ArticlePDF Available

Increasing the Pleasure and Enjoyment of Exercise: A Novel Resistance-Training Protocol

Authors:

Abstract

This study was designed to test the effect of an increasing- (UP) or decreasing-intensity (DOWN) resistance-training (RT) protocol on the pleasure and enjoyment of RT. The participants (N = 40; mean age = 35.0 ± 9.2 years) completed two RT sessions comprising 3 × 10 repetitions of six exercises. In the UP condition, load progressively increased from 55% to 75% of 1-repetition maximum, while in the DOWN condition, this pattern was reversed (i.e., 75–55% 1-repetition maximum). The DOWN condition resulted in more overall pleasure compared with UP and a slope of increasing pleasure, while the UP condition resulted in decreasing pleasure. Enjoyment of RT, postexercise pleasure, and remembered pleasure were all significantly greater for DOWN compared with UP (all ps > .01). These findings suggest that decreasing RT intensity throughout an exercise bout can elicit a positive slope of pleasure and enhance affective evaluations of exercise.
1
Increasing the pleasure and enjoyment of exercise: A novel resistance training protocol
2
3
Jasmin C. Hutchinson1*, Zachary Zenko2, Sam Santich1, & Paul C. Dalton3
4
1Springfield College, Department of Exercise Science and Sport Studies, Springfield, MA.
5
2California State University Bakersfield, Department of Kinesiology, Bakersfield, CA.
6
3Lebanon Valley College, Department of Exercise Science, Annville, PA.
7
8
9
This is the unformatted version of the published article in
10
Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology
11
12
Citation: Hutchinson, J. C., Zenko, Z., Santich, S., & Dalton, P. C. (2020). Increasing the
13
pleasure and enjoyment of exercise: A novel resistance training protocol. Journal of Sport &
14
Exercise Psychology, 42(2), 143-152. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2019-0089
15
16
17
*Corresponding Author:
18
Jasmin C. Hutchinson
19
Springfield College
20
Department of Exercise and Sport Studies
21
Phone: 413-748-3601
22
E-mail: jhutchinson@springfieldcollege.edu
23
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 2
Abstract
1
This study was designed to test the effect of an increasing (UP) or decreasing (DOWN) intensity
2
resistance training (RT) protocol on pleasure and enjoyment of RT. Participants (N = 40; mean
3
age = 35.0 ± 9.2 years) completed two RT sessions comprising 3 x 10 reps of six exercises. In
4
the UP condition, load progressively increased from 55% to 75% of 1-repetition maximum (1-
5
RM) while in the decreasing-intensity DOWN condition, this pattern was reversed (i.e., 75% to
6
55% 1-RM). The DOWN condition resulted in more overall pleasure compared to UP, and a
7
slope of increasing pleasure while the UP condition resulted in decreasing pleasure. Enjoyment
8
of RT, postexercise pleasure, and remembered pleasure were all significantly greater for DOWN
9
compared to UP (all p > .01). These findings suggest that decreasing RT intensity throughout an
10
exercise bout can elicit a positive slope of pleasure and enhance affective evaluations of exercise.
11
(149 words)
12
Keywords: Affect, resistance exercise, behavioral economics, remembered utility
13
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 3
Regular resistance training (RT) is associated with a myriad of physical and
1
psychological benefits, including improvements in muscular fitness, body composition, insulin
2
sensitivity, bone mineral density, and mental health (Westcott, 2012). Despite these benefits,
3
only 21.9% of men and 17.5% of women in the USA report regular participation in RT (Centers
4
for Disease Control, 2006), with similar estimates for other industrialized nations (e.g. Dalbo et
5
al., 2015). Accordingly, there is a pressing need for new and innovative methods to promote RT
6
that might complement existing cognitive-behavioral strategies. One approach, that has
7
experienced a recent surge of interest and empirical support, considers the importance of
8
exercise-related affect and automatic associations of exercise as important determinants of
9
exercise behavior (e.g., Brand & Ekkekakis, 2018; Rhodes & Kates, 2015).
10
Core affect is described as a simple non-reflective state with two underlying dimensions
11
of valence (pleasantness-unpleasantness) and arousal (activation) (Russell, 1980). When
12
considering affective response to exercise as a potential determinant of exercise behavior... it is
13
most useful to focus on affective valence (Lee, Emerson, & Williams, 2016, p.4); therefore, our
14
discussion of affective responses to exercise will concentrate on core affective valence. Affective
15
experiences associated with a particular behavior (e.g., feeling good when walking) can be
16
distinguished from cognitive or reflective attitudes (e.g., walking is good for my health).
17
Hedonic theories of motivation propose that affective responses play an integral role in
18
behavioral decision-making. It is theorized that positive affective responses during exercise will
19
increase participation because people tend to engage in behaviors that bring them pleasure and
20
avoid activities that are accompanied by feelings of displeasure (Ekkekakis & Dafermos, 2012).
21
This notion was supported in a systematic review, which found that a positive change in affect
22
during moderate-intensity exercise was linked to future exercise behavior (Rhodes & Kates,
23
2015).
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 4
Affective Responses to Resistance Training
1
Affective responses to RT are understudied; one reason for this is the lack of guiding
2
conceptual framework (Greene & Petruzzello, 2015). Affective responses to aerobic exercise
3
have been shown to be intensity dependent. The dual-mode model (DMM; Ekkekakis, 2009)
4
posits that affective valence is largely positive during low intensity exercise, at least at the group
5
level, but high intensity exercise (i.e., that which exceeds the ventilatory threshold) elicits
6
negative shifts in affective valence, due to the increasing influence of interoceptive cues that
7
signal homeostatic disruption. At exercise intensities that approximate VT, there is considerable
8
inter-individual variability in affective responses. These differences can be accounted for, in part,
9
by cognitive strategies and individual differences in preference for and tolerance of the somatic
10
sensations associated with vigorous exercise (Ekkekakis, Parfitt, & Petruzzello, 2011). The
11
DMM has been effective in predicting affective responses during aerobic exercise, but there is
12
less evidence on how (or indeed if) this theory may apply to RT (Cavarretta, Hall, & Bixby,
13
2018). Nonetheless, research evidence to date suggests that a similar doseresponse relationship
14
exists between intensity and affect for RT.
15
Exercise-induced affective change associated with three different RT protocols (40%,
16
70%, and 100% of 10-repetition maximum [RM]) was examined by Arent, Landers, Matt, and
17
Etnier (2005). A curvilinear dose-response relationship between intensity and affective responses
18
was reported, with moderate intensity (70% 10-RM) training producing the greatest pre- to post-
19
exercise improvement in affective valence, compared to training loads at 40% and 100% 10-RM.
20
Recognizing the need to also assess affect during exercise, Greene and Petruzzello (2015)
21
examined affective responses to RT before, during, and after RT protocols at 70% and 100% 10-
22
RM. Again, a dose-response relationship was supported; participants felt more positive in
23
response to RT loads corresponding to 70% 10-RM, compared to higher training loads
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 5
corresponding to 100% of their 10-RM, and exercise enjoyment was significantly greater
1
following 70% vs. 100% 10-RM conditions. Divergent patterns of affective response emerged as
2
a function of RT load when comparing 40% 1-RM, 70% 1-RM, and a self-selected (SS) load
3
(Focht et al, 2015). In the SS condition, participants were instructed to select a load that would
4
be comfortable, yet still provide a good challenging workout; the mean selected intensity was
5
57% 1-RM. Ratings of pleasure (affective valence) increased from baseline during the 40% 1-
6
RM and SS conditions but decreased from baseline during the 70% 1-RM condition.
7
One limitation of the aforementioned research is that in-task affect ratings were taken
8
during rest-periods between exercise sets, rather than during the actual exercise itself. Such
9
ratings might be influenced by so-called affective-rebound, which describes “a pronounced and
10
instantaneous rebound from affective negativity to affective positivity” as soon as the exercise
11
stimulus is terminated (Hall, Ekkekakis, & Petruzzello, 2002, p.60). This phenomenon is
12
described by the opponent-process theory of affect (Solomon & Corbit, 1974) which posits that
13
all sensations consist of a primary process and an ‘opponent process’ of opposite valence. The
14
opponent process activates after the primary process is quieted, for example, when a painful
15
sensation is abruptly terminated it is immediately replaced by a pleasant feeling of pain relief
16
(Leknes, Brooks, Wiech, & Tracey, 2008).
17
Patterns of Pleasure-Displeasure
18
Findings from the field of behavioral economics indicate that the slope of pleasure (i.e.,
19
rate and direction of pleasure change during an experience) can influence the overall
20
retrospective evaluation of affectively salient tasks (Zauberman, Diehl, & Ariely, 2006). When
21
evaluating an experience, individuals are more likely to prefer an unpleasant experience followed
22
by a more pleasant experience (i.e., an improving pattern) than a pleasant experience followed by
23
a less pleasant experience (i.e., a declining pattern) (Zauberman et al., 2006). This finding
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 6
indicates a recency effect, wherein the pleasure or displeasure experienced at the end of an
1
experience is heavily weighted in the overall affective evaluation of the experience (Kahneman,
2
Fredrickson, Schreiber, & Redelmeier, 1993); a notion that has received some initial support in
3
an exercise context (Brewer, Manos, McDevitt, Cornelius, & Van Raalte, 2000; Hargreaves &
4
Stych, 2013).
5
Manipulating the Slope of Intensity and Pleasure
6
To date, no study has examined the impact of RT load manipulations on the slope of
7
affective valence during RT. This is an important question because it may be possible to create
8
an improving pattern of affect during a RT session, which might enhance the overall memory
9
and evaluation of the exercise session. Beginning an exercise session with a heavy load and
10
ending with a lighter load may allow participants to experience increasing pleasure during RT,
11
while still exposing them to a load and repetition range that is associated with strength and
12
hypertrophic gains (Schoenfeld, Wilson, Lowery, & Krieger, 2016) and a low risk of injury (da
13
Silva et al., 2010). When comparing increasing and decreasing intensity RT protocols, past
14
researchers have reported no significant differences between protocols on strength gains, enzyme
15
activity, or electromyography amplitude (da Silva et al., 2010; Pereira, Mendel, Schettino,
16
Machado, & Augusto-Silva, 2013). Therefore, it seems possible to improve the affective
17
experience of an RT session while keeping the exercise load constant. Such an approach was
18
taken with aerobic exercise by Zenko, Ekkekakis, and Ariely (2016).
