The effect of self-selecting the number of repetitions on motor performance and psychological outcomes

A systematic narrative review of extrinsic strategies to improve affective responses to exercise

Background

Extrinsic strategies affect the exercise experience but fall outside the frequency, intensity, time, and type (i.e., dose-determining) principles. To our knowledge, no systematic review has focused on extrinsic strategies to influence the affective responses to exercise. The objective was to identify extrinsic strategies that seek to influence affective responses during exercise and other motivationally relevant variables including post-exercise momentary affective valence, remembered and forecasted pleasure, and enjoyment.

Methods

For inclusion, eligible articles reported peer-reviewed original research, used acute bouts of exercise, and used a dimensional approach for measuring affective responses or measured enjoyment post-exercise. Web of Science, PubMed, and PsychINFO databases were last searched on 10th September 2021. Quality assessment was completed following the Effective Public Health Practice Project approach. Results were presented using a narrative synthesis.

Results

125 studies were included with sample descriptions, study design (extrinsic strategies, mode, type, intensity, and duration), measurement details, and results summarised for each study.

Conclusions

71% of studies were categorised as Weak according to the quality assessment tool with sampling practices (self-referred participants) and poor reporting of participant withdrawals/drop-outs the predominant reasons for Weak ratings. A wide variety of extrinsic strategies were reported with music, music videos, immersive virtual reality, outdoor exercise, caffeine, high-to-low pattern of exercise intensity, self-selected exercise intensity, and manipulation of self-efficacy offering promise as suitable strategies to positively change how people feel during exercise.

Systematic Review Registration

https://osf.io/jbh8v/.

Should I Rest or Should I Go Now? A Randomized Cross-Over Trial Comparing Fixed and Self-Selected Rest Durations in High-Intensity Interval Training Cycling Sessions

BACKGROUND

In high-intensity interval training (HIIT), the rest durations between intervals are commonly prescribed using a fixed approach (e.g., 30 s between intervals). An alternative is the self-selected (SS) approach, in which trainees select their resting durations. Studies comparing the two approaches report mixed results. However, in these studies, trainees in the SS condition rested for as little or as long as they wished, leading to dissimilar total rest durations between conditions. Here, for the first time, we compare the two approaches while controlling for total rest duration.

METHODS

Twenty-four amateur adult male cyclists completed a familiarization session, followed by two counterbalanced cycling HIIT sessions. Each session was composed of nine, 30-s intervals, in which the goal was to accumulate as many watts as possible on an SRM ergometer. In the fixed condition, cyclists rested for 90 s between intervals. In the SS condition, cyclists had 720 s (i.e., 8  × 90 s) of rest to allocate in any way they wished. We measured and compared watts, heart rate, electromyography of the knee flexors and extensors, rating of perceived effort and fatigue, perception of autonomy and enjoyment. Additionally, a subsample of ten cyclists completed a retest of the SS condition.

RESULTS

With the exception of perception of autonomy, which was higher in the SS condition, outcomes were highly similar in both conditions. For example, the average aggregated differences were: 0.57 (95% CI - 8.94, 10.09) for watts; - 0.85 (95% CI - 2.89, 1.18) for heart rate; and 0.01 (95% CI - 0.29, 0.30) for rating of perceived effort (on a 0-10 scale). Additionally, the retest of the SS condition resulted in a similar rest allocation pattern across the intervals and in similar outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Given the similarities in performance, physiological and psychological outcomes between the fixed and SS conditions, both can be equally utilized based on coaches' and cyclists' preferences and training goals.

Prescribing Intensity in Resistance Training Using Rating of Perceived Effort: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: Rating of perceived effort (RPE) scales are used to prescribe intensity in resistance training (RT) in several ways. For instance, trainees can reach a specific RPE value by modifying the number of repetitions, lifted loads, or other training variables. Given the multiple approaches of prescribing intensity using RPE and its growing popularity, we compared the effects of two RPE prescription approaches on adherence rates, body composition, performance and psychological outcomes, in an online RT intervention. Methods: We randomly assigned 57 healthy participants without RT experience (60% females, age range: 18-45) to one of two groups that received two weekly RT sessions using a resistance-band for 8 weeks. In the fixed-repetition group, participants adjusted the band resistance with the goal of completing 10 repetitions and reaching a 7-RPE on a 0-10 scale by the 10th repetition. In the open-repetition group, participants selected their preferred band resistance and completed repetitions until reaching a 7-RPE by the final repetition. We measured body composition, performance, and program satisfaction rates. Results: We assessed 46 participants at post-test, 24 from the fixed-repetition group and 22 from the open-repetition group. We observed non-significant and trivial differences between groups in all outcomes (p > 0.05). We then combined the pre-post change scores of the two groups. We found that adherence rates began at 89% and gradually decreased to 42%. On average, participants increased their fat-free mass [0.3 kg (95% CI: 0.1-0.6)], isometric mid-thigh pull [5.5 kg (95% CI: 0.8-10.4)], isometric knee-extension [2.2 kg (95% CI: 0.8-3.7)], and push-ups [6.3 repetitions (95% CI: 4.5-8.2)]. We observed non-significant and trivial changes in bodyweight, grip-force, and countermovement jump. Participants reported high satisfaction rates with all components of the program. Conclusion: Participants in both groups improved their body composition and physical capacity to a similar extent, and reported comparable satisfaction rates with the programs they followed. Accordingly, either prescription approach can be used to deliver online RT sessions based on personal preferences and logistical constraints. However, since adherences rates declined over the course of the study, future research should test additional strategies aiming to maintain adherence rates.

A comparison between predetermined and self-selected approaches in resistance training: effects on power performance and psychological outcomes among elite youth athletes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate if choice over resistance training exercise order affects motor performance and psychological outcomes among elite youth hockey players.

METHODS

Seventeen elite hockey players (male, n = 14; female, n = 3, age: 15.1 ± 1.1 years) participated in this study. In the first session, individual optimum power loads were calculated in the back squat, jump squat, bench press and bench throw exercises. Then, in four counterbalanced sessions, participants completed three sets of six repetitions in the same exercises loaded with their optimum power loads. In two sessions, athletes used a self-selected order of exercises, while in other two sessions the order was predetermined. Power outputs were estimated with a linear position transducer. Fatigue and enjoyment were measured during and after the sessions using standardized questionnaires. Repeated measures analyses of variance and a paired-sample t-test were used to compare the effects between conditions.

RESULTS

We observed trivial to small differences between conditions in power outputs (p ≥ 0.07; ES ≤ 0.21), fatigue (p ≥ 0.42; ES ≤ 0.33) and enjoyment (p = 0.72; ES = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Given the comparable effects between approaches, both can be used when coaching youth athletes. Self-selecting the order of exercises based on preferences is a feasible and practical coaching option when working with youth athletes.