Stance width and bar load effects on leg muscle

activity during the parallel squat.

McCaw ST1, Melrose DR.
Author information
1
Department of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, Illinois State University,
Normal 61790-5120, USA. smccaw@ilstu.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE:
Altering foot stance is often prescribed as a method of isolating muscles during the parallel
squat. The purpose of this study was to compare activity in six muscles crossing the hip
and/or knee joints when the parallel squat is performed with different stances and bar
loads.

METHODS:
Nine male lifters served as subjects. Within 7 d of determining IRM on the squat with
shoulder width stance, surface EMG data were collected (800 Hz) from the rectus femoris,
vastus medialis, vastus lateralis, adductor longus, gluteus maximus, and biceps femoris
while subjects completed five nonconsecutive reps of the squat using shoulder width,
narrow (75% shoulder width), and wide (140% shoulder width) stances with low and high
loads (60% and 75% 1RM, respectively). Rep time was controlled. A goniometer on the
right knee was used to identify descent and ascent phases. Integrated EMG values were
calculated for each muscle during phases of each rep, and the 5-rep means for each
subject were used in a repeated measures ANOVA (phase x load x stance, alpha = 0.05).

RESULTS:
For rectus femoris, vastus medialis, and vastus lateralis, only the load effect was
significant. Adductor longus exhibited a stance by phase interaction and a load effect.
Gluteus maximus exhibited a load by stance interaction and a phase effect. Biceps femoris
activity was highest during the ascent phase.

CONCLUSION:
The results suggest that stance width does not cause isolation within the quadriceps but
does influence muscle activity on the medial thigh and buttocks.

1: McCaw ST, Melrose DR. Stance width and bar load effects on leg
muscle activity
during the parallel squat. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999 Mar;31(3):428-
36. PubMed
PMID: 10188748.
THE EFFECT OF SQUAT STANCE OF MUSCLE ACTIVATION IN THE
SQUAT

The parallel squat is typically a barbell exercise where the individual begins in a standing position with
the barbell resting on the upper back, and bends the knees to squat down until the thighs are parallel
with the floor (Chandler et al., 2014).

The squat can be performed in a variety of ways, using different stances and/or techniques.
Weightlifters make use of different squat stance widths for a variety of reasons. Beardsley (2013)
states that some people believe that wider stance squats are more effective for powerlifting and allow
them to move a greater weight. Others believe that a narrower stance squat will target the quadriceps
more effectively, while a wider stance squat targets the hip musculature and gluteals. (Swinton et al.,
2012) state that many powerlifters adopt a wide stance and focus on moving the hips posteriorly during
the descent phase of the movement. Chandler et al., (2014) and the ACSM (American College of
sports medicine) recommend “an approximate shoulder-width foot stance” however, this does not take
into account the specific needs of powerlifters. The ACSM recommendations are targeted at the
everyday gym user, whereas (Swinton et al., 2012) are more concerned with competitive powerlifters.
Both groups have very different goals and needs.

The squat is considered as a very effective exercise for increasing strength and stability of the muscles
of the lower limbs (Gullett et al., 2009). Squats are usually included in a weight training programme to
develop quadriceps, hamstrings and triceps surae. Muscle groups such as the hip adductors,
abductors along with the erector spinae are also loaded throughout the movement (O’Shea, 1985).
The parallel squat is a complex lift involving the hip, knee and ankle joints leading Lombardi (1989) to
note that due to its multipoint nature it is sometimes referred to as the “pillar of strength” exercise for
the lower extremity.

McCaw & Melrose (1999) compared various stance widths used when performing the parallel back
squat and found that stance width did not appear to affect the EMG activity of the key hip extensors
and knee extensors. Furthermore they found that the quadriceps activity in general was much higher
than the activity of the hamstrings and gluteals. This indicates that the quadriceps as a muscle group
are the primary agonists for this particular lift no matter what variation of stance is used. McCaw &
Melrose’s research concluded that stance width does not affect the degree of muscular recruitment of
the quadriceps or hamstrings during the back squat. In addition, their research indicated that it is not
possible to isolate specific heads of the any of the four quadricep muscles. However, they noted that a
greater stance width does lead to increased gluteus maximus activity.

Escamilla et al., (2001) similarly found no differences in the muscle activity of a number of muscles
during different squat stance widths, although it is important to note that they did not investigate the
activation of the gluteals. More recently Paoli (2009) found that the gluteus maximus is more activated
during wider stance squats than during narrower stance squats. Paoli et al., (2009) state that taking a
stance that is double the distance between the hips requires a significantly greater contribution from
the gluteals than if a hip-width stance is used. It is also more effective than a stance that is 1.5 times
hip width.

The research done by Paoli et al., (2009) confirms the finding of McCaw & Melrose (1999) in
suggesting that when performing a parallel squat the quadriceps activity in general was much higher
than the activity of the hamstrings and gluteals.