19
Zenko et al. (2016) manipulated pleasure responses by randomizing participants to either
20
an increasing or a decreasing intensity protocol during a 15-min bout of recumbent cycling. In
21
the increasing-intensity protocol, exercise intensity was gradually increased from to low (0
22
Watts) to high (120% of the Watts corresponding to the ventilatory threshold [VT]) intensity. In
23
the decreasing-intensity protocol, this pattern was reversed, and intensity was continuously
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 7
decreased from high (120% of VT Watts) to low (0 Watts). The increasing-intensity group felt
1
progressively less pleasant (or more unpleasant) while the opposite was true for the decreasing-
2
intensity group; thus, there was an inverse relation between pleasure and intensity. Despite
3
having similar mean affective responses during exercise, the decreasing-intensity group reported
4
more positive postexercise pleasure, remembered pleasure, forecasted pleasure, and enjoyment
5
of exercise.
6
Based upon the contributions of Greene and Petruzzello (2015), Focht et al. (2015) and
7
Zenko et al. (2016), we predicted that people would feel increasingly more pleasant in response
8
to decreasing RT intensities compared to increasing RT intensities. A training method known as
9
the Oxford technique, or Reverse Pyramid Training (RPT), emphasizes training from a high load
10
to a lighter load (e.g., Pour & Naghibi, 2015). However, RPT involves one or more sets of one
11
particular exercise before moving on to complete a different exercise. This creates a pattern of
12
multiple cycles of high-to-low training loads for the duration of the session. In contrast, we were
13
interested in testing the effectiveness of a Modified Reverse Pyramid Training protocol on
14
affective responses to RT.
15
In the Modified RPT protocol (henceforth “DOWN”), participants completed the RT
16
exercises in a circuit, beginning with one set at a high load (75% 1-RM), then one set a medium
17
load (65% 1-RM), and ending with one set at a low load (55% 1-RM). See Figure 1 for an
18
example comparison between RPT and DOWN. Participants served as their own control using a
19
modified pyramid training (henceforth “UP”) protocol with progressively heavier loads for each
20
circuit (i.e. 55% 1-RM, 65% 1-RM, 75% 1-RM). Thus, unlike previous research (Focht et al.,
21
2015; Greene & Petruzello, 2015), which has investigated the effect of intensity on affect
22
without equating for volume (Cavarretta et al., 2018), the total training volume (number of
23
repetitions and number of sets) was identical in both RT sessions.
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 8
We hypothesized several psychological benefits of Modified RPT. First, DOWN would
1
result in greater postexercise pleasure (H1) and enjoyment (H2) than UP. Second, DOWN would
2
be remembered as more pleasant immediately following the exercise session (H3) and 24 hr later
3
(H4) compared to UP. We also had exploratory hypotheses, including a positive association
4
between the slope of affective responses experienced during exercise and postexercise pleasure,
5
enjoyment, and remembered pleasure (H5) and a stronger association of affective valence toward
6
the end of exercise (vs. beginning) with postexercise pleasure, enjoyment, and remembered
7
pleasure (H6).
8
Method
9
Prior to data collection, the experimental design and analyses were registered and made
10
public on AsPredicted.org (https://aspredicted.org/vj7ps.pdf). The Institutional Review Board of
11
the first author approved the study protocol on June 26, 2017. Each participant provided
12
informed consent and completed a prescreening questionnaire (Riebe et al., 2015) to establish
13
absence of known cardiovascular, metabolic, or renal disease and/or symptoms suggestive of
14
these conditions.
15
A statistical power analysis was conducted using G*Power software (Faul, Erdfelder,
16
Buchner, & Lang, 2009) to establish appropriate sample size for a one-way repeated-measures
17
(RM) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Assuming a medium effect size (f = 0.25;
18
Greene and Petruzzello, 2015), with an alpha level of 0.05, power at 0.8, and anticipating
19
moderately correlated repeated measures (r = 0.40) the power analysis indicated that a minimum
20
of 40 participants would be required.
21
Participants
22
Volunteer participants were recruited using social media posts and flyers distributed on a
23
college campus. Fifty-two participants were screened for eligibility using an online survey
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 9
platform (Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA). Eligibility criteria included age 1850 yr, nonsmoking,
1
and reporting < 3 days per week of moderate to vigorous aerobic exercise and < 2 days per week
2
of resistance training over the past 6 months. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy and signs or
3
symptoms of and/or known cardiovascular, metabolic or renal disease. After this initial
4
screening, eligible participants (n = 45) were scheduled for testing. Five participants withdrew
5
from the study during testing, therefore 40 participants were retained (30 women, 9 men and 1
6
participant who identified as transgender; mean ± SD; age = 35.0 ± 9.2 yr, height = 166.5 ± 7.7
7
cm, body mass = 77.1 ± 18.7 kg/m2). The racial distribution was 75.0% White, 23.3% Black or
8
African American, 1.7% other; and 1.0% were Hispanic. Most participants were overweight
9
(37.5%) or had obesity (25.0%) according to BMI guidelines, while 37.5% were of normal
10
weight.
11
Measures
12
The main dependent variables for hypothesis testing were affective valence (pleasure),
13
enjoyment, and remembered pleasure. Affective valence (during- and post-exercise) was
14
assessed using the Feeling Scale (FS; Hardy & Rejeski, 1989). The FS is a single-item scale that
15
utilizes the stem ‘How do you feel right now, at this moment?’ with possible responses ranging
16
from -5 (very bad) to +5 (very good) and verbal anchors at zero (neutral) and odd numbers.
17
Drawing on the results of a discriminant function analysis, Hardy and Rejeski concluded that the
18
good/bad dimension of the FS was representative of a core affective expression (Russell, 1980).
19
Exercise enjoyment was measured using the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale-8
20
(PACES-8; Mullen et al., 2011). Respondents were asked to rate "how you feel at the moment
21
about the physical activity you have been doing" using a 7-point bipolar rating scale (three items
22
are reverse scored). Higher PACES-8 scores reflect greater levels of enjoyment. Group and
23
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 10
longitudinal invariance has been established for the PACES-8 (Mullen et al., 2011). Internal
1
consistency in the present sample was very good (Chronbach’s α = .86 .92).
2
Remembered pleasure was measured with the Empirical Valence Scale (EVS; Lishner,
3
Cooter, & Zald, 2008), which is a bipolar rating scale with empirically spaced verbal descriptors
4
along a continuum ranging from most unpleasant imaginable to most pleasant imaginable.
5
Respondents were administered the question, “How did you feel during the exercise session you
6
just completed? and they marked their response on the 200 mm EVS using a pencil. EVS scores
7
range from -100 to 100, corresponding to the distance in millimeters from the neutral 0-point in
8
the unpleasant and pleasant directions, respectively. The use of a different measurement format
9
to that of the FS served to minimize common-method variance (Zenko et al., 2016). Participants
10
were also contacted 24 hr postexercise via text message for a second assessment of remembered
11
pleasure (24-hr remembered pleasure) and asked, “Think back to how you felt during the
12
strength exercise circuit yesterday. Please rate how this session felt using a scale from 0 (most
13
unpleasant) to 10 (most pleasant) (cf. Kwan, Stevens & Bryan, 2017). Participants were
14
required to reply within 1 hr for a response to be considered valid, and all participants did so.
15
Initial plans also included sending text messages 1- and 6-hr postexercise to measure
16
remembered pleasure, but this was not done to avoid potentially irritating participants.
17
To obtain a subjective measure of workload, participants’ ratings of perceived exertion
18
(RPE) were assessed using the CR-10 scale (Borg, 1998). As a manipulation check, these ratings
19
were compared to ensure that the workload was perceived similarly between conditions. Several
20
studies have validated the Borg CR-10 scale for measurement of the perceived intensity of
21
resistance exercise (e.g. Buckley & Borg, 2011). Finally, for exploratory purposes, individual
22
preference for and tolerance of the intensity of exercise was measured using the Preference for
23
and Tolerance of the Intensity of Exercise Questionnaire (PRETIE-Q; Ekkekakis, Hall, &
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 11
Petruzzello, 2005). This two-factor measure is designed to assess individual differences in the
1
preference for and tolerance of exercise intensity. Items indicative of low tolerance (Items 1, 3,
2
9, 13) and a preference for low intensity exercise (Items 2, 4, 8, 12) are reversed-scored; thus
3
higher PRETIE-Q scores indicate greater preference for and tolerance of high-intensity exercise.
4
Construct validity and concurrent validity data for the PRETIE-Q have been provided by
5
Ekkekakis et al. (2005). Internal consistency in this sample was weak-to-acceptable (Cronbach’s
6
α = .654 and .780 for the Preference and Tolerance subscales, respectively).
7
Procedure
8
Each participant completed three testing sessions that were scheduled 7 days apart and at
9
the same time of day to account for any diurnal variation in the dependent variables. Each
10
session began with a warm up consisting of a 5-min walk on a treadmill, and a series of dynamic
11
stretches. All testing took place in a strength and conditioning facility during a time at which the
12
facility was not in use to eliminate potential distractions (e.g., presence of others, background
13
noise) and was overseen by a certified strength and conditioning specialist.
14
Session 1: Pre-experimental testing and familiarization. The purpose of the first
15
session was (a) to collect anthropometric data; (b) determine 3-RM, to set the workload for the
16
subsequent experimental sessions; and (c) familiarize participants with the self-report measures.
17
Each participant’s body mass (kg) and height (cm) were determined using a physician’s scale
18
(Detecto 437, Webb City, MO). Cybex VR3 selectorized machines (Cybex International,
19
Medway, MA) and a hex bar with polyurethane coated Olympic plates (Perform Better, West
20
Warwick, RI) were used for strength testing. 3-RM was determined by measuring the maximum
21
mass that could be lifted for three repetitions on six different exercises; 45-degree leg press, hex
22
bar deadlift, chest press, narrow-grip seated row, overhead press, latissimus dorsi (lat) pulldown,
23
always performed in the described order. After receiving instruction about proper breathing and
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 12
lifting techniques, participants warmed up using a light load on each exercise. Weights were then
1
added successively until a participant could not complete the three lifts with good form. A 3-RM
2
test was chosen over a 1-RM for reasons of safety (Brzycki, 1993). The 3-RM was used to
3
estimate the 1-RM using Epley's (1985) formula and the load for each exercise was calculated as
4
a percentage of the 1-RM.
