## 4 Discussion
To mitigate such biases in future research, adopting strategies such as a double-blind design, where athletes remain unaware of the specific training regimen they are undertaking, could be beneficial. Additionally, ensuring that all groups receive comparable levels of attention and engagement during training sessions may further help to control psychological influences and enhance the validity of the findings. Despite the promising outcomes, the study is not without limitations. Notably, the study lacks a formal sample size calculation and is based on a convenience sample of 24 athletes. As such, it should be regarded as a pilot study, and the conclusions drawn should be interpreted as preliminary approximations of the subject. The relatively short six-week duration of the training protocol may have limited the extent of observable improvements, particularly among athletes with already high baseline performance levels. The differences in training protocols between the experimental and control groups complicate the attribution of improvements in the experimental group solely to the pyometric training, as the inherent differences between the protocols may have also influenced the results. Additionally, relying on the Spike Jump Test as the sole performance metric may have constrained the scope of the findings, as it does not account for variables such as jump technique or fatigue resistance, which are critical in real-game scenarios. Furthermore, the use of a 1-to-5 Likert scale in the perception survey may not have been sufficiently sensitive to detect subtle variations in athletes' perceptions of the training effects. A more detailed scale or the inclusion of additional qualitative feedback could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the athletes' experiences. The findings of this study offer valuable insights for volleyball coaches and athletes seeking to enhance vertical jump performance. The improvements observed in the EXP group suggest that pyometric training is particularly effective in developing muscular power and enhancing the speed of explosive movements. Moreover, the increased awareness of the benefits of pyometric training among athletes in the EXP group highlights its potential to enhance motivation, fostering greater commitment and overall performance improvements. In contrast, the relatively stable perceptions of the CON group indicate that traditional training methods may not evoke the same level of engagement or perceived effectiveness. This suggests that athletes in the CON group did not experience the same sense of progress or motivation that their counterparts in the EXP group did, despite the modest physical improvements in their vertical jump scores. Future research could address some of the limitations of this study by extending the duration of the training protocol to determine whether the observed improvements are sustainable over time. Including additional performance metrics, such as agility, endurance, and speed tests, would provide a more comprehensive assessment of the effects of pyometric training [29; 30]. Investigating the biomechanical mechanisms underlying the observed improvements could also offer a deeper understanding of the factors driving performance gains [31; 32; 33]. Additionally, expanding the sample size, including elite players, would enhance the generalizability of the findings. Comparing pyometric training with hybrid training protocols that combine fundamental exercises with progressive loads would help identify the most effective approaches for improving overall athletic performance.