Cargando…

“Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons

In resistance training, the use of predicting proximity to momentary task failure (MF, i.e., maximum effort), and repetitions in reserve scales specifically, is a growing approach to monitoring and controlling effort. However, its validity is reliant upon accuracy in the ability to predict MF which...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Armes, Cedrik, Standish-Hunt, Henry, Androulakis-Korakakis, Patroklos, Michalopoulos, Nick, Georgieva, Tsvetelina, Hammond, Alex, Fisher, James P., Gentil, Paulo, Giessing, Jürgen, Steele, James
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7785525/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33424678
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565416
_version_ 1783632463142060032
author Armes, Cedrik
Standish-Hunt, Henry
Androulakis-Korakakis, Patroklos
Michalopoulos, Nick
Georgieva, Tsvetelina
Hammond, Alex
Fisher, James P.
Gentil, Paulo
Giessing, Jürgen
Steele, James
author_facet Armes, Cedrik
Standish-Hunt, Henry
Androulakis-Korakakis, Patroklos
Michalopoulos, Nick
Georgieva, Tsvetelina
Hammond, Alex
Fisher, James P.
Gentil, Paulo
Giessing, Jürgen
Steele, James
author_sort Armes, Cedrik
collection PubMed
description In resistance training, the use of predicting proximity to momentary task failure (MF, i.e., maximum effort), and repetitions in reserve scales specifically, is a growing approach to monitoring and controlling effort. However, its validity is reliant upon accuracy in the ability to predict MF which may be affected by congruence of the perception of effort compared with the actual effort required. The present study examined participants with at least 1 year of resistance training experience predicting their proximity to MF in two different experiments using a deception design. Within each experiment participants performed four trials of knee extensions with single sets (i.e., bouts of repetitions) to their self-determined repetition maximum (sdRM; when they predicted they could not complete the next repetition if attempted and thus would reach MF if they did) and MF (i.e., where despite attempting to do so they could not complete the current repetition). For the first experiment (n = 14) participants used loads equal to 70% of a one repetition maximum (1RM; i.e., the heaviest load that could be lifted for a single repetition) performed in a separate baseline session. Aiming to minimize participants between day variability in repetition performances, in the second separate experiment (n = 24) they used loads equal to 70% of their daily isometric maximum voluntary contraction (MVC). Results suggested that participants typically under predicted the number of repetitions they could perform to MF with a meta-analytic estimate across experiments of 2.0 [95%CIs 0.0 to 4.0]. Participants with at least 1 year of resistance training experience are likely not adequately accurate at gauging effort in submaximal conditions. This suggests that perceptions of effort during resistance training task performance may not be congruent with the actual effort required. This has implications for controlling, programming, and manipulating the actual effort in resistance training and potentially on the magnitude of desired adaptations such as improvements in muscular hypertrophy and strength.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7785525
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77855252021-01-07 “Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons Armes, Cedrik Standish-Hunt, Henry Androulakis-Korakakis, Patroklos Michalopoulos, Nick Georgieva, Tsvetelina Hammond, Alex Fisher, James P. Gentil, Paulo Giessing, Jürgen Steele, James Front Psychol Psychology In resistance training, the use of predicting proximity to momentary task failure (MF, i.e., maximum effort), and repetitions in reserve scales specifically, is a growing approach to monitoring and controlling effort. However, its validity is reliant upon accuracy in the ability to predict MF which may be affected by congruence of the perception of effort compared with the actual effort required. The present study examined participants with at least 1 year of resistance training experience predicting their proximity to MF in two different experiments using a deception design. Within each experiment participants performed four trials of knee extensions with single sets (i.e., bouts of repetitions) to their self-determined repetition maximum (sdRM; when they predicted they could not complete the next repetition if attempted and thus would reach MF if they did) and MF (i.e., where despite attempting to do so they could not complete the current repetition). For the first experiment (n = 14) participants used loads equal to 70% of a one repetition maximum (1RM; i.e., the heaviest load that could be lifted for a single repetition) performed in a separate baseline session. Aiming to minimize participants between day variability in repetition performances, in the second separate experiment (n = 24) they used loads equal to 70% of their daily isometric maximum voluntary contraction (MVC). Results suggested that participants typically under predicted the number of repetitions they could perform to MF with a meta-analytic estimate across experiments of 2.0 [95%CIs 0.0 to 4.0]. Participants with at least 1 year of resistance training experience are likely not adequately accurate at gauging effort in submaximal conditions. This suggests that perceptions of effort during resistance training task performance may not be congruent with the actual effort required. This has implications for controlling, programming, and manipulating the actual effort in resistance training and potentially on the magnitude of desired adaptations such as improvements in muscular hypertrophy and strength. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7785525/ /pubmed/33424678 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565416 Text en Copyright © 2020 Armes, Standish-Hunt, Androulakis-Korakakis, Michalopoulos, Georgieva, Hammond, Fisher, Gentil, Giessing and Steele. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Armes, Cedrik
Standish-Hunt, Henry
Androulakis-Korakakis, Patroklos
Michalopoulos, Nick
Georgieva, Tsvetelina
Hammond, Alex
Fisher, James P.
Gentil, Paulo
Giessing, Jürgen
Steele, James
“Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons
title “Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons
title_full “Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons
title_fullStr “Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons
title_full_unstemmed “Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons
title_short “Just One More Rep!” – Ability to Predict Proximity to Task Failure in Resistance Trained Persons
title_sort “just one more rep!” – ability to predict proximity to task failure in resistance trained persons
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7785525/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33424678
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565416
work_keys_str_mv AT armescedrik justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT standishhunthenry justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT androulakiskorakakispatroklos justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT michalopoulosnick justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT georgievatsvetelina justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT hammondalex justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT fisherjamesp justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT gentilpaulo justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT giessingjurgen justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons
AT steelejames justonemorerepabilitytopredictproximitytotaskfailureinresistancetrainedpersons