5
Participants were oriented to the FS and RPE scales using standardized instructions, were
6
provided examples to assist them in anchoring the perceptual range (see Borg, 1998), and were
7
given the opportunity to ask questions about the scales. To gain experience with the FS and RPE
8
scale, participants reported their responses to these scales during the warm up repetitions (reps)
9
and after each 3-RM attempt. At the end of the testing session participants also responded to the
10
EVS and PACES-8, as an opportunity to familiarize themselves with these scales as well.
11
Sessions 2 and 3: Experimental testing. For experimental testing, participants
12
completed a full body, push-pull, workout, comprising 3 x 10 reps of six exercises; 45-degree leg
13
press, hex bar deadlift (no straps, low handles), chest press, narrow grip seated row, overhead
14
press and lat pulldown. These exercises targeted the major muscle groups and the selected rep
15
range corresponds with recommendations for novice lifters (American College of Sports
16
Medicine [ACSM], 2009). The hex bar deadlift has fewer technical requirements than a
17
traditional straight bar deadlift and places less load on the lumbar spine, making it more
18
appropriate for the novice lifter (Swinton, Stewart, Agouris, Keogh, & Lloyd, 2011). During
19
testing, technical instruction was provided, but with no verbal encouragement.
20
Participants completed one set of each exercise in the order listed before moving on to
21
the next, with a 30s rest period between each set and a 3-min rest period between each circuit
22
(ACSM, 2009). Two experimental conditions (increasing-intensity and decreasing-intensity)
23
were administered using a fully counterbalanced repeated-measures design. In the increasing-
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 13
intensity (UP) condition, participants performed the first exercise circuit at 55% 1-RM, the
1
second circuit at 65% 1-RM, and the third circuit at 75% 1-RM. In the decreasing-intensity
2
(DOWN) condition, the circuits were performed in the opposite order (i.e. 75%, 65%, 55% 1-
3
RM). Thus, exercise intensity either increased or decreased within specific exercises and
4
throughout the overall exercise sessions, which allowed us to test our experimental hypotheses.
5
The specific percentages of 1-RM were selected following pilot testing and in consultation with
6
two strength and conditioning coaches and were designed to encompass low (< 60% 1-RM) and
7
high (>65% 1-RM) loads (Schoenfeld et al., 2016).
8
To avoid conflating affective responses during exercise with rebound effects during
9
recovery, affective valence was assessed 12 times during each circuit (six times each for the
10
work and recovery phases). These assessments occurred during the last 10s of both the work and
11
recovery intervals (i.e. during the last 2-3 reps of the exercise and during the last 10s of the 30s
12
recovery period), which is consistent with previous examinations of affective response to interval
13
workloads (Martinez, Kilpatrick, Salomon, Jung, & Little, 2015). Pilot testing indicated that this
14
was feasible and safe. RPE was assessed immediately upon completion of each circuit.
15
Postexercise pleasure, remembered pleasure, and enjoyment were assessed 5-min following the
16
cessation of the exercise session. Remembered pleasure was assessed a second time 24-hr
17
postexercise via SMS.
18
Statistical Analysis
19
Slope determination and manipulation checks. To test the assumption that a
20
decreasing training load would result in more pleasure over time (DOWN condition), and an
21
increasing load would result in decreased pleasure over time (UP condition), a 2 (condition) by 3
22
(time) RM ANOVA was performed, with pleasure (mean FS ratings for each of the three training
23
loads) used as the dependent variable. The Greenhouse-Geisser correction was used when the
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 14
sphericity assumption was violated. Pleasure slopes were calculated by determining the linear
1
trend across the 36 affective valence ratings made during each exercise session, following the
2
process used to calculate the slope of pleasure throughout an exercise session by Zenko et al.
3
(2016). After visual inspection of the data, it was apparent that the slopes of pleasure were in
4
similar directions for both the work and the recovery phases. Therefore, we calculated the
5
pleasure slopes through the 36 total measurements (18 work and 18 recovery). For the UP-
6
condition work intervals only, the affective slope equation was y = -0.080x + 2.737. For the UP-
7
condition recovery intervals only, the affective slope equation was similar, y = -0.085x + 3.049.
8
Similar slope equations were also evident for the work intervals (y = 0.032x + 1.319) and
9
recovery intervals (y = 0.019x + 1.742) of the DOWN condition. In other words, the rebounds
10
during recovery did not alter the direction of the slopes. As an additional manipulation check, the
11
impact of condition (DOWN vs. UP) on mean RPE, overall pleasure (mean of all FS ratings
12
during the exercise session) experienced during exercise, and the slope of pleasure experienced
13
during exercise, was assessed using a RM MANOVA.
14
Primary analysis. For the main analysis, a RM MANOVA was used to determine the
15
effect of condition on the primary dependent variables, namely (a) postexercise pleasure, (b)
16
enjoyment, (c) remembered pleasure, and (d) 24-hr remembered pleasure. The original study
17
preregistration proposed planned comparisons of the four dependent variables using paired t-
18
tests. However, we utilized an updated analysis plan using RM-MANOVA to protect Type 1
19
error rate against multiple comparisons.
20
A series of exploratory correlation analyses were performed to determine the relations
21
between several components of the affective experience and the primary dependent variables,
22
including (a) the slope of pleasure experienced during the exercise sessions, (b) the mean
23
pleasure experienced during the exercise sessions, and (c) the mean pleasure experienced at the
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 15
end of each session (i.e., during the final circuit). Affective responses during work and recovery
1
intervals were assessed separately to avoid conflating affective responses during exercise with
2
rebound effects. This allowed us to explore whether affective responses measured during work
3
intervals influence memory differently than affective responses measured during recovery
4
intervals. For example, the mean pleasure during the work intervals (Mean-Work) was calculated
5
using the affective valence ratings made during the 18 work intervals, likewise, the mean
6
pleasure experienced during the recovery intervals (Mean-Recovery) was calculated using the
7
affective valence ratings made during the rest periods. To test for a recency effect, we examined
8
the importance of timing (i.e. beginning versus ending affect) on the strength of association
9
between real-time (in-task) and retrospective affective evaluations. Finally, a series of
10
exploratory correlation analyses were performed to determine if preference for and tolerance of
11
exercise was related to (a) the slope of pleasure during exercise, (b) postexercise pleasure, (c)
12
enjoyment, (d) remembered pleasure, and (e) 24-hr remembered pleasure.
13
Results
14
Slope Determination and Manipulation Checks
15
The RM ANOVA for mean FS ratings at each of the three training loads yielded a
16
significant effect of condition, F (1, 39) = 7.05, p = .011, ηp2 = .15, a significant effect of time, F
17
(1.52, 59.13) = 20.37, p < .001, ηp2 = .34, and more importantly for our assumption of a relation
18
between load and pleasure, a significant condition by time interaction, F (1.20, 46.82) = 49.30, p
19
< .001, ηp2 = .56. The interaction showed that reducing (increasing) training load over time
20
resulted in increasing (decreasing) levels of pleasure. The shape of this relation was determined
21
using within-subjects contrasts for the effect of time. Within-subjects contrasts indicated the
22
existence of a significant linear component (F (1, 39) = 25.11, p < .001, ηp2 = .39), but no
23
significant quadratic component (F (1, 39) = 3.32, p = .076, ηp2 = .08).
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 16
The impact of condition on mean RPE, overall pleasure, and the slope of pleasure
1
experienced during exercise was assessed using a RM MANOVA. This analysis revealed a
2
significant effect of condition, Pillai’s V = .60, F (3, 37) = 18.51, p < .001, ηp2 = .60. Follow-up
3
univariate tests indicated no differences in RPE between conditions, F (1, 39) = 1.55, p = .221,
4
ηp2 = .04. There was, however, a significant difference in overall pleasure, F (1, 39) = 9.25, p =
5
.004, ηp2 = .19, and a significant difference in the slope of pleasure, F (1, 39) = 53.49, p < .001,
6
ηp2 = .58. This indicates that mean perceived exertion was not significantly different between
7
conditions (4.07 ± 1.25 in the DOWN condition and 4.29 ± 1.12 in the UP condition). Mean
8
RPEs for 55%, 65%, and 75% 1-RM indicated that these intensities were perceived as
9
“moderate” (3.21 ± 1.68), “somewhat hard” (4.01 ± 1.48), and “hard” (5.40 ± 1.5), respectively
10
based upon the Borg scale. The DOWN condition resulted in more positive affective valence
11
during the exercise session than the UP condition (1.99 ± 1.47 FS units vs. 1.38 ± 1.49 FS units),
12
as well as a more positive slope of pleasure (0.03 ± 0.05 FS units vs. -0.08 ± 0.07 FS units). In
13
other words, with each of the 36 successive measurements during the DOWN condition, people
14
were expected to feel slightly better than before, with an increase of approximately 0.03 FS units
15
at each assessment point. In contrast, with each measurement during the UP condition, people
16
were expected to feel slightly worse than before, with a decrease in approximately 0.08 units on
17
the FS. See Figure 2. At the individual level, 37 (92.5%) of participants had more positive slopes
18
in the DOWN condition than the UP condition.
19
Primary Results
20
For the main analysis, a RM MANOVA was used to determine the effect of condition
21
(DOWN vs. UP) on the primary dependent variables of postexercise pleasure, enjoyment,
22
remembered pleasure, and 24-hr remembered pleasure. The RM MANOVA showed a significant
23
effect of condition, Pillai’s V = .45, F (4, 33) = 6.77, p < .001, ηp2 = .45. Univariate tests revealed
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 17
a significant effect of condition on all four dependent variables: (a) postexercise pleasure, F (1,
1
36) = 22.17, p < .001, ηp2 = .38; (b) enjoyment, F (1, 36) = 12.13, p = .001, ηp2 = .25; (c)
2
remembered pleasure, F (1, 36) = 5.26, p = .028, ηp2 = .13; and (d) 24-hr remembered pleasure, F
3
(1, 36) = 11.57, p = .002, ηp2 = .24. As predicted, the DOWN condition resulted in more positive
4
affective evaluations for all dependent variables (see Table 1).
