Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Human Kinetics volume 87/2023, 23–34 DOI: 10.5114/jhk/161468 23
Section I – Kinesiology
1 Health Research Centre, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain.
* Correspondence: josemuyor@ual.es
Accepted for publishing in the Journal of Human Kinetics vol. 87/2023 in April 2023.
Comparison of Muscle Activity between the Horizontal Bench
Press and the Seated Chest Press Exercises Using Several Grips
by
José M. Muyor 1,*, David Rodríguez-Ridao 1, José M. Oliva-Lozano 1
This study aims to compare muscle activity in the pectoralis major, anterior deltoid, and triceps brachii in the
horizontal bench press exercise with a prone grip at 150% and 50% of the biacromial width and the seated chest press
exercise with two types of grips (a neutral grip at ~150% of the biacromial width and a prone grip at ~200% of the
biacromial width). Twenty physically active adults performed a set of 8 repetitions at 60% of the one repetition maximum.
The results showed that the clavicular portion of the pectoralis major had significantly greater muscle activity in the
seated chest press exercise with a neutral grip (~30% of the maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC)) than in
the lying bench press exercise with a prone grip at 150% of the biacromial width (~25% MVIC). The muscle activity of
the anterior deltoid was not significantly different across any exercise or grip evaluated (~24% MVIC). The muscle
activity of the triceps brachii was significantly higher in the lying bench press exercise with a grip at 50% biacromial
width (~16% MVIC) than at 150% of the biacromial width (~12% MVIC). In conclusion, all exercises and grips showed
similar muscle activity, and the selection of these exercises should not be based exclusively on the grounds of muscle
activation but rather on the load capacity lifted, the level of technique of the participant, and/or the transference to the
specific sporting discipline or event.
Keywords: electromyography; muscle excitation; muscle activation; fitness; strength
Introduction
Currently, it is well known that strength
training has positive effects on sports performance
and the health of individuals (Pichardo et al., 2019;
Westcott, 2012). For strength training and strength
and conditioning, professional trainers usually
propose two types of exercises: those performed on
guided machines, usually for beginners or with
little command of technical execution, and those
performed with free weights for athletes with more
advanced execution techniques (Baechle and
Groves, 1998).
Therefore, it is essential to correctly select
the exercises that generate the necessary
adaptations in the appropriate muscles. One of the
most commonly used techniques to determine the
degree of muscle activation and identify activation
patterns of several muscles is surface
electromyography (sEMG) (David et al., 2000;
Strońska et al., 2018).
sEMG measures the electrical potential present on
the skin due to muscle contraction (Merlo and
Campanini, 2010), and it is highly correlated with
muscle force (Disselhorst-Klug et al., 2009).
The bench press exercise is a popular and
widely used example of this kind of exercise that
allows upper-limb muscle strengthening through
additional loads (Giorgio et al., 2009). It is a
complex exercise in which large external loads can
be lifted, requiring high neuromuscular activity
(Stastny et al., 2017). In this regard, the bench press
exercise is often modified by bench inclination
(Rodríguez-Ridao et al., 2020; Saeterbakken et al.,
2017), grip width (Barnett et al., 1995; Lehman,
2005; Saeterbakken et al., 2017), or using a Sling
shot (Wojdala et al., 2022) to adjust the muscle
activity of the primary movements.
24 Comparison of muscle activity between the horizontal bench press and the seated chest press exercises
Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 87/2023 http://www.johk.pl
A previous study by Barnett et al. (1995)
addressed the influence of grip width and bench
inclination on the muscle activity of the primary
movements during the bench press exercise with
two grip widths at 100% and 200% of the
biacromial distance (a narrow and a wide grip,
respectively). Those authors found that the
horizontal bench press exercise with a narrow grip
produced a higher sEMG activity of the clavicular
head of the pectoralis major and the anterior
deltoid than with a wide grip. With the trunk in a
vertical position, hand spacing had no effect on the
sEMG activity in the evaluated muscles. However,
those authors evaluated the bench press exercise
with the participants seated on a bench and with
the trunk vertical. Consequently, the load was
lifted vertically, as in a military press exercise, and
not pushed in a horizontal plane. Alternatively,
Lehman (2005) evaluated the influence of three
grip widths (100% and 200% of the biacromial
distance and a pronated grip with hand width
distance between the two hands) during the flat
bench press exercise on the muscle activity of the
clavicular head of the pectoralis major, the lateral
head of the triceps, and the biceps brachii. That
author reported that changing from the widest to
the narrowest grip width increased the sEMG
activity in the triceps brachii, independent of the
hand position (prone or supine) and decreased the
sEMG activity of the sternoclavicular portion of the
pectoralis major with a prone grip. However, these
authors did not assess the muscle activity in the
lower portion of the pectoralis major or the anterior
deltoid muscle. In this regard, the anterior deltoid
is an essential muscle in shoulder flexion, and the
pectoralis major, the lower portion, has an
indispensable role in the pushing action.
