles and Labs for Wellness and Fitness. 11th
ed. Wadsworth: Yolanda Cossio. p316-330.
Hoffman, R. and Collingwood, T.R. (2005). Fit for Duty. 2nd ed. USA: Human Kinetics. p320.
Hoover, L.T. (1992). Trends in police physical ability selection testing. Public Personnel
Management. 21 (1), p29-39.
Incledon, L. (2005). Strength training for Women. Leeds: Human Kinetics. p27-32.
42
James, N.W., James, R., and Thompson, G. (2005). AS PE for AQA. London: Heinemann
Educational Publishers. p70.
Kathleen, P., Decker, M.P. (2006). Fit, unfit or misfit? How to perform fit for duty
evaluations in law enforcement professionals.. Illinois: Charles C Thomas. p20-46.
Kilding, A.E. (2006). Measuring and predicting maximal aerobic power in international-level
intermittent sport athletes. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 46
(3), p. 366-72.
Kokkinos, P (2010). Physical Activity and Cardiovascular Disease Prevention. Sudbury:
Jones & Bartlett Publishers. p128.
Landy, F.J. (1992). alternatives to chronological age in determining standards suitability for
public safety jobs. Volume I. Technical Report. Pennsylvania State University.
January. P.2-47.
Lawrence Wilson, M.D. (2010). Women and men, and their differences. Available:
http://drlwilson.com/Articles/WOMEN%20AND%20MEN.HTM. Last accessed 26th
February 2014.
Léger, A.L., Mercier, D., Gadoury, C., and Lambert, J. (1988). The multistage 20 metre
shuttle run test for aerobic fitness. Journal of Sports Sciences. 16 (2), p93-101.
Léger, L., and Lambert, J. (1982). A Maximal Multistage 20m Run Test to Predict VO2 max.
European Journal of Applied Physiology, 49, 1-12.
Macnee, C.L & McCabe, S. (2008). Understanding nursing research: reading and using
research in evidence-based practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins. p119-133.
43
Mackenzie, B. (1999). What factors may influence test results?. Available:
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/eval.htm#effect. Last accessed 25th February 2014.
Mackenzie,
B.
(1999)
Multi-Stage
Fitness
Test.
Available:
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/beep.htm Last accessed 8th March 2014.
Maher, P.T. (1984). Police Physical Abilites Tests: Can They Ever Be Valid?. Public
Personnel Management. 13 (2), p173-83
Malina, R.M. & Bouchard, C., and Bar-Or, O. (2004). Growth, Maturation, and Physical
Ability. 2nd ed. Leeds: Human Kinetics. p216-228
Marshall, N.M. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice—an international
journal. 13 (6), p522-25.
Miller, G.P., Strang, J., and Miller, M.P. (2010). Addiction Research Methods. Sussex:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd. p13-26.
Moorman, C.B. and Wemmer, R.C. (1983). Law Enforcement Officers Murdered in
California-1982. Journal of California Law Enforcement. 17 (1), p173-83.
Mootz, R.D., and McCarthy, K.A. (1999). Sports Chiropractic. USA: Aspen Publishers.
p168.
Naheed Ali, M.D (2012). The Obesity Reality: A comprehensive approach to a growing
problem. Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield publishers, inc. p34-37.
O’Donoghue, P. (2010). Research Methods for Sports Performance Analysis, Routledge.
O’Donoghue, P. (2012).
Statistics for sport and exercise studies: An introduction.
Abingdon, Oxford: Routledge. p171-190.
44
Palys, T., and Lowman, J. (2006). Protecting research confidentially: Towards a researchparticipant shield law. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 21 (1), p163-185.
Palys, T., and Lowman, J. (2002). Anticipating law: Research methods, ethics, and the law
of privilege. Sociological Methodology, 32. P1-17.
Palys, T., and Lowman, J. (2000). Ethical and legal strategies for protecting confidential
research information. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 15(1), p39-80.
Paz, C.J., and West, P.M (2008). Acute Care Handbook for Physical Therapists. 3rd ed.
London: Elsevier Health Sciences. p29-47.
Quigley, A. (2008). Fit for duty? The Police Chief, 75(6), p62-64.
Rooney, A. (2013). Your Physical Body. London: Capstone Global Library Limited. p34-36.