5
Correlates of Remembered Pleasure, Enjoyment, and Postexercise Pleasure
6
The slope of pleasure during the UP condition significantly correlated with postexercise
7
pleasure, enjoyment, remembered pleasure, and 24-hr remembered pleasure. In contrast, the
8
slope of pleasure during the DOWN condition did not significantly relate to any of the dependent
9
variables (see Table 2). In addition, the mean overall pleasure ratings and mean pleasure ratings
10
at the end (i.e., during the final circuit) for both the UP and DOWN conditions were
11
significantly related to postexercise pleasure, enjoyment, remembered pleasure, and 24-hr
12
remembered pleasure (see Table 2). The magnitude and direction of the relations between the
13
pleasure ratings during exercise and postexercise pleasure, enjoyment, remembered pleasure, and
14
24-hr remembered pleasure were similar for affective valence recorded during the work intervals
15
and affective valence recorded during the recovery intervals.
16
End Significance
17
Experienced affect toward the end of the RT session proved to be more strongly related
18
to the dependent variables than experienced affect toward the beginning for both the UP and
19
DOWN conditions, which was in line with our hypothesis (H6). In the DOWN condition, mean
20
affective valence during 55% 1-RM loads (i.e., the ending circuit) was more strongly correlated
21
with each of the dependent variables (r = .41.60) than mean affective valence during the initial
22
circuit at 75% 1-RM loads (r = .31.37). The opposite was true in the UP condition where the
23
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 18
magnitude of influence was strongest at 75% 1-RM (r = .55.78) and weakest at 55% 1-RM (r =
1
.23.45). See Table 3.
2
Exploring Exercise Preference and Tolerance
3
Exercise preference and tolerance were not significantly related to the slope of pleasure
4
during exercise in the DOWN condition (rs ranged from .01 to −.16), or to postexercise pleasure,
5
enjoyment, or remembered pleasure following the UP condition (rs ranged from .02 to −.18). In
6
contrast, exercise tolerance was significantly related to the slope of pleasure experienced during
7
exercise in the UP condition (r = -.36, p = .023), suggesting the possibility that people with
8
greater self-reported tolerance of exercise had a more negative affective slope during increasing
9
intensity exercise. The relationship between preference for exercise intensity and the slope of
10
pleasure in the UP condition was also in a negative direction (-.28) but was not statistically
11
significant (p = .082). See Table 4.
12
Discussion
13
The present study compared the affective evaluations associated with RT protocols with
14
increasing (UP) and decreasing (DOWN) loads. The expectation that the DOWN condition
15
would elicit a positive mean slope of pleasure and the UP condition would elicit a negative mean
16
slope of pleasure was confirmed and associated with a large effect size. This finding is consistent
17
with previous reports of a negative relationship between RT intensity and affective responses
18
(Focht et al., 2015; Greene & Petruzzello, 2015), and with slopes of pleasure associated with
19
increasing and decreasing intensity aerobic exercise (Zenko et al., 2016).
20
Our confirmatory hypotheses that the DOWN condition would be associated with greater
21
postexercise pleasure (H1) and would be rated as more enjoyable (H2) than the UP condition
22
were fully supported. Likewise, our confirmatory hypotheses that the DOWN condition would be
23
remembered as more pleasant, immediately following the exercise session (H3) and 24 hr later
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 19
(H4) compared to the UP condition was also fully supported. This effect may have been due to
1
differences in experienced pleasure and/or end pleasure, but was not attributable to overall
2
exertion. In contrast to Zenko et al. (2016), who used a between-subjects design, participants in
3
this within-subjects study demonstrated differences in mean experienced pleasure between
4
conditions despite matched training volume and similar levels of perceived exertion.
5
The finding that the DOWN protocol positively influenced both experienced and
6
remembered pleasure, as well as enjoyment, may be of particular importance for RT adherence.
7
Positive affective experiences associated with exercise have been shown to be important
8
predictors of subsequent behavioral engagement (Rhodes & Kates, 2015). Experienced pleasure
9
(i.e. affective valence experienced during physical activity) appears to be especially important in
10
this regard (Van Cappellen, Rice, Catalino, & Fredrickson, 2017), and repeated bouts of
11
pleasurable exercise are thought to result in positive, automatic, affective responses that might
12
bias decision-making in favor of exercise (Brand & Ekkekakis, 2018). Remembered pleasure
13
may be more indicative than experienced pleasure of how an experience registers in memory and
14
informs subsequent decision making. Hedonic theory suggests that if an experience is expected
15
to be pleasant, then it will be more likely to be repeated (Ekkekakis & Dafermos, 2012).
16
In the present study, a large effect size was noted for the influence of RT condition on 24-
17
hr remembered pleasure. This finding is notable in that the effect persisted to a time point when
18
behavioral decisions regarding exercise reengagement might be made. Recall of an affect-laden
19
experience provides an effective competitor to one’s current experience, meaning that “past
20
episodes can compete with and be compared to an ongoing experience with respect to feeling
21
state and motivation (Seligman, Railton, Baumeister, & Sripada, 2013, p. 130). This is of
22
particular importance in health-promoting behaviors where benefits are often gained far into the
23
future (i.e., are temporally remote), and what is most salient at the crucial moment of decision-
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 20
making are proximal outcomes of exercise, which often include the inconvenience and potential
1
discomfort associated with exercising (Hall & Fong, 2007), particularly among inactive and unfit
2
individuals. In contrast, focusing on positive proximal exercise outcomes, such as experienced
3
pleasure, might increase intrinsic motivation for exercise (Evans, Cooke, Murray, & Wilson,
4
2014).
5
Behavioral decisions shaped by people's predictions about how they will feel in the future
6
draw heavily upon relevant past experiences (Dunn & Laham, 2006). Yet, memory is not a
7
simple rote or reproductive system, rather memory involves complex constructive processes that
8
can be prone to error and distortion (Schacter, 2012). Research examining affective forecasting
9
indicates that people tend to be inaccurate predictors of their affective experiences, typically
10
overestimating length or the intensity of future feeling states (Wilson & Gilbert, 2003). An
11
example of this in an exercise context is the observation that, prior to an exercise session, people
12
expect to enjoy exercise less than they report actually enjoying it after completing the exercise
13
(Ruby, Dunn, Perrino, Gillis, & Viel, 2011). The tendency to overestimate how unpleasant
14
exercise will bean affective forecasting erroris thought to undermine motivation for regular
15
physical activity (Loehr & Baldwin, 2014; Ruby et al., 2011). Interestingly, inactive individuals
16
report significantly lower expected enjoyment than active individuals but similar levels of
17
experienced enjoyment (Loehr & Baldwin, 2014). This increased discrepancy between expected
18
and experienced enjoyment points to a larger affective forecasting gap in inactive individuals
19
compared to their active counterparts, suggesting the particular importance of affective
20
manipulations for people who are trying to initiate regular exercise.
21
Ruby et al. (2011) suggest that effortful activities might seem particularly unappealing
22
because their beginnings are often genuinely unpleasant; a phenomenon they term forecasting
23
myopia. They suggest that in situations where initiating an activity is difficult or unpleasant, such
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 21
as beginning to write a paper or jogging the first mile, people may “underestimate their
1
enjoyment of the activity as a whole because their affective forecasts for the activity are
2
anchored by these unpleasant beginnings” (Ruby et al., 2011, p. 67). Nonetheless, our data
3
support a recency effect, whereby experienced affect at the end of the RT session was more
4
strongly correlated with the dependent variables of experienced, recalled, and postexercise
5
pleasure than experienced affect at the beginning of the session. A suggestion for future research
6
might be to explore RT load manipulations where the session begins and ends with a lighter load
7
(i.e., the load is progressively increased and then decreased over several sets). Finn & Miele
8
(2016) examined this effect in the context of mental effort, reporting that math tests that begin or
9
end with easier questions are preferred over tests with easier items embedded in the middle.
10
Additional ways to manipulate the slope of pleasure might warrant future research
11
attention. For example, music can positively influence affective valence during and following
12
exercise (Hutchinson et al., 2018), therefore listening to increasingly preferred music throughout
13
an exercise bout (i.e. saving a favorite track for the end) might lead to a positive slope of
14
pleasure. The use of enjoyment-focused imagery has been shown to improve pleasure during
15
aerobic exercise (Stanley & Cumming, 2010) and might be implemented strategically in order to
16
end an exercise session in a more positive feeling state.
17
Mean pleasure experienced during the exercise sessions, and at the end of each session
18
was significantly and positively related to all dependent variables for both conditions. This
19
finding supports the notion that pleasure experienced during exercise (Van Cappellen et al.,
20
2017) and at the end of an exercise session (Hargreaves, & Stych, 2013) impacts global affective
21
evaluations associated with exercise, which play an important role in adherence (Rhodes &
22
Kates, 2015).
23
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 22
The slope of pleasure experienced during the exercise sessions was significantly and
1
positively related to all dependent variables in the UP condition, but not the DOWN condition.
2
Correlations in the DOWN condition were in the expected direction, although that they were
3
weak. This might suggest that negative slopes are more salient, that is, an increasingly
4
unpleasant experience weighs heavier on retrospective evaluations that an increasingly positive
5
one. Increased sensitivity to negative experiences and events is a well-observed phenomenon
6
termed negativity bias, which is thought to serve a critical adaptive function (Rozin & Royzman,
7
2001). In addition, the relations between the slope of pleasure and the dependent variables were
8
similar, whether affective valence recorded during work or during recovery was used to calculate
9
the slope. This may indicate that, in forming a retrospective evaluation of exercise, participants
10
rely on the affective experience of the entire exercise session and are not influenced by work and
11
recovery intervals differently. However, this is difficult to conclude based on our data because
12
the work and recovery slopes were similar. Future researchers may consider testing the
13
retrospective summary evaluations of exercise sessions consisting of pleasant (or unpleasant)
14
work intervals and unpleasant (or pleasant) recovery intervals.