Therefore, electromyographic evaluation of these
muscles could provide more information on the
involvement of these muscles in the bench press
and seated chest press exercises with their grip
variations. Moreover, some authors have reported
that when, in the bench press exercise, the hand
spacing is > 200% of the biacromial distance, the
shoulder position puts the athlete at a high risk of
injury (Gross et al., 1993); therefore, the grip should
not exceed 150% of the biacromial distance (Green
and Comfort, 2007). Saeterbakken et al. (2017)
compared the sEMG activity in the bench press
exercise in the style of competition with either the
+25° inclined and −25° declined bench position
(wide grip) or using a narrow and medium grip
(flat bench). These authors concluded that there
were no differences in sEMG activity during the
wide grip and on a flat bench in chest and shoulder
muscles compared with inclined and declined
bench positions and in medium and narrow grip
width. However, the biceps brachii showed greater
and the triceps brachii lower sEMG activity during
the inclined bench press than the flat and declined
bench position.
Recently, Rodríguez-Ridao et al. (2020)
evaluated the muscle activity of the pectoralis
major, anterior deltoid, and triceps brachii during
the lying bench press exercise in five bench
inclinations, using only one grip width at 150% of
the biacromial distance. Those authors found that
as the bench inclination increased, the sEMG
activity of the anterior deltoid also increased.
Additionally, they reported that the upper portion
of the pectoralis major (PMUP) showed the highest
sEMG activity at 30° of bench inclination.
However, they did not analyse the sEMG activity
regarding grip width.
Alternatives to the bench press exercise
are guided weight machines, which are considered
safe, effective, and easy to learn and are also an
alternative to free weights (American College of
Sports Medicine, 2009). However, the presence of
machine constraints reducing the degree of
freedom in multijoint exercises can conceivably
influence muscle activity patterns by altering the
muscle forces required for movement execution
and stabilization, affecting the specificity and
effectiveness of strength training (Cacchio et al.,
2008).
Several studies have compared the muscle
activation of the bench press exercise to other
exercises performed in guided machines, such as
the Smith machine (Saeterbakken et al., 2011;
Schick et al., 2010) or the peck deck (de Araújo
Rocha Júnior et al., 2007), in relation to other
exercises such as the pullover (Campos and da
Silva, 2014), the standing cable press (Santana et al.,
2007; Signorile et al., 2017) or with free weights
(Saeterbakken et al., 2011). However, few studies
have analysed whether there are differences in
muscle activation during the bench press exercise
compared to the seated chest press machine and its
grip derivates. Wattanaprakornkul et al. (2011)
compared shoulder muscle activity to the seated
chest press machine and a specific shoulder flexion
by José M. Muyor et al. 25
Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
lying prone on a bench. However, those authors
did not evaluate muscle activity during the bench
press exercise. Recently, Coratella et al. (2020)
found that the sternocostal head of the pectoralis
major and the anterior deltoid were similarly
activated, and the triceps brachii and the lateral
deltoid were primarily recruited in the bench press
exercise rather than in the seated chest press
machine. However, those authors only evaluated
the seated chest press with a prone grip.
Therefore, this study aimed to: 1) compare
muscle activity, through sEMG, in the clavicular
portion, sternal portion, and costal portion of the
pectoralis major, anterior deltoid, and the long
head of the triceps brachii during the bench press
exercise with two grip widths (at 150% and 50% of
the biacromial width), and the seated chest press
exercise with both types of grips (prone and
neutral); and 2) analyse which muscles would have
the greatest sEMG activity in each of these
evaluated exercises.
The primary hypothesis was that the
muscle activity in all analysed muscles would be
similar between the lying bench press exercise with
a grip at 150% of the biacromial width and the
seated chest press exercise, independent of the grip
type (prone or neutral). However, we
hypothesized that the bench press exercise with a
grip at 50% of the biacromial width would show
greater muscle activity in the triceps brachii
compared to the same exercise with a broader grip
width.
Methods
Participants
A total of 20 physically active adults (age:
22.90 ± 2.98 years, body mass: 75.00 ± 8.75 kg, body
height: 1.77 ± 0.04 m, body mass index: 23.96 ± 2.12)
with 5.03 ± 1.01 years of experience in strength
training participated in this study.
To be included in the study, participants
were required to meet the following inclusion
criteria: 1) have a minimum experience of 4 years
of strength training, with a weekly frequency of at
least twice a week of resistance training; 2) no
injury or limitation that would impact the
performance of the exercises proposed in the
study; 3) no history of upper or lower spinal
surgery; and 4) no use of any drugs, anabolic
agents or drinks that could alter the study results.
Moreover, all participants were asked to avoid any
vigorous exercise and not to ingest stimulant
drinks 24 hours before the measurements.
The sample size was a priori calculated
using G*Power software (version 3.1) for Mac OSX
(Faul et al., 2007), with a statistical power (1 – ß) of
0.8, a significance level of 0.05, and an effect size of
0.6. A final sample size of 19 subjects was obtained,
although in the current study, a sample size of 20
participants was used.