Royal Air Force (2014). Fitness. Available: https://www.raf.mod.uk/careers/can-ijoin/fitness/. Last accessed 08th November 2013.
The Royal Marines. (2014). Get fit to join the Royal Marines. Available:
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/Careers/Royal-Marines/Get-fit-to-join-Royal-Marines.
Last accessed 8th November 2013.
The Royal Navy. (2014). Get fit to join. Available:
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/Careers/How-to-Join/Get-fit-to-join. Last accessed 8th
November 2013.
Ramsbottom, R., Brewer, J., and Williams, S.C. (1988). A progressive shuttle run test to
estimate maximal oxygen uptake. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 22(4): p141-144.
Sharf, C.J. (1999). Third Circuit's Lanning v. SEPTA Decision:. Available:
http://www.siop.org/tip/backissues/TipOcto99/26Sharf.aspx. Last accessed 9th March
2014
45
Sharkey, B.A and Gaskill, S.E., (1979). Fitness and Health: your complete guide to aerobic
fitness muscular fitness nutrition weight control. 7th ed. London: Human Kinetics.
p168-175
Shaw, D. (2012). Police could be disciplined if they fail fitness tests. Available:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17382096. Last accessed 8th March 2014.
Sparkes C.A and Smith, B. (2013). Qualitative Research Methods in Sport, Exercise and
Health: From Process to Product. London: Routledge. p17.
Strating, M., Bakker, R.H., Dijkstra, J.G., Lemmink, K., and Groothoff, J.W. (2010). A jobrelated fitness test for the Dutch police. Occupational Medicine. 60 (4), p255-60.
Taylor,
B.
(2003).
Police
fitness
tests
'downgraded'
for
women.
Available:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-181623/Police-fitness-tests-downgradedwomen.html. Last accessed 8th March 2014.
Thomas, R.J., Nelson, K.J., and Silverman, J.S. (2011). Research Methods in Physical
Activity. 6th ed. Leeds: Human Kinetics. p193-213.
Vogel, J.A., Patton, J.F., Mello, R.P., and Daniels, W.L. (1986). An analysis of aerobic
capacity in a large United States population. Journal of Applied Physiology. 60 (1),
p494-500.
Wood,
R.J.
(2011).
Royal
Navy
Fitness
Testing.
http://www.topendsports.com/testing/work/navy/uk-royal.htm.
Last
Available:
accessed
26th
February 2014.
Wood, R.J. (2011). Beep Test Ratings. [online] Topend Sports, The Sport and Science
Resource.
Perth,
Australia.
46
Available
from:
http://www.topendsports.com/testing/bodyfat-skinfolds.htm
Last
accessed
26th
February 2014.
Williams, B. (2002)."Fitness in law enforcement." Pittsfild Township Police Department.
Winter, M.E., Jones, M.A., Davison, R.C.R., Bromley, D.P., and Mercer, H.T. (2007). Sport
and Exercise Physiology Testing. Oxon : Routledge. p231-262.
Young, I.M. (2005). On Female Body Experience: "Throwing like a girl" and other essays.
New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. p156-77.
47
Appendices
A
Appendix A- Initial participant contact letter
Miss Sophie Tucker
3 Stapleton Close
Stapleton
Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Police Headquarters
PO Box 37
Valley Road, Portishead
Bristol
BS20 8QJ
Bristol
BS16 1AX
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to ask you if I can meet with yourself or a suitable member of your staff to
discuss a proposed study into physical fitness and police officers. I am currently studying a BSc Honours
degree in Sport and Physical Education at Cardiff Metropolitan University where I am required to complete
a dissertation and, in recognition with my intention to join the police force, feel this would be a very
productive area of study. The preliminary title is:
‘To what extent does police fitness testing reflect the demands of every day duties carried out by regular
police officers?’
The aim of this study is to try and determine the day to day demands of being a police officer within the
Avon and Somerset area. This will be compared with the fitness tests used within the police in order to gain
entry into the force. To date, I have carried out informal discussions and a pilot of the proposed methods
with non-police individuals to evaluate the method with a review of the current tests to determine the
fitness of any officers. Those willing to take part will be asked to wear a heart rate monitor and a
pedometer over three days to determine the average level of physical activity for these individuals. These
results will be recorded and compared with the fitness testing results. The devices, their attachment and
operation present little or no inconvenience to the wearer in the conducting of their duties and they have
been widely used in many occupational and sport arenas. I would envision between four and six police
officers being required to partake in this study.