15
A novel finding, which warrants further research attention, was the observed relationship
16
between exercise tolerance and affective slope during the UP condition. This exploratory
17
analysis indicated that greater self-reported tolerance of exercise was counterintuitively related to
18
feeling progressively worse as RT intensity increased. However, given that preference and
19
tolerance were not related to (a) the slope of pleasure, (b) postexercise pleasure, (c) enjoyment,
20
or (d) remembered pleasure during the DOWN condition, and tolerance was related only to the
21
affective slope in the UP condition, it is possible that this relation was spurious (i.e., the only
22
significant result out of 16 correlation analyses). Future confirmatory analyses should be
23
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 23
completed to further elucidate the relations between affective responses and self-reported
1
preference for and tolerance of exercise intensity.
2
Limitations
3
This study is not without limitations. The mean BMI was 28.1 kg/m2, with 50% of the
4
sample having a BMI greater than 27.25 kg/m2. The eligibility criteria also required participants
5
to be insufficiently active (i.e., not meeting the physical activity guidelines for cardiorespiratory
6
and resistance exercise). Therefore, it is possible that these findings do not generalize to leaner or
7
more active populations. Second, we did not assess EMG amplitude in the present study. Even
8
though the training volume was consistent between conditions, it is possible that actual impact
9
on muscle activity and potential strength gains may have differed between conditions. Still, as
10
mentioned previously, prior research does not indicate the likelihood of significant differences
11
between conditions in terms of strength gains, enzyme activity, or EMG amplitude (da Silva et
12
al., 2010; Pereira et al., 2013).
13
Conclusions
14
The present study offers initial evidence that RT programming changes can successfully
15
manipulate the experienced and remembered affect associated with a single bout of exercise.
16
Further research is needed to explore the relative salience of positive and negative affective
17
slopes during exercise in the context of retrospective evaluations and, ultimately, exercise
18
behavior. Remembering an experience more positively, enjoying it more, and feeling better
19
afterwards should theoretically predict better adherence, although this has not been tested using
20
the ramp-down protocols demonstrated in this study or previously (Zenko et al. 2016). Thus, the
21
next logical step is to test this effect in a longitudinal research design to see if adherence can be
22
favorably impacted, and if this will have a meaningful impact upon health outcomes.
23
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 24
References
1
American College of Sports Medicine. (2009). American College of Sports Medicine position
2
stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Medicine and Science in
3
Sports and Exercise, 41, 687708. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181915670
4
Arent, S. M., Landers, D. M., Matt, K. S., & Etnier, J. L. (2005). Dose-response and mechanistic
5
issues in the resistance training and affect relationship. Journal of Sport & Exercise
6
Psychology, 27, 92110. doi:10.1123/jsep.27.1.92
7
Borg, G. (1998). Borg's perceived exertion and pain scales. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
8
Brand, R., & Ekkekakis, P. (2018). Affective-reflective theory of physical inactivity and
9
exercise: Foundations and preliminary evidence. German Journal of Exercise and Sport
10
Research, 48, 4858. doi:10.1007/s12662-017-0477-9
11
Brewer, B. W., Manos, T. M., McDevitt, A. V., Cornelius, A. E., & Van Raalte, J. L. (2000). The
12
effect of adding lower intensity work on perceived aversiveness of exercise, Journal of
13
Sport and Exercise Psychology, 22, 119130. doi:10.1123/jsep.22.2.119
14
Brzycki, M. (1993). Strength testingpredicting a one-rep max from reps-to-fatigue. Journal of
15
Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 64, 8890.
16
doi:10.1080/07303084.1993.10606684
17
Buckley, J. P., & Borg, G. A. (2011). Borg’s scales in strength training; from theory to practice
18
in young and older adults. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 36, 682692.
19
doi:10.1139/h11-078
20
Cavarretta, D. J., Hall, E. E., & Bixby, W. R. (2018). The acute effects of resistance exercise on
21
affect, anxiety, and moodpractical implications for designing resistance training
22
programs. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 130.
23
doi:10.1080/1750984X.2018.1474941
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 25
Centers for Disease Control. (2006). Trends in Strength Training - United States, 1998-2004.
1
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 55, 769772.
2
da Silva, D. P., Curty, V. M., Areas, J. M., Souza, S. C., Hackney, A. C., & Machado, M. (2010).
3
Comparison of DeLorme with Oxford resistance training techniques: effects of training on
4
muscle damage markers. Biology of Sport, 27, 77 81.
5
doi:10.1080/1750984X.2018.1474941
6
Dalbo, V. J., Czerepusko, J. B., Tucker, P. S., Kingsley, M. I., Moon, J. R., Young, K., &
7
Scanlan, A. T. (2015). Not sending the message: A low prevalence of strength-based
8
exercise participation in rural and regional Central Queensland. Australian Journal of Rural
9
Health, 23, 295301. doi:10.1111/ajr.12207
10
Dunn, E. W., & Laham, S. M. (2006). Affective forecasting: A user's guide to emotional time
11
travel. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Affect in social thinking and behavior (pp. 177-193). New
12
York: Psychology Press.
13
Ekkekakis, P. (2009). The Dual-Mode Theory of affective responses to exercise in
14
metatheoretical context: I. Initial impetus, basic postulates, and philosophical framework.
15
International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2, 7394.
16
doi:10.1080/17509840802705920
17
Ekkekakis, P., & Dafermos, M. (2012). Exercise is a many-splendored thing, but for some it does
18
not feel so splendid: staging a resurgence of hedonistic ideas in the quest to understand
19
exercise behavior. In E. O. Acevedo (Ed.), Oxford handbook of exercise psychology (pp.
20
295333). New York: Oxford University Press.
21
Ekkekakis, P., Hall, E. E., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2005). Some like it Vigorous: measuring
22
individual differences in the preference for and tolerance of exercise intensity. Journal of
23
Sport & Exercise Psychology, 27(3), 350-374. doi:10.1123/jsep.27.3.350
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 26
Ekkekakis, P., Parfitt, G., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2011). The pleasure and displeasure people feel
1
when they exercise at different intensities. Sports Medicine, 41, 641-671.
2
doi:10.2165/11590680-000000000-00000
3
Epley, B. (1985). Poundage chart. Boyd Epley Workout (p.86). Lincoln, NE: Body Enterprises.
4
Evans, M. B., Cooke, L. M., Murray, R. A., & Wilson, A. E. (2014). The sooner, the better:
5
Exercise outcome proximity and intrinsic motivation. Applied Psychology: Health and
6
Well-being, 6, 34736. doi:10.1111/aphw.12032
7
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using
8
G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research
9
Methods, 41, 11491160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
10
Finn, B., & Miele, D. B. (2016). Hitting a high note on math tests: Remembered success
11
influences test preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
12
Cognition, 42, 1738. doi:10.1037/xlm0000150
13
Focht, B. C., Garver, M. J., Cotter, J. A., Devor, S. T., Lucas, A. R., & Fairman, C. M. (2015).
14
Affective responses to acute resistance exercise performed at self-selected and imposed
15
loads in trained women. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 29, 30673074.
16
doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000985
17
Greene, D. R., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2015). More Isn’t Necessarily Better: Examining the
18
Intensity Affect Enjoyment Relationship in the Context of Resistance Exercise. Sport,
19
Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 4, 7587. doi:10.1037/spy0000030
20
Hall, E. E., Ekkekakis, P., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2002). The affective beneficence of vigorous
21
exercise revisited. British Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 4766.
22
doi:10.1348/135910702169358
23
Hall, P. A., & Fong, G. T. (2007). Temporal self-regulation theory: A model for individual
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 27
health behavior. Health Psychology Review, 1, 6-52. doi:10.1080/17437190701492437
1
Hardy, C. J., & Rejeski, W. J. (1989). Not what, but how one feels: the measurement of affect
2
during exercise. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 304317.
3
doi:10.1123/jsep.11.3.304
4
Hargreaves, E. A., & Stych, K. (2013). Exploring the peak and end rule of past affective
5
episodes within the exercise context. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 169178.
6
doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.10.003
7
Hutchinson, J. C., Jones, L., Vitti, S. N., Moore, A., Dalton, P. C., & O'Neil, B. J. (2018). The
8
influence of self-selected music on affect-regulated exercise intensity and remembered
9
pleasure during treadmill running. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 7, 8092.
10
doi:10.1037/spy0000115
11
Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B. L., Schreiber, C. A., & Redelmeier, D. A. (1993). When more
12
pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 4, 401405.
13
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00589.x
14
Kwan, B. M., Stevens, C. J., & Bryan, A. D. (2017). What to expect when you’re exercising: An
15
experimental test of the anticipated affectexercise relationship. Health Psychology, 36,
16
309319. doi:10.1037%2Fhea0000453
17
Lee, H. H., Emerson, J. A., & Williams, D. M. (2016). The exerciseaffectadherence pathway:
18
an evolutionary perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1285.
19
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01285
20
Leknes, S., Brooks, J. C., Wiech, K., & Tracey, I. (2008). Pain relief as an opponent process: a
21
psychophysical investigation. European Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 794801.
22
doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06380.x
23
Lishner, D. A., Cooter, A. B., & Zald, D. H. (2008). Addressing measurement limitations in
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 28
affective rating scales: Development of an empirical valence scale. Cognition and
1
Emotion, 22, 180192. doi:10.1080/02699930701319139
2
Loehr, V. G., & Baldwin, A. S. (2014). Affective forecasting error in exercise: Differences
3
between physically active and inactive individuals. Sport, Exercise, and Performance
4
Psychology, 3, 177183. doi:10.1037/spy0000006
5
Martinez, N., Kilpatrick, M. W., Salomon, K., Jung, M. E., & Little, J. P. (2015). Affective and
6
enjoyment responses to high-intensity interval training in overweight-to-obese and
7
insufficiently active adults. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 37, 138149.
8
doi:10.1123/jsep.2014-0212
9
Mullen, S. P., Olsen, E. A., Phillips, S. M., Szabo, A. N., Wójcicki, T. R., Mailey, E. L. . .
