Session perceived exertion and affective responses to self-selected and imposed cycle exercise of the same intensity in young men

被引:12
作者
Haile, Luke [1 ]
Goss, Fredric L. [2 ]
Robertson, Robert J. [2 ]
Andreacci, Joseph L. [3 ]
Gallagher, Michael, Jr. [4 ]
Nagle, Elizabeth F. [2 ]
机构
[1] Lock Haven Univ Penn, Dept Hlth Sci, Lock Haven, PA 17445 USA
[2] Univ Pittsburgh, Dept Hlth & Phys Act, Pittsburgh, PA USA
[3] Bloomsburg Univ Penn, Dept Exercise Sci, Bloomsburg, PA 17815 USA
[4] Univ Cent Arkansas, Dept Kinesiol & Phys Educ, Conway, AR USA
关键词
RPE; OMNI Scale; Affect; Affective valence; Feeling Scale; Cycle ergometry; TRAINING LOAD; RPE METHOD; IMPACT; OVERWEIGHT; CAFFEINE; VALIDITY; INTERVAL; PAIN;
D O I
10.1007/s00421-013-2604-0
中图分类号
Q4 [生理学];
学科分类号
071003 ;
摘要
Session perceived exertion (S-RPE) and session affective responses (S-AR) are post-exercise estimates of the global responses experienced during exercise. To compare S-RPE and S-AR to acute RPE (A-RPE) and acute AR (A-AR) during self-selected (SS) and imposed (IMP) exercise of the same workload. Thirty-two males (22.3 +/- A 2.2 years) performed two, 20-min cycle exercise trials. In the SS trial, subjects adjusted SS workload every 5 min. In the IMP trial, workload was automatically adjusted to the SS workload. Experimental (EXP, n = 16) subjects were unaware that workload was the same between the trials. Control (CON, n = 16) subjects were aware that both trials were of the same workload. A-RPE and A-AR were measured every 5 min using the OMNI Scale and Feeling Scale, respectively. Fifteen minutes following a cool-down, subjects rated S-RPE and S-AR. Session and exercise values were compared between trials and groups using ANOVA. No between-group differences were observed. There were no differences between the SS and IMP trials for S-RPE, A-RPE, S-AR and A-AR. For SS and IMP trials, S-RPE was greater than A-RPE (4.6 +/- A 1.5 vs. 3.9 +/- A 1.4; 4.3 +/- A 1.6 vs. 3.7 +/- A 1.4, respectively, p < 0.05). S-AR was greater than A-AR for the SS trial (1.9 +/- A 1.3 vs. 2.3 +/- A 1.5, p < 0.05), but not the IMP trial (1.9 +/- A 1.5 vs. 2.2 +/- A 1.4). A mismatch exists between the session and acute exercise values for RPE and AR during the SS cycle exercise in young males.
引用
收藏
页码:1755 / 1765
页数:11
相关论文
共 58 条
  • [1] A comparison of the effects of caffeine following abstinence and normal caffeine use
    Addicott, Merideth A.
    Laurienti, Paul J.
    [J]. PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2009, 207 (03) : 423 - 431
  • [2] A Comparison of Methods Used for Quantifying Internal Training Load in Women Soccer Players
    Alexiou, Helen
    Coutts, Aaron J.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS PHYSIOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE, 2008, 3 (03) : 320 - 330
  • [3] Quantifying Training Intensity Distribution in a Group of Norwegian Professional Soccer Players
    Algroy, Erling A.
    Hetlelid, Ken J.
    Seiler, Stephen
    Pedersen, Jorg I. Stray
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS PHYSIOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE, 2011, 6 (01) : 70 - 81
  • [4] Anderson L, 2003, J STRENGTH COND RES, V17, P734
  • [5] [Anonymous], 1998, BORGS PERCEIVED EXER
  • [6] Effect of caffeine on RPE and perceptions of pain, arousal, and pleasure/displeasure during a cycling time trial in endurance trained and active men
    Astorino, Todd A.
    Cottrell, Trisha
    Lozano, Andrea Talhami
    Aburto-Pratt, Kylan
    Duhon, Jessica
    [J]. PHYSIOLOGY & BEHAVIOR, 2012, 106 (02) : 211 - 217
  • [7] EFFECT OF TWO RECOVERY METHODS ON REPEATED CLOSED-HANDED AND OPEN-HANDED WEIGHT-ASSISTED PULL-UPS
    Bacon, Nicholas T.
    Wingo, Jonathan E.
    Richardson, Mark T.
    Ryan, Greg A.
    Pangallo, Tracey C.
    Bishop, Phillip A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2012, 26 (05) : 1348 - 1352
  • [8] BORG G, 1970, Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, V2, P92
  • [9] Charro MA, 2010, J SPORT MED PHYS FIT, V50, P229
  • [10] Enhanced mood and psychomotor performance by a caffeine-containing energy capsule in fatigued individuals
    Childs, Emma
    de Wit, Harriet
    [J]. EXPERIMENTAL AND CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2008, 16 (01) : 13 - 21