1

Zoe Holtby

The Effect of Stance on Muscle Activation
In the Squat
The squat is a widely recognised exercise that is necessary for athletes to perform due
to the similarity of movement that occurs in many sports and daily activities; hip, knee
and ankle joints are flexed and extended simultaneously during this movement
(Chandler et al,d.u; Clark et al., 2012). Muscular activity in the gluteus maximus,
hamstrings, quadriceps, obliques, abdominals, thigh adductors and erector spinae,
within a squat, are proposed to strengthen athletic performance due to the
neuromuscular and biomechanical resemblance of many athletic actions.
The standardised squat position should start with feet parallel and shoulder width apart
or slightly wider with the toes turned away from the centre, approximately between 20-
35 degrees, so that the the thigh and foot are parallel(Everett,2012;Ratamess,2012);
however, Everett (2012) states that some athletes may need to adjust the position
slightly due to anthropmetric differences and differing levels of flexibility. Nonetheless,
assuming the corrct position will reduce the risk of injury by ensuring the correct
biomechanical alignment and allowing a full range of motion (Everett,2012).
According to Everett (2012) the effectiveness of the squat is largely influenced by foot
positioning; the postioning and movement of the back and hips can be affected by the
degree of external rotation and width of the stance, which will ulitmately define whether
the squat is technically successful or a potential cause for injury.
2
Zoe Holtby

It is generally believed that altering the stance width of the squat will result in training
adaptions, due to particular muscle groups being activated (Clark et al., 2012; Signorile
et al., 1995). For example, it is claimed that the vastus medialis and adductors are
predominantly activated when adopting a wider stance, whilst a narrow stance primarily
activates the vastus lateralis (Beardsley, 2013).
A study by McCaw and Melrose (1999) investigated if parallel squatting a low (60%)
and high load (75%) of 1 RM in a narrow (75% of shoulder width), shoulder width and
wide stance (140% of shoulder width) would affect the activation of the gluteus
maximus, adductor longus, vastus medialis, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis and biceps
femoris in 9 experienced male lifters; muscle activity was measured by using surface
electromyography (EMG).The results displayed that the high load (75% of
1RM)produced higher EMG values in the vastus meadialis, rectus femoris and vastus
lateralis, when compared to 1RM load of 60%, though no differences were found in the
quadriceps among the 3 stances. Yet, the gluteus maximus and adductor longus
displayed greater mean EMG values when assuming a wide stance compared to a
narrow and shoulder width stance.
These results may be due to the muscles being utilized more than normal; for example,
In the ascent of a squat the adductor longus, along with adductor brevis and magnus,
pull the thigh in towards the body in order to extend the hip and knee to ensure the body
is in a neutral position, although when adopting a wider stance range of motion is
increased in the adductors along with external rotation of the hip, thus increasing
muscular activity (McCaw and Melrose,1999).
3
Zoe Holtby

According to Beardsley (2013a) the results displaying a higher activation in the gluteus
maximus is due to the hip being positioned in a wider stance which results in a greater
degree of abduction and also causes the hips to external rotate, then causes the GM to
shorten. Similarly, Paoli et al.,(2009) found that in wide stance lifting 70% of 1RM the
gluteus maximus displayed a significantly greater display of EMG activity compared to a
narrow or shoulder width stance. McCaw and Melrose (1999) propose that a wider
stance may affect the length-tension curve, as the joint angle is not in an optimal
position to produce force; therefore the shortened GM will have to work harder to
produce force which would ultimately be displayed within the EMG values.
Conversely, the study of McCaw and Melrose (1999) allowed the participants to adopt
their preferential foot placement to maintain a natural squatting position; however, the
authors later contradict this and highlight that previous literature reports that foot
position, either laterally rotated or parallel, within a wide, shoulder width or narrow
stance can further enhance activation in the vastus medialis or the vastus lateralis.
A study by Murray et al.,(2013) investigated these theories by measuring EMG activity
in vastus medialis, rectus femoris and vastus lateralis, in 7 females and 13 males. Each
subjects performed 5 repetitions on the power tower at 55% of their bodyweight (a
partial weight bearing squat machine), adopting an internally rotated, externally rotated,
staggered or neutral foot position. Results demonstrated that vastus medialis and
vastus lateralis activity was significantly different in the staggered position compared to
the externally (P = 0.038; P = 0.018) and internally rotated positions (p= 0.005); rectus
femoris activity also yielded greater activity in the staggered position compared to the
neutral position (P = 0.012), hence this suggests that a staggered position is the most
4
Zoe Holtby