Prior to enrolling in the study, all
participants received verbal and written
information on the purposes and methods of the
study, which had been developed in accordance
with the Declaration of Helsinki and authorized by
the Bioethical Committee of the University of
Almería. An informed consent form was freely
signed by each participant.
Procedures
Each participant went to the laboratory on
two occasions with at least 48 hours between each
visit to avoid muscle fatigue. During the first visit,
participants reached the maximal lifting load in a
unique repetition, i.e., one repetition maximum
(1RM) of the bench press exercise gripping the bar
(using a hook grip with the thumb) at 150% and
50% of the biacromial width and the seated chest
press exercise with both a prone and a neutral grip.
Participants performed the lifts in random order
for each exercise to minimize any possible order
effect. The second visit was conducted to evaluate
the muscle activity in each exercise.
Determination of the 1RM
Following the protocol described by
Rodríguez-Ridao et al. (2020), the first session
began by evaluating each participant’s biacromial
width, body mass (measured with an electronic
body composition analyser (model BF−350; Tanita,
Tokyo, Japan)), and height (measured with a Seca
stadiometer (Seca, Hamburg, Germany)).
Afterwards, participants warmed up on an
elliptical machine. Then, they performed joint
mobility and active stretching exercises of the
upper limbs for 3–5 minutes. Next, participants
rested for 3–5 minutes to avoid possible fatigue
before the tests.
Participants then performed a specific
protocol to reach the 1RM in the bench press
exercise with both grip widths (at 150% and 50% of
the biacromial width) and in the seated chest press
exercise with both types of grips (prone and
26 Comparison of muscle activity between the horizontal bench press and the seated chest press exercises
Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 87/2023 http://www.johk.pl
neutral). This protocol by Saeterbakken et al. (2011)
was as follows: 1) 20 repetitions at approximately
30% 1RM, 2) 12 repetitions at approximately 50%
1RM, 3) six repetitions at approximately 70% 1RM,
and 4) one repetition at approximately 85% 1RM.
Last, participants had to lift the most
weight they could manage in one repetition (1RM)
while using the appropriate form (Kraemer and
Fry, 1995). Through this method, 1RM was usually
established in the second attempt. However, when
necessary, a third attempt was made. The rest
intervals between sets and between the bench
press and seated chest press exercises were
approximately five minutes long to avoid muscle
fatigue. None of the displayed signs of weariness
would have interfered with the accuracy or
validity of the tests. The 1RM for each exercise and
the grip variations were calculated in the morning
and later randomized and counterbalanced. The
results of the 1RM are shown in Table 1.
Electromyography Setup and Data Collection
This protocol was performed at the second
visit, which started with the same warm-up as in
the first visit. Corporal areas were then chosen for
electrode placement and were prepared by shaving
the hair and cleansing the area with alcohol to
reduce surface impedance. Ag/AgCl electrodes
(Medico Lead-Lok, Noida, India) were placed
parallel to the muscle fibres at a 2 cm centre-to-
centre distance.
To avoid any potential displacement
during the activities, the electrodes were then
placed on each participant's dominant side and
secured using adhesive tape. Particularly, the
electrodes were positioned in accordance with the
suggestions made by Surface Electromyography
for the Non-invasive Assessment of Muscles
(SENIAM) (Hermens et al., 2000), on muscles
following a detailed description (Table 2).
To standardize the sEMG readings
recorded during the bench press and seated chest
press exercises, the maximum voluntary isometric
contraction (MVIC) of each muscle was recorded
after the electrodes were placed. To this end, two
3-s MVICs trials were recorded for each muscle in
a randomized manner, with approximately a 10-s
rest interval between each contraction and a 2-min
rest interval between the MVIC measurement of
each muscle (Muyor et al., 2019). The MVIC was
determined as an average amplitude over a one-
second window of the highest rectified sEMG
signals (root-mean-square, RMS) with a 100 ms
window (Contreras et al., 2016). The intraclass
correlation coefficient (ICC) values were calculated
to verify the consistency between repetitions for
the MVIC tests. Additionally, the percentage of the
coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated. The
ICCs were > 0.95 (0.94–0.98; p < 0.000) and CV was
< 3% in the sEMG in all MVIC assessments.
The MVIC manoeuvres are shown in Table
2. All muscles were randomly tested to avoid
fatigue. Additionally, each participant received
verbal support from an examiner to maintain a
continuous effort throughout the MVIC.
Accordingly, to start the test each
participant completed a more focused warm-up
that included 15 repetitions at 30% of the exercise.
Last, after a 5-min rest interval, the bench press and
seated chest press exercises data were collected for
each grip condition in random and
counterbalanced order with a 5-min rest interval
between trials. The sEMG signal was registered
while participants performed a set of 8 repetitions
at 60% 1RM (Rodríguez-Ridao et al., 2020), and the
eccentric phase and the concentric phase were
performed and recorded at a velocity of two
seconds in each phase (Wattanaprakornkul et al.,
2011) for each exercise and grip condition. This
velocity was controlled by a KORG MA−1
metronome (Keio Electronic Laboratories, Tokyo,
Japan) (Muyor et al., 2019; Rodríguez-Ridao et al.,
2020).