Just as squatting to a low depth doesn’t decrease quad activation, using a wider stance doesn’t
decrease the contribution of the four quadricep muscles to the squat. The main factor that does affect
muscle activation of the quads is the load of the bar. Loads below 70 percent of the 1 repetition
maximum (1RM) tend to decrease the work of the quads. Paoli et al., (2009) found a significant
difference in EMG activity only for the gluteus maximus; in particular, there was a higher electrical
activity of this muscle when back squats were performed at the maximum stance widths, at 0 and 70%
1RM. There were no significant differences concerning the EMG activity of the other analysed muscles
such as the quadriceps. These findings suggest that a large stance width is necessary for a greater
activation of the gluteus maximus during back squats. They also suggests that the quadriceps muscle
activation does not tend to change significantly between wide and narrow stance squats, the main
factor effecting quadricep activation is what percentage of the subjects 1RM they are working at.

Signorile et al., (1995) state that many weightlifters have commonly believed that changing joint
position can alter specific muscle activation. Boyden et al., (2000) state that the practice of adopting
foot rotation to selectively strengthen individual muscles of the quadriceps group was not supported by
their study, which involved smaller, more readily adopted, and comfortable levels of foot rotation than
did those previously investigated. The testing involved pointing the toes 10 degrees inwards, at 0
degrees, 10 degrees outwards and 20 degrees outwards. They found no significant difference in
muscle activation when changing foot positioning whilst performing the squat. However,
Schwarzenegger & Dobbins (1985) popular bodybuilding text suggests that the activity of the inner
thigh can be manipulated by having a wider than shoulder-width stance and rotating the feet 45
degrees away from the body. This correlates to the standard powerlifter stance when squatting.

In conclusion it seems clear that the quadriceps involvement in the squat is constant throughout
different stances and foot placements. The specific muscle cannot be isolated through widening or
narrowing the lifters stance, or the angle at which their feet are pointed. Width stance does not appear
to affect quadriceps muscle activity (McCaw & Melrose, 1999); (Escamilla et al., 2001). However, we
can see from the research that as the squatter’s stance increases past the width of the shoulders there
is greater activation of the gluteal muscles. Gluteus maximus muscular activity is significantly higher in
the wide stance (McCaw & Melrose, 1999); (Paoli et al., 2009). In addition, the activation of the gluteal
muscles becomes even greater when the weight lifted is increased past 70% of the lifters one
repetition maximum.

References

Beardsley, C. (2013). What difference does squat stance width make?. Available:
http://www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com/2013/01/28/squat-stance-width/. Last accessed 1st
March 2014.

Boyden, G. Scurr, J. Dyson, R. (2000). A comparison of quadriceps electromyographic activity with the
position of the foot during the parallel squat. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 14 (4),
379-382.

Chandler, J. McMillan, E. Kibler, B. Richards, D. (2014). Safety of the Squat Exercise. Available:
http://www.acsm.org/docs/current-comments/safetysquat.pdf. Last accessed 1st March 2014.

Escamilla, R. Flesig, G. Zheng, N. Lander, J. Barrentine, S. Andrews, J. Bergemann, B. Moorman, C. .

(2001). Effects of technique variations on knee biomechanics during the squat and leg press. Medicine
and science in sports and exercise. 9 (33), 1552-66

Gullett, J.C., Tillman, M.D., Gutierrez, G.M. and Chow, J.W. (2009) A biomechanical comparison of
back and front squats in healthy trained individuals. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research.
Vol. 23, No. 284

Lombardi, V. (1989). Weight Training. Dubuque, IA: W.C. Brown. 201-204.

Mccaw, S. Melrose, D. (1999). Stance width and bar load effects on leg muscle activity during the
parallel squat. Medicine and science in sports and exercise. 3 (3), 428-36.

Murray, N. Cipriani, D. O'Rand, D. Reed-Jones, R. (2013). Effects of Foot Position during Squatting on
the Quadriceps Femoris: An Electromyographic Study. International Journal of Exercise Science. 6 (2),
114-125.

Paoli, A. Marcolin, G. Petrone, N. (2009). The effect of stance width on the electromyographical activity
of eight superficial thigh muscles during back squat with different bar loads. Journal of strength and
conditioning. 21 (1), 246-50.

Schwarzenegger, A. Dobbins, B. (1985). The Arnold Schwarzenegger Encyclopadia of Modern

Bodybuilding. New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc. 461-463.

Signorile, J. Kwiatkowski, K. Caruso, J. Robertson, B. (1995). Effect of food position on the

electromyographic activity of the superficial quadriceps muscles during the parallel squat and knee
extension. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 9, 182-187.

Swinton, P. Lloyd, R. Keogh, J. Agouris, I. Stewart, A. (2012). A biomechanical comparison of the

traditional squat, powerlifting squat, and box squat. Health Sciences & Medicine papers. 26 (7), 1805-
1816.

O'Shea, P. (1985). The parallel squat. National strength and conditioning journal. 6, 70-72.