Abstract：Recently, postactivation potentiation (PAP) has received much attention in the field of athletic training, and it has great potential to enhance athletes' performance. However, there is some controversy between static and dynamic induction methods for inducing lower limb PAP in athletes. In this study, eight male sprinters were recruited, completed static and dynamic induction experiments in a randomized crossover order to collect lower limb kinetic and electromyographic data, and aimed to explore intra- and intergroup differences between statically and dynamically induced PAP. Results indicated that: (1) there were significant intragroup differences between kinetic and electromyographic data before static induction of PAP and the recovery time points of 4 min and 8 min; (2) there were significant intragroup differences between kinetic data before dynamic induction of PAP and the recovery time points of 4 min, 8 min, and 12 min. There were significant intragroup differences between electromyographic data before dynamic induction of PAP and the recovery time points of 8 min and 12 min; (3) there were no significant intergroup differences between static and dynamic induced groups in terms of lower limb kinetic and electromyographic data at the recovery time points of 15 s, 4 min, 8 min, 12 min, 16 min, and 20 min. In conclusion: Both static and dynamic induction can induce the PAP effect, with no significant difference in the recovery time of the lower limb PAP effect in sprinters between the two methods. However, the duration of the PAP effect is longer after dynamic induction rather than static, while the time of the kinetic peak is earlier with static induction. (Full text)