10
McAuley, E. (2011). Measuring enjoyment of physical activity in older adults: Invariance
11
of the physical activity enjoyment scale (paces) across groups and time. International
12
Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 8, 103. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-8-
13
103
14
Pereira, R., Mendel, M. M. A., Schettino, L., Machado, M., & Augusto-Silva, P. (2013). Acute
15
neuromuscular responses to a resistance exercise session performed using the DeLorme and
16
Oxford techniques. Human Movement, 14, 347-352. doi:10.2478/humo-2013-0042
17
Pour, M. D., & Naghibi, M. (2015). Effects of two types of resistance training, pyramid and
18
reverse pyramid training, on IL-4, IL-6, and IFN-γ in young women. Biomedical and
19
Pharmacology Journal, 8, 915921. doi:10.13005/bpj/842
20
Rhodes, R. E., & Kates, A. (2015). Can the affective responses to exercise predict future motives
21
and physical activity behavior? A systematic review of published evidence. Annals of
22
Behavioral Medicine, 49, 715731. doi:10.1007/s12160-015-9704-5
23
Riebe, D., Franklin, B. A., Thompson, P. D., Garber, C. E., Whitfield, G. P., Magal, M., &
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 29
Pescatello, L. S. (2015). Updating ACSM's recommendations for exercise preparticipation
1
health screening. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 47, 24732479.
2
doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000000664
3
Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and
4
contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296320.
5
doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2
6
Ruby, M. B., Dunn, E. W., Perrino, A., Gillis, R., & Viel, S. (2011). The invisible benefits of
7
exercise. Health Psychology, 30, 6774. doi:10.1037/a0021859
8
Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social
9
Psychology, 39, 1161-1178. doi:10.1037/h0077714
10
Schacter D. L. (2012). Constructive memory: past and future. Dialogues in Clinical
11
Neuroscience, 14(1), 718. PubMed ID: 22577300
12
Schoenfeld, B. J., Wilson, J. M., Lowery, R. P., & Krieger, J. W. (2016). Muscular adaptations in
13
low-versus high-load resistance training: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Sport
14
Science, 16, 110. doi:10.1080/17461391.2014.989922
15
Seligman, M. E., Railton, P., Baumeister, R. F., & Sripada, C. (2013). Navigating into the future
16
or driven by the past. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 119141. doi:
17
10.1177/1745691612474317
18
Solomon, R. L., & Corbit, J. D. (1974). An opponent-process theory of motivation: I. Temporal
19
dynamics of affect. Psychological Review, 81, 119145. PubMed ID: 4817611
20
Stanley, D.M., & Cumming, J. (2010). Are we having fun yet? Testing the effects of imagery use
21
on the affective and enjoyment responses to acute moderate exercise. Psychology of Sport
22
and Exercise, 11, 582590. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.06.010
23
Swinton, P. A., Stewart, A., Agouris, I., Keogh, J. W., & Lloyd, R. (2011). A biomechanical
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 30
analysis of straight and hexagonal barbell deadlifts using submaximal loads. The Journal of
1
Strength & Conditioning Research, 25, 20002009. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181e73f87
2
Van Cappellen, P., Rice, E. L., Catalino, L. I., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2017). Positive affective
3
processes underlie positive health behaviour change. Psychology & Health, 33, 121.
4
doi:10.1080/08870446.2017.1320798
5
Westcott, W. L. (2012). Resistance training is medicine: Effects of strength training on health.
6
Current Sports Medicine Reports, 11, 209216. doi:10.1249/JSR.0b013e31825dabb8
7
Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2003). Affective forecasting. Advances in Experimental Social
8
Psychology, 35, 345411. doi:10.1007/s12160-012-9362-9
9
Zauberman, G., Diehl, K., & Ariely, D. (2006). Hedonic versus informational evaluations: Task
10
dependent preferences for sequences of outcomes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,
11
19, 191211. doi:10.1002/bdm.516
12
Zenko, Z., Ekkekakis, P., & Ariely, D. (2016). Can you have your vigorous exercise and enjoy it
13
too? Ramping intensity down increases postexercise, remembered, and forecasted pleasure.
14
Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 38, 149159. doi:10.1123/jsep.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 31
Table 1.
1
Means (95% confidence intervals) for Dependent Variables by Condition
2
Condition
UP
DOWN
Postexercise Pleasure
1.14 (0.41, 1.86)
2.84 (2.32, 3.36)**
Enjoyment
38.38 (35.93, 40.82)
42.16 (39.65, 44.67)**
Remembered Pleasure
16.78 (5.11, 28.46)
32.34 (20.60, 44.08)*
24-hr Remembered Pleasure
5.95 (5.41, 6.48)
6.72 (6.26, 7.18)**
Note: *significant at .05 level, **significant at .005 level. Bonferroni adjustment made for
3
multiple comparisons.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 32
Table 2.
1
Pearson’s Correlation Coefficients between Components of the Affective Experience and
2
Dependent Variables by Condition.
3
Postexercise
Pleasure
Enjoyment
Remembered
Pleasure
24-hr
Remembered
Pleasure
DOWN
Slope-Work
.08
.24
.27
.04
Slope-Recovery
.10
.27
.29
.06
Mean-Work
.49**
.47**
.49**
.39*
Mean-Recovery
.51**
.50**
.55**
.49**
End-Work
.52**
.56**
.60**
.41*
End-Recovery
.52**
.58**
.63**
.47**
UP
Slope-Work
.62**
.37*
.44**
.51**
Slope-Recovery
.64**
.32*
.42*
.55**
Mean-Work
.66**
.61**
.43*
.54**
Mean-Recovery
.71**
.51**
.38*
.60**
End-Work
.78**
.65**
.55**
.62**
End-Recovery
.81**
.53**
.48**
.66**
Note: Components of the affective experience are slope, mean, and end. Work refers to pleasure
4
measured during the last 10 seconds of each work interval. Recovery refers to pleasure measured
5
during the last 10 seconds of each recovery period. *significant at .05 level, **significant at .005
6
level.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 33
Table 3.
1
Pearson’s Correlation Coefficients between Beginning and Ending Experienced Affect and
2
Dependent Variables by Condition.
3
Postexercise
Pleasure
Enjoyment
Remembered
Pleasure
24-hr
Remembered
Pleasure
DOWN
Affect-beginning
(75% 1-RM)
.37*
.31*
.32*
.35*
Affect-end
(55% 1-RM)
.52**
.56**
.60**
.41*
UP
Affect-beginning
(55% 1-RM)
.40*
.45**
.23
.33*
Affect-end
(75% 1-RM)
.78**
.65**
.55**
.62**
Note: *significant at .05 level, **significant at .005 level.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 34
Table 4.
1
Pearson’s Correlation Coefficients between Preference for and Tolerance of Higher Intensity
2
Exercise and the Slope of Affect, Postexercise Pleasure, Enjoyment, and Remembered Pleasure.
3
Affective
Slope
Postexercise
Pleasure
Enjoyment
Remembered
Pleasure
24-hr
Remembered
Pleasure
DOWN
Preference1
.08
.02
.11
-.16
.01
Tolerance2
.04
.01
.06
-.16
.06
UP
Preference1
-.28
-.18
.06
-.02
-.18
Tolerance2
-.36*
-.09
.11
.02
-.18
4
Note: *significant at .05 level. 1Higher scores on the Preference subscale indicate preference for
5
higher exercise intensities. 2Higher scores on the Tolerance subscale indicate greater tolerance of
6
high-intensity exercise.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 35
1
2
Figure 1. Comparison between example reverse pyramid training and modified reverse pyramid
3
training protocols (RM: Repetition Maximum)
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
PLEASURE AND ENJOYMENT RESISTANCE TRAINING 36
1
Figure 2. Feeling Scale ratings over time
2
Note: Lines of Best Fit are shown for each of the conditions and interval types, from the beginning of the
3
exercise session (0% completed) to the end (100% completed). Dotted line: UP (work intervals); Solid
4
line: UP (recovery intervals); Small-dashed line: DOWN (work intervals); Large-dashed line: DOWN
5
(recovery intervals). Each slope was calculated by finding the line of best fit through 18 Feeling Scale
6
ratings.
7
8
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Feeling Scale Ratings
Time
... Tolerance to effort influences one's ability to continue exercising at an imposed intensity even if the activity becomes uncomfortable or unpleasant (Ekkekakis et al., 2005). It has been reported that the tolerance level of an individual is related to one's perception of the physical effort of exercising (Hall et al., 2014), to one's self-regulation strategies applied while cycling (Carlier, & Delevoye-Turrell, 2017) and/or to the affective responses experienced while moving (Hutchinson et al., 2020). Thus, dual tasking should reveal that the more cognitive resources allocated to perform a physical activity the more low tolerance individuals should experience the activity session as unpleasant. ...
Article
Performing a physical activity means dealing with the challenges and difficulties occurring during the task. The more a person possesses the cognitive ability to deal with the complexity of the task, the more that person will be able to face the difficulties in activity regulation. However, no studies have been designed to investigate the cognitive dimension of physical activity. In the present study, we present an original in-task methodology that offers the means to assess the cognitive and physical load of a physical activity. Through the application of a dual task paradigm, we report in-task changes in cognitive abilities and physiological experiences in low and high tolerant individuals during the practice of one of two whole-body stepping tasks. The findings confirmed that stepping through space is a physical activity that requires more cognitive resources and is perceived as more cognitively and physically challenging than stepping on the spot. We demonstrated also that the tolerance to effort, which is a psychological factor, plays a non-negligible role in the way the activity sessions were experienced. The affective states in low tolerant individuals were always more negative than those reported by high tolerant individuals. Our findings argue for the existence of a cognitive dimension to physical activity with tolerance to effort being a moderator of individuals’ affective experience to exercise.
... While Zenko et al. (2016) tested this concept in the context of aerobic exercise (i.e., using a cycle ergometer), Hutchinson et al. (2020) replicated the findings in the context of resistance exercise. This time in a within-subjects design (where participants repeated both conditions), participants performed a resistance-training circuit that either increased or decreased in training load. ...
... Create exercise sessions that become progressively more pleasant and enjoyable, perhaps by decreasing intensity throughout an exercise session, perhaps especially among nonathletic populations (for more, see Hutchinson, Zenko Santich, & Dalton, 2020;Stuntz, Grosshans, Boghosian, Brendel, & Williamson 2020;Zenko, Ekkekakis, & Ariely, 2016). Ariely and Carmon (2000) Hutchinson et al. ...
... Comparatively less research has examined factors that will influence recalled in-task affect. Two recent studies have indicated that manipulating the slope of pleasure (i.e., the direction of pleasure change and the rate at which it changes) experienced during aerobic exercise impacts recalled affect, such that recalled affect is more positive if the slope of pleasure is also positive [26,27]. In both studies, the slope of pleasure was manipulated by ramping intensity down as the bout progressed, suggesting that intensity's well-established role as a determinant of in-task affect also has a lasting effect on recalled affect as well. ...