Regarding technique, all participants
began the bench press exercise supine on the
bench, gripping the bar with their thumbs in a
hook grip at either 150% or 50% of the biacromial
width, depending on the type of bench press
exercise they were performing. Participants also
kept their hands and forearms pronated
throughout all repetitions (Figure 1A). To maintain
the starting position, the bar was lowered to 1 cm
from the chest (sternum), the shoulders were
abducted to approximately 45° (during the
eccentric phase), and the bar was raised until the
elbows were extended (Muyor et al., 2019).
Regarding the technique during the seated chest
press exercise, all participants started the exercise
seated on the machine, gripping the bar with their
thumbs in a hook grip and the hands and forearms
pronated (a prone grip) (Figure 1B) or in a prone-
supine position (a neutral grip) (Figure 1C) during
by José M. Muyor et al. 27
Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
all repetitions recorded.
Electromyography
Using a WBA Mega device (Mega
Electronics, Ltd., Kuopio, Finland), sEMG data for
each muscle were captured and sampled at 1000
Hz. An A/D converter (National Instruments, New
South Wales, Australia) was used to convert the
analogue signal to a digital signal. LabView
software (National Instruments, Austin, TX, USA)
was then used to filter the digital signal by
bandwidth (12–450 Hz) using a fourth-order
Butterworth filter. The MEGAWIN software
program (Mega Electronics, Ltd.) was used to
transform the raw sEMG data into RMS signals in
microvolts (V) for further analysis.
Although data were collected during eight
repetitions, the first (initial) and the last (8th) were
discarded to eliminate movement variability due
to initiation and termination of the exercise
(Cacchio et al., 2008).
Statistical Analyses
The Shapiro-Wilk normality test was used
to analyse the data distribution. Parametric tests
were performed because all variables followed a
normal distribution.
Two separate repeated-measures
ANOVAs were performed to analyse the
dependent variable of muscle activity. A 4 x 5
ANOVA (exercise*muscle) design was applied to
determine differences in each muscle activity (%
MVIC) across exercises and their variants of grips.
Likewise, a 5 x 4 ANOVA (muscle*exercise) design
was applied to determine differences in the muscle
activity (% MVIC) across different muscles in each
exercise and their variants of grips. Additionally,
to assess assumptions of variance, the Mauchly's
test of sphericity was performed using all the
ANOVA results. A Greenhouse-Geisser correction
was performed to adjust the degrees of freedom if
an assumption was violated. When significant F
values were obtained, pairwise comparisons using
a Bonferroni adjustment were employed. Partial
eta-squared (η2p) was used to estimate explained
variance and effect size, and a value of 0.2 was
considered a small effect, 0.5 a medium effect, 0.8 a
large effect, and 1.3 a very large effect (Levine and
Hullett, 2002).
Statistical analyses were carried out using
IBM SPSS software (v.27), and the level of
significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results
ANOVA indicated that the main effect of
exercise on muscle activity for the PMUP was
statistically significant with a small effect size (F(3,57)
= 4.33, p = 0.008, η2p = 0.18), with post hoc testing
indicating that the muscle activity for the PMUP in
the seated chest press exercise was significantly
greater than in the lying bench press exercise (p =
0.016). The main effect of exercise on muscle
activity for the middle portion of the pectoralis
major (PMMP) was statistically significant with a
small effect size (F(3,57) = 11.79, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.38)
with post hoc testing indicating that the muscle
activity for the PMMP in the lying bench press
exercise with a grip at 50% of the biacromial width
was significantly lower than the rest of the
exercises (p ≤ 0.01). The main effect of exercise on
muscle activity for the anterior deltoid (AD) was
not statistically significant. Moreover, it showed a
very small effect size (F(3,57) = 1.20, p = 0.318, η2p =
0.05), with post hoc testing indicating that the
muscle activity for the AD was not significantly
different between any exercise (p > 0.05). The main
effect of exercise on muscle activity for the triceps
brachii (TB) was statistically significant with a
small effect size (F(1.63, 30.96) = 3.90, p < 0.038, η2p =
0.17), with post hoc testing indicating that the
muscle activity for the TB in the lying bench press
exercise with a grip at 50% of the biacromial width
was significantly greater than that in the same
exercise with a grip at 150% of the biacromial
width (p = 0.025). The specific values and their
comparisons are detailed in Figure 2.
Regarding the muscle activity in each exercise
(Figure 3), the PMMP showed the highest muscle
activity in all exercises, except in the lying bench
press exercise with a grip at 50% of the biacromial
width. There were no significant differences in the
muscle activity between the upper, middle, and
lower portions of the pectoralis major and the AD
in any exercise evaluated, except for the lying
bench press exercise with a grip at 50% of the
biacromial width, where the PMUP had
significantly greater muscle activity than the
PMMP and the lower portion of the pectoralis
major (PMLP) (Figure 3).