prominent foot position for a greater activity in the quadriceps, although this may need
to be investigated using a full weight bearing squat rather than a partial weight bearing
technique (Murray et al.,2009).
In terms of squat kinematics, a study by Escamilla et al., (2001b) researched varying
stances within a barbell back (BB) squat, to identify if squat kinematics were affected.
Three categories of stance width were standardised according to shoulder width (SW);
narrow (107% of SW), medium (142% of SW) and wide (169% of SW). The results
documented significant comparisons between the narrow (NS) and wide stance (WS),
with wide stance producing greater hip flexion (6-11

), horizontal thigh position (7-12

),
hip external rotation (6

) and lower leg vertical shank position (5-9

), thus demonstrating
that squat kinematics are affected by varying stance width. The greater hip flexion,
horizontal thigh position and vertical shank position were proposed to be due to forward
knee movement, 4-6cm greater in NS than WS, which the authors advise amplifies knee
shear forces (Escamilla et al., 2001); therefore it could be assumed that adopting a
wider stance may reduce knee shearing forces and potentially allow help those who
have previous knee injuries (Beardsley,2013b).
The authors also found that the wide stance had a greater effect on the acceleration
phase, as more time was spent in this phase when performing a wide stance squat; this
may be beneficial for athletes as it may potentially promote a greater training effect
(Escamilla et al., 2001b;Beardsley, 2013b).

5
Zoe Holtby

In conclusion, the varying stance widths that are applicable to a squat have shown that
activity within the quadriceps is not significantly enhanced when adopting a difference
stance. However, it seems that a wide stance does enhance activation in the gluteus
maximus and the adductor longus, thus allowing athletes to gain some advantage when
adopting a wide squat stance. Although, it should be noted that some of these studies
did not normalize the EMG of each muscle, which may have presented different results
as some muscles are concealed by more fat, thus the results documented may not have
presented accurate EMG activity of the specific muscles tested (Beardsley, 2013a).

6
Zoe Holtby

References
Beardsley, C.(2013a) How does stance width effect muscle activity in the squat?
[Online] Available from
http://www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com/2013/05/08/stance-width-squats/
[Accessed April 18
th
2014.]
Beardsley,C.(2013b) What difference does squat stance width make? [Online] Available
from http://www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com/2013/01/28/squat-stance-width/
[Accessed April 18
th
2014.]
Chandler,J., McMillan,J.,Kibler,B., and Richards,D. (Date unknown) Safety of the Squat
Exercise. [Online] Available from http://www.acsm.org/docs/current-
comments/safetysquat.pdf [Accessed March 24th 2014.]
Clark,D.R.Lamber,M.I.,and Hunter,A.M.(2012) Muscle Activation in the Loaded Barbell
Squat: A Brief Review. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning.Vol.26, No.4:1169-
1178.
Escamilla, R.F., Fleisig, G.S., Lowry, T.M., Barrentine, S.W. & Andrews, J.R. (2001a) A
three-dimensional biomechanical analysis of the squat during varying stance widths.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. Vol. 33, No. 6: 98498.
Escamilla, R.F., Fleisig, G.S., Zheng, N., Lander, J.E., Barrentine, S.W., Andrews, J.R.,
Bergemann, B.W. & Moorman, C.T. (2001b) Effects of technique variations on knee
biomechanics during the squat and leg press. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise. Vol. 33, No. 9: 155266.
7
Zoe Holtby

McCaw, S.T. & Melrose, D.R. (1999) Stance width and bar load effects on leg muscle
activity during the parallel squat. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. Vol. 31, No.
3: 428436.
Murray, N.Cipriani, D.ORand,D.,and Reed-Jones,R. (2012). Effects of Foot Position
during Squatting on the Quadriceps Femoris: An Electromyographic Study. International
Journal of Exercise Science.Vol. 6,No.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 Research / National Strength &
Conditioning Association. Vol. 23, No. 1: 24650.
Signorile,J.F.Kwiatkowski,K.Caruso,J.F., and Roberston,B.(1995) Effect of foot position
on the electromyographical activity of the superficial quadriceps muscles during the
parallel squat and knee extension. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research.
Vol. 9, No. 3.