Article
Exercise-related affective responses, particularly in-task, have been implicated as influencing behavioral maintenance. An extensive body of literature, primarily using aerobic modes in laboratory settings, has identified a relatively consistent inverse relationship between intensity and affect. This relationship is purported to be partially accounted for by the saliency of interoceptive sensations (i.e., respiratory and heart rates, muscular effort), such that increased saliency elicits decreased affect. In naturalistic settings, exercise is volitional, individuals have comparatively more autonomy over exercise components (i.e., volume, duration, intensity), and less is known regarding contributing factors of affective responses. Recalled affect (RA) may be perceived as a less invasive, more logistically feasible construct to measure in such settings. Thus, the purpose of the current study is to explore the basis of recalled affect (RA) following an acute bout of volitional exercise. Upon leaving the designated exercise area of a university recreation center, respondents (23y±10, 176cm±9.5, 76.9kg±16.2, 31.8% female) were asked to complete a pen-and-paper survey regarding the bout they had just completed. RA was rated via 100mm Visual Analog Scale, and respondents were asked to provide written explanation for the basis of RA scores. RA scores were non-normally distributed (Mdn=81; IQR=30.5). Qualitative results indicate that interpretation of exertion and salient interoceptive sensations were mixed, resulting in both pleasant and negative affective response. Pre-exercise readiness factors (i.e., energy levels, substrate intake, and physical components) also contribute to RA, and could potentially explain variance in the interpretation of interoceptive sensations. Further research should expand on these findings through a more in-depth interview process and measuring factors of readiness before exercise.
... Furthermore, focusing on modifications in training protocols to improve enjoyment may also be a useful technique for encouraging those at risk of COVID-19-exacerbated sarcopenia to participate in RE, as people are more likely to engage in activities that are enjoyable and avoid activities that are disagreeable [300]. For example, beginning an exercise session with a heavy load and ending with a lighter load has been shown to increase the enjoyment, post-exercise pleasure, and remembered pleasure of a bout of RE [301]. Similarly, in directed exercise settings, focusing on enjoyment in the sessions and using some of the following guiding principles has been shown to encourage affective states and promote exercise adherence over 8 weeks: Fig. 4 Summary of evidence-based resistance exercise variables reported to improve muscle size in older adults. ...
Article
Full-text available
The COVID-19 pandemic is an extraordinary global emergency that has led to the implementation of unprecedented measures in order to stem the spread of the infection. Internationally, governments are enforcing measures such as travel bans, quarantine, isolation, and social distancing leading to an extended period of time at home. This has resulted in reductions in physical activity and changes in dietary intakes that have the potential to accelerate sarcopenia, a deterioration of muscle mass and function (more likely in older populations), as well as increases in body fat. These changes in body composition are associated with a number of chronic, lifestyle diseases including cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, osteoporosis, frailty, cognitive decline, and depression. Furthermore, CVD, diabetes, and elevated body fat are associated with greater risk of COVID-19 infection and more severe symptomology, underscoring the importance of avoiding the development of such morbidities. Here we review mechanisms of sarcopenia and their relation to the current data on the effects of COVID-19 confinement on physical activity, dietary habits, sleep, and stress as well as extended bed rest due to COVID-19 hospitalization. The potential of these factors to lead to an increased likelihood of muscle loss and chronic disease will be discussed. By offering a number of home-based strategies including resistance exercise, higher protein intakes and supplementation, we can potentially guide public health authorities to avoid a lifestyle disease and rehabilitation crisis post-COVID-19. Such strategies may also serve as useful preventative measures for reducing the likelihood of sarcopenia in general and in the event of future periods of isolation.
... In attempts to increase understanding of the mechanisms underlying the global issue of physical inactivity (Troiano et al., 2008;Ding et al., 2016), contemporary research increasingly focuses on factors that influence individuals' perceptual experience of exercise (e.g., Kwan and Bryan, 2010;Ekkekakis et al., 2013;Hutchinson et al., 2020). Numerous studies highlight that positive affect experienced during exercise is a significant predictor of future exercise behavior (for review, see Rhodes and Kates, 2015); conversely, experiencing discomfort, unpleasant affect, or pain during exercise is likely to contribute to a discontinuation of engagement in physical activity (Ekkekakis, 2003;Brand and Ekkekakis, 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
Affective responses to exercise are noted to be dynamic and frequently vacillate between positive and negative valence during physical activity. Recalled affect following exercise can influence anticipated affective responses to exercise and guide future behaviors. Research examining affective memory processes indicates that the recall of an experience can substantially differ from the actual experience and change over time. Grounded in the dual mode model (Ekkekakis, 2003), this study examines individuals' recall of exercise-related affect over a period of 2 weeks. Forty-two adults (26 women, 16 men; Mage = 29.64, SD = 5.69) completed two 20-min treadmill exercise trials in a randomized control crossover design; the trials were set either at a low or high exercise intensity based upon individuals' ventilatory threshold. Data analyses indicate that the affective responses to the low-intensity condition were evaluated more positively than in the high-intensity condition. Recalled affect fluctuated over a 2-week time period following both the low- and high-intensity exercise trials. A significant reduction at the 24-h recall measurement point was observed in both exercise intensity conditions. Implications for future research and health promotion interventions aiming to optimize affective responses to exercise are presented.
Article
Full-text available
Efecto de un programa de entrenamiento de fuerza y acondicionamiento en seco sobre las habilidades físicas en practicantes federados en natación O efeito de um programa de treino de força e condicionamento em seco nas capacidades físicas e partida em praticantes regulares de natação previamente federados ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a 10-week strength and conditioning (S&C) program in physical capacities and start in previously federated and regular swimming practitioners. 16 swimmers (9 male, 17.00±2.16 years of age, 179.14±5.76 cm of height and 69.79±3.11 kg of weight; 7 female, 15.86±2.34 years of age, 163.86±4.98 cm of height and 60.19±3.60 kg of weigh) were equality, but randomly separated in two groups (control group and experimental group, CG and EG, respectively). In the pre-test, swimmers performed three starts in two different models, grab start and track start, the best start was registered. Kinematic parameters of the swimming start and time at 15 m were determined. Flexibility, countermovement jump and 3 kg medicine ball throw were also assessed. In post-test, 10-weeks after a regular 2-sessions week specific dry-land S&C program of 60 min was performed by the EG, all tests were repeated. Flexibility, strength and muscular power gains were significant in EG, contrarily to CG. Swimming start flight phase variables improved more in EG compared to CG, with specificities observed in grab and track start but not a linear consequence with performance in 15-m mark in both groups. A 10-week dry-land S&C program can provide benefits in physical capacities in regular swimming practitioners, fact that may improve the initial phase of the swimming start, prior to the underwater moment, which should deserve attention by the coaches in daily training aiming performance enhancement at 15 m. RESUMEN El propósito de esto estudio fue evaluar el efecto de un programa de fuerza y acondicionamiento (F&A) en seco de 10 semanas sobre las habilidades físicas y el salto en practicantes habituales de natación previamente federados. 16 nadadores (9 masculino, 17.00±2.16 años de edad, 179.14±5.76 cm de altura y 69.79±3.11 kg de peso and 7 mujer, Cita: Silva, C.; Jesus, J.; Vilarigues, I.; Aranha, I.; Candeias, I.; Santos, F., Figueiredo, T.; Espada, M. (2022). Effects of a 10-week dry-land strength and conditionining program in physical capacities and start of previously federated and regular swimming practicioners. Cuadernos de Psicología del Deporte, 22(1), 230-244 Cuadernos de Psicología del Deporte, 22, 1 (enero) Dry strength and conditioning training for swimmers 231 15.86±2.34 años de edad, 163.86±4.98 cm de altura y 60.19±3.60 kg de peso) fueron equitativamente, pero al azar divididos en dos grupos (control y experimental, respectivamente, GC e GE). En el pre-test realizaron tres saltos en dos modelos, grab start e track start, siendo el mejor registrado. Se han determinado parámetros cinemáticos del salto en natación y el tiempo a los 15 m. También se evaluaron la flexibilidad, el salto con contramovimiento y el lanzamiento de una pelota medicinal de 3 kg. En el post-test, 10 semanas después de un programa de F&A en seco con 2 sesiones semanales de 60 min interpretado por GE, las pruebas se repitieron. Las mejoras de flexibilidad, fuerza y potencia muscular fueron significativas en el GE, en contraste con el GC. Las variables de la fase de vuelo en el salto mejoraron más en el GE en comparación con el CG, con especificidades observadas en el grab start e track start, pero no una consecuencia lineal con el rendimiento a 15 m en ambos grupos. Un programa de F&A seco de 10 semanas puede promover beneficios en las habilidades físicas de nadadores habituales, hecho que puede mejorar la fase inicial del salto en la natación, previa al momento subacuático, que debe merecer la atención de los entrenadores en las sesiones diarias con el objetivo de a una mejora del rendimiento a 15 m. Palabras clave: Entrenamiento, Fuerza, Flexibilidad, Cinemática, Rendimiento. RESUMO O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o efeito de um programa de força e condicionamento (F&C) em seco de 10 semanas nas capacidades físicas e salto em praticantes regulares de natação previamente federados. 16 nadadores (9 masculinos, 17.00±2.16 anos de idade, 179.14±5.76 cm de altura e 69.79±3.11 kg de peso; 7 femininos, 15.86±2.34 anos de idade, 163.86±4.98 cm de altura e 60.19±3.60 kg de peso) foram equitativamente, mas de forma aleatória divididos em dois grupos (controlo e experimental, respetivamente, GC e GE). No pré-teste, nadadores realizaram três saltos em dois modelos, grab start e track start, sendo registado o melhor. Foram determinados parâmetros do salto na natação e o tempo aos 15 m. Flexibilidade, salto em contramovimento e lançamento de bola medicinal de 3 kg foram também avaliados. No pós-teste, 10 semanas após programa de F&C em seco com 2 sessões semanais de 60 min realizado por GE, testes foram repetidos. As melhorias de flexibilidade, força e potência muscular foram significativas no GE, contrariamente ao GC. As variáveis da fase inicial do salto associadas ao voo melhoraram mais no GE comparativamente ao GC, com especificidades observadas no grab start e track start, mas não uma consequência linear com o desempenho aos 15 m em ambos os grupos. Um programa de F&C em seco de 10 semanas pode promover benefícios nas capacidades físicas de praticantes regulares de natação, facto que pode melhorar a fase inicial do salto na natação, anterior ao momento subaquático, que deve merecer atenção pelos treinadores nas sessões diárias visando uma melhoria de desempenho aos 15 m.