28 Comparison of muscle activity between the horizontal bench press and the seated chest press exercises
Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 87/2023 http://www.johk.pl
Table 1. Mean ± standard deviation 1RM for the four exercises evaluated.
Mean ± SD
1RM Lying barbell bench press (kg) with a grip at 150% of the biacromial width (A) 85.00 ± 12.87
1RM Lying barbell bench press (kg) with a grip at 50% of the biacromial width (B) 69.25 ± 14.80
1RM Seated machine chest press with a prone grip (kg) (C) 79.25 ± 14.98
1RM Seated machine chest press with a neutral grip (kg) (D) 69.75 ± 11.05
Significant differences in 1RM between exercises:
p < 0.001: A vs. B; A vs. D; C vs. D
p < 0.01: A vs. C; B vs. C
Table 2. Surface electrode placement and maximal isometric voluntary
contraction (MVIC) manoeuvre description
Muscle Electrode placement MVIC manoeuvre
Pectoralis major
upper portion
(clavicular portion,
PMUP)
On the midclavicular line over the second
intercostal space (Glass and Armstrong,
1997). In a standing position, with shoulders and elbows
flexed at 90˚ (in the horizontal plane), the
participants brought their elbows towards their
body’s midline (simulating the pec-deck exercise)
against maximal manual resistance in the opposite
direction.
Pectoralis major
middle portion
(sternal portion,
PMMP)
On the chest wall horizontally from the
arising muscle mass (approximately 2 cm
out from the axillary fold) (Park et al.,
2013).
Pectoralis major
lower portion (costal
portion, PMLP)
At the midclavicular line over the fifth
intercostal space (Glass and Armstrong,
1997).
Anterior deltoid (AD)
At 1.5 cm distal and anterior to the
acromion (Saeterbakken and Fimland,
2013).
Participants performed a deltoid flexion at 90° in a
seated position with an erect posture and no back
support against maximal manual resistance in the
opposite direction.
Triceps brachii (TB)
long head
At the midpoint between the posterior
aspect of the acromion and the olecranon
processes (Cogley et al., 2005).
Participants performed a forearm extension with
elbows at 90° in a seated position with an erect
posture and no back support against maximal
manual resistance in the opposite direction.
Figure 1. Horizontal bench press exercise with a prone grip at 150% and 50%
of the biacromial width (A). Seated chest press exercise with a prone grip
(B) and a neutral grip (C).
by José M. Muyor et al.
29
Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
Figure 2. Comparison of the electromyographic activity of each muscle between
exercises and grips.
PMUP: pectoralis major upper portion (clavicular portion); PMMP: pectoralis major middle portion
(sternal portion); PMLP: pectoralis major lower portion (costal portion); AD: anterior deltoid; TB:
triceps brachii (long head). * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001
Figure 3. Comparison of electromyographic activity between muscles
in each exercise and grip.
HBP: horizontal bench press; SCP: seated chest press; PMUP: pectoralis major upper
portion (clavicular portion); PMMP: pectoralis major middle portion (sternal portion);
PMLP: pectoralis major lower portion (costal portion); AD: anterior deltoid; TB: triceps
brachii (long head). * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001
30 Comparison of muscle activity between the horizontal bench press and the seated chest press exercises
Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 87/2023 http://www.johk.pl
Discussion
Coaches often prescribe different strength
exercises and variations in an attempt to activate or
modify the activation of the musculature involved
in the primary movements. In this regard, one of
the main aims of the current study was to compare
muscle activity in the pectoralis major (clavicular
portion, sternal portion, and costal portion),
anterior deltoid, and the long head of the triceps
brachii in the bench press exercise with two grip
widths (at 150% and 50% of the biacromial width)
and in the seated chest press exercise with two
types of grips (prone and neutral). When
comparing the muscle activity of each muscle
among the different exercises and grips, the main
result was that the PMUP showed significantly
greater muscle activity in the seated chest press
exercise with a neutral grip than in the lying bench
press exercise with a grip at 150% of the biacromial
width. The PMMP and the PMLP were
significantly less activated in the lying bench press
exercise with a grip at 50% of the biacromial width
compared to the rest of the exercises. The AD
muscle activity did not significantly differ in any
exercise or grip evaluated. The TB only showed
significantly higher activation in the lying bench
press exercise with a grip at 50% of the biacromial
width than with a grip at 150% of the biacromial
width.
Our results agree with previous studies
that evaluated muscle activity according to grip
width in the horizontal bench press exercise. A
study by Barnett et al. (1995) found that the
clavicular portion of the pectoralis major and the
long head of the TB were more activated with a
narrow hand grip (100% of the biacromial distance)
than with a wide grip (200% of the biacromial
distance). In a subsequent study, Clemons and
Aaron (1997) observed that with a narrower grip
(100% of the biacromial distance), there was
significantly greater muscle activation in the TB
than in the pectoralis major. According to those
authors, although they did not specify which
triceps head they evaluated, the results are justified
because the narrower grip may reduce activity
towards the end of the lift due to lesser shoulder
transverse adduction and perhaps less torque on
the shoulder (Clemons and Aaron, 1997). In
contrast, Lehman (2005) did not find significant
differences in muscle activation when comparing
the sternoclavicular and clavicular portions of the
pectoralis major between a wide grip (at 200% of
the biacromial distance) and a middle grip (at 100%
of the biacromial distance) in the bench press
exercise. However, that author observed
significantly higher activation in the
sternoclavicular portion with a wide grip than with
a narrow grip (with one hand width distance
between the two hands). Likewise, as in the current
study, that author also found that TB activity
increased when the grip was changed from a wide
to a narrower grip (Lehman, 2005). However, in
that previous study, the lateral head of the triceps
brachii was evaluated rather than the long head.