I hope that this study sounds of interest to yourself and your region with a view to understanding more
about the physical activity that police officers are doing. My submission date for the work is the 12th of
March 2013. If you have any further questions on this or the pilot study, please do not hesitate to get in
contact with me.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Many thanks,
Sophie Tucker.
Tel: 07428563632
Email: st10001475@outlook.uwic.ac.uk
A-1
Appendix B- Participant information sheet- A
Undergraduate Dissertation Research: Participant information sheet
Title of study: A cross validation study between simulated occupational activity and the bleep test.
You have been invited to take part in a pilot study as part of an undergraduate dissertation. Before you agree to
participate it is important for you to understand why the research is being conducted and what it will involve. Please
take your time to ensure you read the following information carefully. If you have any questions regarding the study
or if there is something you are not clear on, please do not hesitate to contact me and I will do my very best to ensure
I provide you with the information required.
Who will be conducting the research?
Myself:
Sophie Tucker – BSc (Ord) Sport and Physical Education Graduate
What is the main aim of this study?
The aim of this study is to gain an insight into whether current fitness tests used within the recruitment of new police
officers and during training truly reflects the demands of their training and duties, and research into current
perceptions of fitness levels within the police; the results of this test aim to highlight whether the current fitness tests
used need to be developed to adapt more to simulate the demands of an officers job.
Why have I been chosen to participate in this study?
A random sample of officers have been selected to participate in this study to ensure that the results stay as least
biased as possible, this sample is from a selection of officers either completing the PSU training or working within the
police force in the year 2013.
Will the results of this study have any effect on my job?
No. All information recorded will be strictly confidential and no names will be disclosed in relation to the results of the
data collection.
What will I be asked to do if I agree to take part?
15 officers will be sampled at random and using Suunto heart rate monitors, officer’s heart rates will be recorded over
the course of one of the PSU training dates. This will be pre, during and post the bleep test to the required level of 6.3,
and again during the PSU training and the live scenario. It is important to mention that no one is required to complete
this testing against their will and if you wish to drop out at any time you will not be asked to provide any explanation
as to why.
What happens to the data collected?
B-1
Appendix B- Participant information sheet- B
The data collected will be kept completely confidential. Data from the heart monitors will be analysed and compared
with the heart rate readings from the bleep test, training and live scenario in order to build a conclusion of whether
the bleep test is enough to test officers fitness for their job demands.
How will my confidentiality be maintained?
Absolutely, although names are taken for informed consent forms, your score will be referred to as a letter or number
dependant on which HRM you are using.
What happens if I do not wish to take part or if I change my mind half way through?
You can pull out of the study whenever you wish and you are not required to provide any sort of explanation.
Will I be paid for partaking in this research?
Unfortunately, as this study is an undergraduate pilot study, no sort of payment for participation is offered.
What is the duration of the research/ study?
The study will be conducted over a period of seven months from September until March.
Contact details for any further questions or issues that may arise:
Sophie Tucker
Tel: 07428563632
Email: st10001475@outlook.uwic.ac.uk
Thank you for taking your time to read through this information, your participation in this study is greatly
appreciated.
B-2
Appendix C- Police support unit informed consent form
Title of study: A cross validation study between simulated occupational activity and the bleep test.
Name of Researcher: Sophie Tucker
Participant to complete this section:
Please initial each box.
I confirm that I have read and understand the information sheet dated for this evaluation
study. I have had the opportunity to consider the information, ask questions and have had
these answered satisfactorily.
I understand that my participation is voluntary and that it is possible to stop
taking part at any time, without giving a reason.
I also understand that if this happens, our relationships with the
Cardiff Metropolitan University or our legal rights will not be affected
I understand that information from the study may be used for
reporting purposes, but I will not be identified.
I agree to take part in this study on 7th and 8th November 2013.