Article
By reading this article, health and fitness professionals will learn: • There is a strong relationship between total volume load (TVL), muscular strength, and skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Resistance training with pyramid repetition schemes are an effective way to increase TVL during a training session. • Linear pyramid training (LPT), also known as DeLorme training, involves a systematic increase in intensity from set to set. Contrarily, reverse pyramid training (RPT), also known as Oxford training, involves a systematic decrease in intensity from set to set. • The literature consistently shows that RPT and LPT are both effective at increasing muscular strength; however, people may enjoy RPT more than LPT because the session feels easier as fatigue accumulates.
Article
Full-text available
This study explored the influence of self-selected music on affect-regulated exercise intensity and remembered pleasure. A total of 17 active male and female participants (28.1 ± 9.9 years; BMI 23.8 ± 3.2 kg/m2; oxygen uptake (VO2) peak 48.73 ± 8.73 ml.min−1.kg−1) completed a maximal exercise test, and each individual’s ventilatory threshold was identified. Following this, two treadmill exercise trials were performed at an intensity that was perceived to correspond to a Feeling Scale value of +3 (i.e., “good”). Sessions with either self-selected music or no music were completed 48 hr apart and in a randomized counterbalanced order. Affective responses (Feeling Scale) and heart rate were measured during exercise and remembered pleasure was measured 5 min post exercise. Results indicated that participants selected an exercise intensity that exceeded their ventilatory threshold during the two affect-regulated exercise sessions (p = .002, d = .99). Participants exercised with greater intensity during affect-regulated exercise with music than without (p = .045; d = 1.12) while maintaining a “good” feeling. Furthermore, participants recalled the music session as more pleasurable than the no-music session (p = .001; d = .72). These results illustrate a positive ergogenic and psychological influence of music during affect-regulated exercise. Encouraging individuals to exercise at an intensity that feels “good” elicits an exercise intensity sufficient to garner cardiorespiratory benefits and may lead to improved adherence. Moreover, the use of self-selected music appears to augment this effect.
Article
Full-text available
This article introduces a new theory, the Affective–Reflective Theory (ART) of physical inactivity and exercise. ART aims to explain and predict behavior in situations in which people either remain in a state of physical inactivity or initiate action (exercise). It is a dual-process model and assumes that exercise-related stimuli trigger automatic associations and a resulting automatic affective valuation of exercise (type-1 process). The automatic affective valuation forms the basis for the reflective evaluation (type-2 process), which can follow if self-control resources are available. The automatic affective valuation is connected with an action impulse, whereas the reflective evaluation can result in action plans. The two processes, in constant interaction, direct the individual towards or away from changing behavior. The ART of physical inactivity and exercise predicts that, when there is an affective–reflective discrepancy and self-control resources are low, behavior is more likely to be governed by the affective type-1 process. This introductory article explains the underlying concepts and main theoretical roots from which the ART of physical inactivity and exercise was developed (field theory, affective responses to exercise, automatic evaluation, evaluation-behavior link, dual-process theorizing). We also summarize the empirical tests that have been conducted to refine the theory in its present form.
Article
Full-text available
Positive health behaviours such as physical activity can prevent or reverse many chronic conditions, yet a majority of people fall short of leading a healthy lifestyle. Recent discoveries in affective science point to promising approaches to circumvent barriers to lifestyle change. Here, we present a new theoretical framework that integrates scientific knowledge about positive affect with that on implicit processes. The upward spiral theory of lifestyle change explains how positive affect can facilitate long-term adherence to positive health behaviours. The inner loop of this spiral model identifies nonconscious motives as a central mechanism of behavioural maintenance. Positive affect experienced during health behaviours increases incentive salience for cues associated with those behaviours, which in turn, implicitly guides attention and the everyday decisions to repeat those behaviours. The outer loop represents the evidence-backed claim, based on Fredrickson's broaden-and-build theory, that positive affect builds a suite of endogenous resources, which may in turn amplify the positive affect experienced during positive health behaviours and strengthen the nonconscious motives. We offer published and preliminary evidence in favour of the theory, contrast it to other dominant theories of health behaviour change, and highlight attendant implications for interventions that merit testing.
Article
Full-text available
Objective: Anticipated affect may influence exercise behavior via experienced affective responses and intentions. Cognitive manipulations of anticipated affect may inform exercise intervention design. The purpose of this study was to experimentally test the effects of an expectation-based manipulation of affective responses to exercise on anticipated, experienced, and remembered affect and adherence to a 7-day exercise prescription. Method: Participants (N = 98) were randomly assigned to a positive anticipated affect manipulation, a negative anticipated affect manipulation, or a no affect manipulation control. They reported anticipated, experienced, and remembered affect during and after a standardized 30-min bout of treadmill exercise at an intensity just below ventilatory threshold. Participants were asked to try to complete the prescribed exercise daily for 1 week. Differences in affect and exercise behavior were examined across conditions, as were relationships between affect measures, intentions and behavior. Results: The manipulation influenced anticipated and experienced affective responses, but not behavior. Participants generally expected exercise to be less pleasant and more fatiguing that it actually was. Anticipated, experienced, and remembered affect were associated with intentions to exercise. Intentions and remembered affect were both directly associated with exercise behavior. Conclusions: Moderate-to-vigorous exercise can be more pleasant than people expect it to be. Additionally, encouraging exercisers to focus on the positive affective outcomes of exercise can yield a more positive affective experience than those who focus on negative affective outcomes or do not focus on affective outcomes at all. The role of affect in both reflective and automatic motivation to exercise is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record
Article
Full-text available
The low rates of regular exercise and overall physical activity (PA) in the general population represent a significant public health challenge. Previous research suggests that, for many people, exercise leads to a negative affective response and, in turn, reduced likelihood of future exercise. The purpose of this paper is to examine this exercise–affect–adherence relationship from an evolutionary perspective. Specifically, we argue that low rates of physical exercise in the general population are a function of the evolved human tendency to avoid unnecessary physical exertion. This innate tendency evolved because it allowed our evolutionary ancestors to conserve energy for physical activities that had immediate adaptive utility such as pursuing prey, escaping predators, and engaging in social and reproductive behaviors. The commonly observed negative affective response to exercise is an evolved proximate psychological mechanism through which humans avoid unnecessary energy expenditure. The fact that the human tendencies toward negative affective response to and avoidance of unnecessary physical activities are innate does not mean that they are unchangeable. Indeed, it is only because of human-engineered changes in our environmental conditions (i.e., it is no longer necessary for us to work for our food) that our predisposition to avoid unnecessary physical exertion has become a liability. Thus, it is well within our capabilities to reengineer our environments to once again make PA necessary or, at least, to serve an immediate functional purpose. We propose a two-pronged approach to PA promotion based on this evolutionary functional perspective: first, to promote exercise and other physical activities that are perceived to have an immediate purpose, and second, to instill greater perceived purpose for a wider range of physical activities. We posit that these strategies are more likely to result in more positive (or less negative) affective responses to exercise, better adherence to exercise programs, and higher rates of overall PA.
Article
Full-text available
There is a paucity of methods for improving the affective experience of exercise. We tested a novel method based on discoveries about the relation between exercise intensity and pleasure, and lessons from behavioral economics. We examined the effect of reversing the slope of pleasure during exercise from negative to positive on pleasure and enjoyment, remembered pleasure, and forecasted pleasure. Forty-six adults were randomly assigned to a 15-min bout of recumbent cycling of either increasing intensity (0%-120% of Watts corresponding to the ventilatory threshold) or decreasing intensity (120%-0%). Ramping intensity down, thereby eliciting a positive slope of pleasure during exercise, improved postexercise pleasure and enjoyment, remembered pleasure, and forecasted pleasure. The slope of pleasure accounted for 35%-46% of the variance in remembered and forecasted pleasure from 15 min to 7 days postexercise. Ramping intensity down makes it possible to combine exposure to vigorous and moderate intensities with a pleasant affective experience.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare acute neuromuscular behavior during a resistance exercise session (RES) conducted with the DeLorme and Oxford techniques. Methods. Seven healthy and trained participants volunteered to carry out two RES, one week apart, of unilateral elbow flexion. Each session was conducted with the DeLorme or Oxford techniques in a counterbalanced order. Electromyographic (EMG) data were recorded from the biceps brachii (BB) and triceps brachii (TRIC) during a maximal isometric voluntary contraction. Normalized EMG amplitude from BB and TRIC and the co-contraction ratio (CCR) during the concentric and eccentric phases were calculated. Results. The EMG amplitude from BB and TRIC as well as the CCR of both the concentric and eccentric phases were similar in both techniques. Additionally, normalized EMG amplitude from BB was higher during the concentric phase when compared with the eccentric phase for both techniques, supporting the hypotheses of distinct neural control for concentric and eccentric phases of movement. The DeLorme and Oxford techniques induced similar acute neuromuscular responses during the RES. Conclusions. Our results may support previous findings on similar strength gains after resistance training performed with both analyzed techniques.
Article
Based on insufficient research on effects of different types of resistance training, the purpose of this study was to investigate effects of pyramid and reverse pyramid training on levels of rest of IL-4, IL-6, and IFN-γ in young women. Thirty participants were accidently assigned into 3 groups: pyramid, reverse pyramid, and control group. Pyramid and reverse pyramid training groups took increasing resistance training for 8 weeks. Before (24 hours before training) and after training (48 hours after training), blood samples were taken from participants. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures was employed to examine and compare changes of variables. Resistance training resulted in increase of IL-4 and IL-6 and reduction of IFN-γ (p<0.05). However, there was no difference between pyramid and reverse pyramid training (p>0.05). Perhaps resistance training reduces cellular immune response and increases humoral and inflammatory response in young women through reduction of IFN-ã and increase of IL-4 and IL-6. It is possible that the training has been too intensive for participants. Further research on this issue is required.