From the results reported in previous
studies and those obtained in the current one,
although a significant activation of the TB can be
observed with a narrow grip, its muscle activity is
the lowest of the four evaluated exercises.
However, in our study, the pectoralis major,
followed by the AD, was still activated to a greater
extent, despite a narrow grip. Nevertheless,
Saeterbakken et al. (2017) recommend using a wide
grip in a flat bench press exercise if the load is high
to improve muscle hypertrophy in athletes.
The seated chest press exercise is a
machine-assisted multijoint exercise. Despite
limiting the degree of freedom of movement of the
joints, in the current study, when evaluating this
exercise with a neutral grip (at 150% of the
biacromial width), we found slightly greater
muscle activity (with no significant differences) in
the three portions of the pectoralis major and in the
AD, although with a 1RM significantly lower, than
in the lying bench press exercise with a grip at
150% of the biacromial distance and the seated
chest press exercise with a prone grip. Based on
these results, the seated chest press exercise with a
neutral grip could be considered a suitable exercise
for people who do not need significant strength
requirements in their training. A previous study by
Balachandran et al. (2016) found similar results
with improved physical function in older adults
after 12 weeks of strength training in seated
machines versus standing cable machines.
Similarly, Schott et al. (2019) compared a free-
weight training group with a machine-assisted
training group and found that after 26 weeks of
training, there were similar results on muscular
strength in high-functioning older adults.
Nevertheless, following the results
by José M. Muyor et al. 31
Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
obtained in the current study, considering the
small influence that occurs when modifying grip
widths or the type of exercise (free weights or
machine-assisted), the choice of the grip position or
exercise should be determined by the athlete's
position or the type of movement required for their
sport.
Some limitations of the current study
should be considered. First, the results were
reported in absolute values and were not separated
into concentric and eccentric phases. These phases
could show differences in muscle activity.
However, our purpose was to evaluate muscle
activity in the whole movement of the barbell or
the machine. Another limitation was our decision
to evaluate the movements at a controlled velocity
(2 s for concentric and 2 s for eccentric phases).
Future studies should evaluate muscle activity at
different velocities of execution. Another limitation
was that the relative load evaluated was moderate
(at 60% 1RM) and selected to improve the
participants' security and technique. However, it
would have been interesting to evaluate these
exercises in a higher load to record the muscle
activity in several load resistances. Finally,
although normalization to an MVIC was
standardized, using procedures previously
described in the literature, the MVIC was not
matched to the task under investigation. Moreover,
grip width was not assessed during the seated
chest press exercise because the bar itself
assembled on the machine was used. Therefore,
there was no possibility of adjusting the grip
widths to 150% and 50% of the biacromial width of
participants. It would be interesting for future
work in which a customized bar could be installed
in this machine to adapt the grips to the
characteristics of participants.
Conclusions
Muscle activity of the three portions of the
pectoralis major and the AD was similar in the
following exercises: lying bench press exercise
with a grip at 150% of the biacromial width, seated
chest press exercise with a prone grip, and seated
chest press exercise with a neutral grip. The lying
bench press exercise with a grip at 50% of the
biacromial width showed significantly lower
muscle activity in the sternal and costal portions of
the pectoralis major and greater muscle activity in
the TB than during the same exercise with a grip at
150% of the biacromial width. Due to the similar
muscle activity found in these exercises, their
selection within a strength training program
should not be based exclusively on muscle
activation, but rather should be justified on the
grounds of the load capacity lifted, the level of
technique of the participant, and/or the
transference to the specific sporting activity.
Author Contributions: : J.M.M. and D.R.-R.; methodology: J.M.M., D.R.-R. and J.M.O.-L.; validation: J.M.M.,
D.R.-R. and J.M.O.-L.; formal analysis: J.M.M. and D.R.-R.; investigation: J.M.M., D.R.-R. and J.M.O.-L.;
resources: J.M.M., D.R.-R. and J.M.O.-L.; data curation: J.M.M. and D.R.-R..; writing—original draft
preparation: J.M.M. and D.R.-R.; writing—review & editing: J.M.M., D.R.-R. and J.M.O.-L.; visualization:
J.M.M., D.R.-R. and J.M.O.-L.; supervision: J.M.M., D.R.-R. and J.M.O.-L.; project administration: J.M.M.;
funding acquisition: J.M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
ORCID iD:
José M. Muyor: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2849-0323
José M. Oliva-Lozano: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7257-3620
Funding Information: This work was supported by the Proyectos I+D+I Ministerio de Economía y
Competitividad. Gobierno de España. Referencia: DEP 2016-80296-R (AEI/FEDER, UE). José M. Oliva-Lozano
was supported by a grant funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities
(FPU18/04434).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Please include the following statement: "This study was conducted
following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or
Ethics Committee) of Universidad de Almería (protocol code UALBIO2014/009 – February 13, 2014).