__________________________________
Name of Participant
________________________________________________
Signature of Participant
___________________
Date
________________________________________________
Name of person taking consent
___________________
Date
________________________________________________
Signature of person taking consent
* When completed, one copy for participant and one copy for researcher’s files.
C-1
Appendix D- statistical t tests
Table 4: Paired sample t-test between mean minimum HR and mean HR following MSFT.
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
Bleep test HR @
6.3
N
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
168.33
15
12.49
3.23
62.03
15
7.79
2.01
Pair 1
Day 1+2 min
mean
Paired Samples Correlations
N
Pair 1
D-1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
& Day 1+2 min mean
Correlatio
n
15
.49
Sig.
.07
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3 Day 1+2 min mean
106.3
11.05
2.85
Paired Samples Test
Paired
Differences
t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Upper
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3 - Day
1+2 min mean
112.42
37.27
14
D-2
.00
100.18
Table 5: Paired sample t-test between mean HR and mean HR following MSFT.
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
N
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Bleep test HR @
6.3
168.33
15
12.49
3.23
Day 1+2 mean
HR
101.95
15
12.93
3.34
Pair 1
Paired Samples Correlations
N
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
& Day 1+2 mean HR
Correlatio
n
15
D-3
.27
Sig.
.33
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Lower
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
- Day 1+2 mean HR
66.39
15.37
3.97
57.88
Paired Samples Test
Paired
Differences
t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
16.73
14
.00
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Upper
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3 Day 1+2 mean HR
74.90
D-4
Table 6: Paired sample t-test between mean HR and mean HR
following MSFT.
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
Pair
1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
Pair 1 & Day 1+2 Mean max
HR
Std. Error
Mean
168.33
15
12.49
3.23
Day 1+2 Mean
max HR
174.67
15
12.74
3.29
Correlatio
n
15
Std.
Deviation
Bleep test HR @
6.3
Paired Samples Correlations
N
N
.18
Sig.
.52
D-5
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Lower
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
Pair 1 - Day 1+2 Mean max
HR
-6.3
16.16
4.17
-15.28
Paired Samples Test
Paired
Differences
T
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Upper
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3 Day 1+2 Mean max HR
2.62
D-6
-1.52
14
.15
Table 7: Paired sample t-test of mean minimum, mean and mean
maximum HR compared with HR following MSFT.
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
Bleep test HR @
Pair 1 6.3
N
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
168.33
16
12.07
3.02
62.03
16
7.53
1.88
168.33
16
12.07
3.02
Day 1+2 mean HR
101.93
16
12.48
3.12
Bleep test HR @
6.3
168.33
16
12.07
3.02
Day 1+2 Mean
max HR
174.67
16
12.31
3.08
Day 1+2 min mean
Bleep test HR @
Pair 2 6.3
Pair 3
D-7
Paired Samples Correlations
N
Correlatio
n
Sig.
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
& Day 1+2 min mean
16
.49
.06
Pair 2
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
& Day 1+2 mean HR
16
.27
.31
16
.18
.51
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
Pair 3 & Day 1+2 Mean max
HR
D-8
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Lower
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
- Day 1+2 min mean
106.3
10.67
2.67
100.61
Pair 2
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
- Day 1+2 mean HR
66.4
14.84
3.71
58.49
Bleep test HR @ 6.3
Pair 3 - Day 1+2 Mean max
HR
-6.34
15.61
3.90
-14.66
D-9
Paired Samples Test
Paired
Differences
t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Upper
Pair 1
Bleep test HR @ 6.3 Day 1+2 min mean
111.99
39.84
15
.00
Pair 2
Bleep test HR @ 6.3 Day 1+2 mean HR
74.31
17.90
15
.00
Pair 3
Bleep test HR @ 6.3 Day 1+2 Mean max HR
1.98
-1.62
15
.13
D-10
Appendix E- Statistical Analysis RPE
Table 8 - Paired sample t- test of perceived exertion (BPM) compared with mean and mean maximum heart rate (BPM) from JST and the
MSFT.
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
HR following bleep
N
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
168.33
15
12.49
3.23
RPE bleep (BPM)
53.07
15
21.07
5.44
HR Training mean
101.93
15
13
3.36
RPE training (BPM)
126.13
15
18.75
4.84
RPE training (BPM)
126.13
15
18.75
4.84
Pair 3 Day 1+2 Mean max
HR Training
174.93
15
12.64
3.26
Pair 1
Pair 2
E-1
Paired Samples Correlations
N
Correlatio
n
Sig.
