Are you James W. Yates?

Claim your profile

Publications (4)8.13 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Law enforcement officers (LEOs) on university campuses are required to perform a variety of physical occupational tasks. Identifying which physical fitness characteristics are associated with these occupational tasks will assist in the development of appropriate exercise programs and physical fitness assessments. Therefore the purpose of this study was to identify physical fitness and demographic characteristics that were correlated with occupational tasks commonly performed by campus LEOs. The occupational assessment was conducted using an officer physical ability test (OPAT), which simulated a foot chase of a suspect. Sixteen male LEOs (age: 33.1+/-8.7 yr.; body mass: 87.2+/-11.2 kg; height: 179.0+/-7.9 cm) performed the OPAT. A battery of physical fitness tests were used to assess aerobic capacity, muscular endurance, strength, power, flexibility, agility, and body composition. Bivariate correlations were performed to identify significant (p<0.05) correlations between physical fitness characteristics and OPAT time. The officers' age was significantly correlated to the majority of OPAT tasks, physical fitness and anthropometric assessments. Therefore, partial correlations were used to control for the confounding effects of age. After controlling for the officers' age, the overall OPAT time was significantly correlated with agility (r=0.57) and aerobic endurance (r=-0.65). Furthermore, push-up, curl-up, body mass, waist circumference, and abdominal circumference were significantly correlated to individual OPAT tasks. In conclusion, exercise programs and fitness assessments should be used for campus LEOs that address a variety of physical fitness characteristics associated with occupational performance. In addition, exercise programs should focus on body composition management and fitness for older LEOs.
    The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 02/2015; 29(8). DOI:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000863 · 2.08 Impact Factor
  • Katie J Dennison · David R Mullineaux · James W Yates · Mark G Abel ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Firefighting is a strenuous occupation that requires optimal levels of physical fitness. The National Fire Protection Association suggests that firefighters should be allowed to exercise on duty to maintain adequate fitness levels. However, no research has addressed the effect of exercise-induced fatigue on subsequent fire ground performance. Therefore, the primary purpose of this study was to determine the effect that a single exercise session had on the performance of a simulated fire ground test (SFGT). Secondarily, this study sought to compare the effect of physical training status (i.e., trained vs. untrained firefighters) on the performance of an SFGT. Twelve trained (age: 31.8 ± 6.9 years; body mass index [BMI]: 27.7 ± 3.3 kg·m(-2); VO2peak: 45.6 ± 3.3 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)) and 37 untrained (age: 31.0 ± 9.0 years; BMI: 31.3 ± 5.2 kg·m(-2); VO2peak: 40.2 ± 5.2 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)) male career firefighters performed a baseline SFGT. The trained firefighters performed a second SFGT after an exercise session. Time to complete the SFGT, heart rate, and blood lactate were compared between baseline and exercise SFGT (EX-SFGT) conditions. In the trained firefighters, time to complete the SFGT (9.6% increase; p = 0.002) and heart rate (4.1% increase; p = 0.032) were greater during the EX-SFGT compared with baseline, with no difference in post-SFGT blood lactate (p = 0.841). The EX-SFGT time of the trained firefighters was faster than approximately 70% of the untrained firefighters' baseline SFGT time. In addition, the baseline SFGT time of the trained firefighters was faster than 81% of the untrained firefighters. This study demonstrated that on-duty exercise training reduced the work efficiency in firefighters. However, adaptations obtained through regular on-duty exercise training may limit decrements in work efficiency because of acute exercise fatigue and allow for superior work efficiency compared with not participating in a training program.
    The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 04/2012; 26(4):1101-9. DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31822dd027 · 2.08 Impact Factor
  • James W. Yates · Lindsay E. Mohney · Mark G. Abel · Rob Shapiro ·

    Medicine &amp Science in Sports &amp Exercise 05/2011; 43(Suppl 1):779. DOI:10.1249/01.MSS.0000402166.48135.2a · 3.98 Impact Factor