Informed Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.
32 Comparison of muscle activity between the horizontal bench press and the seated chest press exercises
Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 87/2023 http://www.johk.pl
References
American College of Sports Medicine. (2009). Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 41(3), 687–708. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e3181915670
Baechle, T. R., & Groves, B. R. (1998). Weight Training: Steps to Success Steps to Success. Human Kinetics.
Balachandran, A., Martins, M. M., de Faveri, F. G., Alan, O., Cetinkaya, F., & Signorile, J. F. (2016). Functional
strength training: Seated machine vs standing cable training to improve physical function in elderly.
Experimental Gerontology, 82, 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2016.06.012
Barnett, C., Kippers, V., & Turner, P. (1995). Effects of variation on the bench press exercise on the EMG activity
of five shoulder muscles. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 9(4), 222–227.
Cacchio, A., Don, R., Ranavolo, A., Guerra, E., McCaw, S. T., Procaccianti, R., Camerota, F., Frascarelli, M., &
Santilli, V. (2008). Effects of 8-week strength training with two models of chest press machines on
muscular activity pattern and strength. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 18(4), 618–627.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.12.007
Campos, Y. D. A. C., & da Silva, S. F. (2014). Comparison of electromyographic activity during the bench press
and barbell pullover exercises. Motriz. Revista de Educacao Fisica, 20(2), 200–205.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742014000200010
Clemons, J. M., & Aaron, C. (1997). Effect of grip width on the myoelectric activity of the prime movers in the
bench press. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 11(2). https://journals.lww.com/nsca-
jscr/Fulltext/1997/05000/Effect_of_Grip_Width_on_the_Myoelectric_Activity.5.aspx
Cogley, R. M., Archambault, T. A., Fibeger, J. F., Koverman, M. M., Youdas, J. W., & Hollman, J. H. (2005).
Comparison of muscle activation using various hand positions during the push-up exercise. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 19(3), 628–633.
Contreras, B., Vigotsky, A. D., Schoenfeld, B. J., Beardsley, C., & Cronin, J. (2016). A comparison of gluteus
maximus, biceps femoris, and vastus lateralis electromyography amplitude for the barbell, band, and
American hip thrust variations. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 32(3), 254–260.
https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.2015-0091
Coratella, G., Tornatore, G., Longo, S., Esposito, F., & Cè, E. (2020). Specific prime movers’ excitation during
free-weight bench press variations and chest press machine in competitive bodybuilders. European
Journal of Sport Science, 20(5), 571–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2019.1655101
David, G., Magarey, M. E., Jones, M. A., Dvir, Z., Türker, K. S., & Sharpe, M. (2000). EMG and strength
correlates of selected shoulder muscles during rotations of the glenohumeral joint. Clinical Biomechanics,
15(2), 95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0033(99)00052-2
de Araújo Rocha Júnior, V., Gentil, P., Oliveira, E., & Do Carmo, J. (2007). Comparison among the EMG activity
of the pectoralis major, anterior deltoidis and triceps brachii during the bench press and peck deck
exercises. Revista Brasileira de Medicina Do Esporte, 13(1), 51–54. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-
86922007000100012
Disselhorst-Klug, C., Schmitz-Rode, T., & Rau, G. (2009). Surface electromyography and muscle force: Limits
in sEMG–force relationship and new approaches for applications. Clinical Biomechanics, 24(3), 225–235.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2008.08.003
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis
program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.
Giorgio, P., Samozino, P., & Morin, J. B. (2009). Multigrip flexible device: Electromyographical analysis and
comparison with the bench press exercise. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(2), 652–659.
https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e31818f0950
Glass, S. C., & Armstrong, T. (1997). Electromyographical activity of the pectoralis muscle during incline and
decline bench presses. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 11(3), 163–167.
https://doi.org/10.1519/00124278-199708000-00006
Green, C. M., & Comfort, P. (2007). The affect of grip width on bench press performance and risk of injury.
Strength and Conditioning Journal, 29(5), 10–14.
Gross, M. L., Brenner, S. L., Esformes, I., & Sonzogni, J. J. (1993). Anterior shoulder instability in weight lifters.
American Journal of Sports Medicine, 21(4), 599–603. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354659302100419
by José M. Muyor et al. 33
Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
Hermens, H. J., Freriks, B., Disselhorst-Klug, C., & Rau, G. (2000). Development of recommendations for SEMG
sensors and sensor placement procedures. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 10(5), 361–374.
