Standing curls: trained lifters differ in trunk timing
In short
In a study of 15 trained and 15 untrained men, rapid standing curls at 35% of 1RM revealed closer arm–trunk activation timing in the trained group under a visual cue. The comparison does not prove training caused the difference or increased muscle growth.
Standing curls involve the trunk as well as the elbow flexors. A Neuroscience Letters study published on October 29, 2026 found a narrower timing gap between the onset of erector spinae and biceps activity in trained men during a visual-cued task. The trained group comprised 15 men with at least three years of strength training; the comparison group comprised 15 untrained men. The outcome was when activation began, rather than how large the muscles were.
How were the curl conditions compared?
Participants stood and performed rapid bilateral curls with 35% of their individual one-repetition maximum. Researchers recorded EMG from the right biceps brachii and erector spinae while changing the signal that initiated the movement. This was a laboratory reaction task, not a multiweek comparison of bodybuilding programmes. The load therefore describes the test; it does not establish an optimal training intensity.
| Starting cue | Reported observation |
|---|---|
| Visual cue alone | Arm and trunk onset times were closer in trained men |
| Visual cue plus 80dB sound | Auditory comparison condition |
| Visual cue plus 115dB startling sound | Both muscles began activating earlier in both groups |
Does earlier activation mean more muscle growth?
Muscle growth was not measured. The relative shortening of biceps onset produced by the startling signal was smaller in trained men, whereas the erector spinae response did not show that group difference. The authors interpreted the pattern as consistent with muscle-specific differences in reticulospinal contributions. That is an indirect interpretation of the response, not a direct recording of a neural pathway or evidence that trained lifters are superior on every reaction measure.
The 115dB sound was an experimental startling stimulus. Do not reproduce loud noise to improve a workout: this study did not test the effectiveness or safety of noise-based training.
What should go into a workout log?
Because the groups were compared at one point in time, training cannot be isolated as the cause of their coordination difference. A useful editorial application is to keep the conditions behind a curl record comparable. The following logging suggestions are not a technique intervention validated by this experiment; they help distinguish a change in performance from a change in how a repetition was executed.
- Distinguish standing curls from seated curl conditions.
- Record load and repetitions, and note whether body swing was used.
- When load rises, check whether trunk movement also changed.
In fairlift, keep curl loads and repetitions as accessory-work records rather than treating them as an increase in the Big 3 score. The Muscle Index calculator uses squat, bench press and deadlift one-repetition maximums. For a separate question about the magnitude of the EMG signal, read the comparison of biceps activation across curl variations. Signal magnitude and activation timing should not be read as interchangeable outcomes.
Frequently asked questions
What differed in trained men during standing curls?
Under the visual-only cue, the onset of erector spinae activity was closer to biceps onset in trained men. The finding concerns activation timing, not greater muscle size or a superior training outcome.
Should curls be trained at 35% of 1RM?
The investigators used 35% for a rapid laboratory task. They did not compare loads to identify the best intensity for strength or hypertrophy.
Does loud sound improve a workout?
The 115dB stimulus was used to probe a reaction in a laboratory task. It was not validated as an effective or safe training method and should not be reproduced during exercise.
Do curls increase the Muscle Index?
Curl records do not directly contribute to the Muscle Index. The score is based on the sum of squat, bench press and deadlift one-repetition maximums.
Source: Neuroscience Letters · Inubashiri et al. (published )