Pair 1
HR following bleep &
RPE bleep (BPM)
15
.51
.05
Pair 2
HR Training mean &
RPE training (BPM)
15
.46
.09
15
.59
.02
RPE training (BPM) &
Pair 3 Day 1+2 Mean max
HR Training
E-2
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Lower
Pair 1
HR following bleep RPE bleep (BPM)
Pair 2
HR Training mean RPE training (BPM)
RPE training (BPM) Pair 3 Day 1+2 Mean max
HR Training
115.27
18.23
4.71
105.17
-24.2
17.28
4.46
-33.77
-48.8
15.26
3.94
-57.25
E-3
Paired Samples Test
Paired
Differences
t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Upper
Pair 1
HR following bleep RPE bleep (BPM)
125.36
24.49
14
.00
Pair 2
HR Training mean RPE training (BPM)
-14.63
-5.42
14
.00
-40.35
-12.39
14
.00
RPE training (BPM) Pair 3 Day 1+2 Mean max HR
Training
E-4
Appendix F- The multistage fitness test
Table 9: MSFT level, distance covered and speed.
Time
Level
Shuttles
Speed
per
per level
(km/h)
shuttle
(s)
Cumulative
Distance
Time
per level
(min/seconds)
(m)
Cumulative
Distance (m)
1
7
8.0
9.00
1:03
140
140
2
8
9.0
8.00
2:07
160
300
3
8
9.5
7.58
3:08
160
460
4
9
10.0
7.20
4:12
180
640
5
9
10.5
6.86
5:14
180
820
6
10
11.0
6.55
6:20
200
1020
7
10
11.5
6.26
7:22
200
1220
Figure 8: A diagram to show the multistage fitness test.
F-1
Appendix G- Map of distance covered during simulated training
Figure 9: A map of the training course covered by PSU officers during training.
G-1
Appendix H- Ethics Status- A
Principal Investigator:
Sophie Tucker
Supervisor (if student project):
Dr David Wasley/ Dr Karianne Backx
School:
Cardiff School of Sport
Type of researcher:
Undergraduate Student
Programme enrolled on:
Sport and PE
Project Title:
A cross validation study between simulated occupational
activity and the bleep test.
PART ONE – ETHICS REVIEW CHECKLIST
ERC1: Will the study involve NHS patients or staff?
No
If YES, you do not need to complete Part Two of this form. Instead, an application for ethics approval
must be submitted to the appropriate external NHS Research Ethics Committee. Complete
Declaration A overleaf and forward a copy of your NHS application plus Part One of this form to your
School Ethics Committee for information.
ERC2:
Does your research fall entirely within one of the following three categories:
 Paper-based, involving only documents in the public domain
 Laboratory based, not involving human participants or human tissue samples
(eg electronics, chemical analysis)
 Practice-based, not involving human participants (eg exhibitions, curatorial,
reflective analysis, practice audit)
No
If YES, you do not need to complete Part Two of this form. Instead, complete Declaration B
overleaf and send the completed form to your School Ethics Committee for information.
If NO, you must complete Part Two of this form and submit your application (Part One and Part
Two) to your School Ethics Committee for consideration.
H-1
Appendix H- Ethics Status- B
DECLARATION A
I confirm that the information contained in this form is correct
My research involves human participants and ERC1 indicates I must obtain ethics clearance
from the appropriate external health authority ethics committee.
Signature of Principal Investigator:
Date:
13/03/2014
DECLARATION B
I confirm that the information contained in this form is correct
My research falls entirely within the categories described in ERC2 and I do not need to take
further action to obtain ethics clearance.
Signature of Principal Investigator:
Date:
13/03/2014
Brief synopsis of project:
FOR STUDENT PROJECTS ONLY
I confirm that I have read and agreed the information contained in this form
Name of Supervisor: Dr Karianne Backx/ Dr David Wasley
Date: 05/11/2012
Signature of Supervisor:
School Research Ethics Committee use only
Considered and supported
Considered and not supported
Name: Dr Karianne Backx
Date: 05/11/2012
H-2