Kraemer, W., & Fry, A. (1995). Strength testing: development and evaluation of methodology. In P. Maud &
C. Foster (Eds.), Physiological assessment of human fitness (pp. 115–138). Human Kinetics.
Lehman, G. J. (2005). The influence of grip width and forearm pronation/supination on upper-body
myoelectric activity during the flat bench press. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 19(3), 587–
591. https://doi.org/10.1519/R-15024.1
Levine, T. R., & Hullett, C. R. (2002). Eta squared, partial eta squared, and misreporting of effect size in
communication research. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 612–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
2958.2002.tb00828.x
Merlo, A., & Campanini, I. (2010). Technical aspects of surface electromyography for clinicians. The Open
Rehabilitation Journal, 3, 98–109. https://doi.org/doi: 10.2174/1874943701003010098
Muyor, J. M., Rodríguez-Ridao, D., Martín-Fuentes, I., & Antequera-Vique, J. A. (2019). Evaluation and
comparison of electromyographic activity in bench press with feet on the ground and active hip flexion.
PLoS ONE, 14(6), e0218209. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218209
Park, K.-M., Cynn, H.-S., Yi, C.-H., & Kwon, O.-Y. (2013). Effect of isometric horizontal abduction on pectoralis
major and serratus anterior EMG activity during three exercises in subjects with scapular winging.
Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 23(2), 462–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2012.11.013
Pichardo, A. W., Oliver, J. L., Harrison, C. B., Maulder, P. S., Lloyd, R. S., & Kandoi, R. (2019). Effects of
Combined Resistance Training and Weightlifting on Motor Skill Performance of Adolescent Male
Athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 33(12), 3226–3235.
https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003108
Rodríguez-Ridao, D., Antequera-Vique, J. A., Martín-Fuentes, I., & Muyor, J. M. (2020). Effect of five bench
inclinations on the electromyographic activity of the pectoralis major, anterior deltoid, and triceps
brachii during the bench press exercise. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
17(19), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197339
Saeterbakken, A. H., & Fimland, M. S. (2013). Electromyographic activity and 6rm strength in bench press on
stable and unstable surfaces. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 27(4), 1101–1107.
https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182606d3d
Saeterbakken, A. H., Mo, D.-A., Scott, S., & Andersen, V. (2017). The effects of bench press variations in
competitive athletes on muscle activity and performance. Journal of Human Kinetics, 57(1), 61–71.
https://doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2017-0047
Saeterbakken, A. H., van den Tillaar, R., & Fimland, M. S. (2011). A comparison of muscle activity and 1-RM
strength of three chest-press exercises with different stability requirements. Journal of Sports Sciences,
29(5), 533–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2010.543916
Santana, J. C., Vera-Garcia, F. J., & McGill, S. M. (2007). A kinetic and electromyographic comparison of the
standing cable press and bench press. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 21(4), 1271–1277.
Schick, E. E., Coburn, J. W., Brown, L. E., Judelson, D. A., Khamoui, A. V, Tran, T. T., & Uribe, B. P. (2010). A
comparison of muscle activation between a Smith machine and free weight bench press. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(3), 779–784. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181cc2237
Schott, N., Johnen, B., & Holfelder, B. (2019). Effects of free weights and machine training on muscular strength
in high-functioning older adults. Experimental Gerontology, 122, 15–24.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2019.03.012
Signorile, J. F., Rendos, N. K., Heredia Vargas, H. H., Alipio, T. C., Regis, R. C., Eltoukhy, M. M., Nargund, R.
S., & Romero, M. A. (2017). Differences in muscle activation and kinematics between cable-based and
selectorized weight training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 31(2), 313–322.
https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001493
Stastny, P., Gołaś, A., Blazek, D., Maszczyk, A., Wilk, M., Pietraszewski, P., Petr, M., Uhlir, P., & Zajac, A.
(2017). A systematic review of surface electromyography analyses of the bench press movement task.
PLoS ONE, 12(2), e0171632. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171632
34 Comparison of muscle activity between the horizontal bench press and the seated chest press exercises
Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 87/2023 http://www.johk.pl
Strońska, K., Trebert, M., Gołaś, A., Maszczyk, A., & Zając, A. (2018). Changes in EMG activity of the prime
movers during 10 sets of the flat bench press performed to concentric failure. Balt J Health Phys Activ,
10, 22-29. https://doi.org/10.29359/BJHPA.10.1.02
Wattanaprakornkul, D., Halaki, M., Cathers, I., & Ginn, K. A. (2011). Direction-specific recruitment of rotator
cuff muscles during bench press and row. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 21(6), 1041–1049.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2011.09.002
Westcott, W. L. (2012). Resistance training is medicine. Current Sports Medicine Reports, 11(4), 209–216.
https://doi.org/10.1249/JSR.0b013e31825dabb8
Wojdala, G., Trybulski, R., Bichowska, M., & Krzysztofik, M. (2022). A Comparison of Electromyographic
Inter-Limb Asymmetry during a Standard versus a Sling Shot Assisted Bench Press Exercise. Journal of
Human Kinetics, 83(1), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2022-0084
Received: 20 July 2022; Accepted: 07 November 2022; Published: 20 April 2023
