Content uploaded by Gregory A Brown
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Gregory A Brown on Feb 25, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
COMPARISON OF ENERGY EXPENDITURE ON A
TREADMILL VS.AN ELLIPTICAL DEVICE AT A
SELF-SELECTED EXERCISE INTENSITY
GREGORY A. BROWN,CHAD M. COOK,RYAN D. KRUEGER,AND KATE A. HEELAN
Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Leisure Studies,
University of Nebraska at Kearney, Kearney, Nebraska
ABSTRACT
Brown, GA, Cook, CM, Krueger, RD, and Heelan, KA.
Comparison of energy expenditure on a treadmill vs. an
elliptical device at a self-selected exercise intensity. J Strength
Cond Res 24(6): 1643–1649, 2010—Treadmills (TM) and
elliptical devices (EL) are popular forms of exercise equipment.
The differences in the training stimulus presented by TM or EL
are unknown. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate
oxygen consumption, energy expenditure, and heart rate on
a TM or EL when persons exercise at the same perceived level
of exertion. After measuring peak oxygen uptake (
_
VO
2
peak) in
9 male and 9 female untrained college-aged participants, the
subjects performed 2 separate 15-minute submaximal exercise
tests on the TM and EL at a rating of perceived exertion (RPE) of
12–13.
_
VO
2
peak was higher (p,0.05) in the males (48.6 6
1.5 vs. 45.2 61.6 ml/kg/min) than the females (41.7 61.8 vs.
38.8 62.2 ml/kg/min) for both TM and EL (means 6standard
error of the mean; for TM vs. EL respectively), but there were no
differences in the measured
_
VO
2
peak between TM or EL. During
submaximal exercise there were no differences in RPE between
TM and EL. Total oxygen consumption was higher (p,0.05) in
males (30.8 62.2 vs. 34.9 62.2 L) than females (24.1 61.8
vs. 26.9 61.7 L) but did not differ between TM and EL. Energy
expenditure was not different between TM (569 6110 J) or EL
(636 6120 kJ). Heart rate was higher (p,0.05) on the EL
(164 616 beats/min) compared to the TM (145 615 beats/
min). When subjects exercise at the same RPE on TM or EL,
oxygen consumption and energy expenditure are similar in spite
of a higher heart rate on the EL. These data indicate that during
cross training or noncompetition-specific exercise, an elliptical
device is an acceptable alternative to a treadmill.
KEY WORDS rating of perceived exertion, oxygen consumption,
heart rate, submaximal exercise, energy expenditure
INTRODUCTION
Physical inactivity is considered a major risk factor
for a number of adverse health conditions including
obesity, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and
diabetes mellitus (9,27,28). The current guidelines
from the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
indicate that at least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity
aerobic physical activity on most days of the week are
required to promote health and prevent disease (17). The U.S.
Surgeon General’s report on physical activity indicates that
people should engage in at least 60 minutes of moderate-
intensity physical activity every day to prevent obesity,
whereas the Institute of Medicine indicates that people need
90 minutes of moderate physical activity to lose weight (6).
When encouraging people to become physically active,
it is important to have individuals select exercise modalities
that optimize energy expenditure to prevent or treat obesity
(21,26), whereas presenting a training stimulus that is per-
ceptually preferable will enhance exercise adherence (4).
Many different exercise modalities can produce beneficial car-
diovascular effects (17); however, differences exist in energy
expenditure among exercise devices during submaximal
exercise at intensities within the perceptual preference
range, which is defined as an rating of perceived exertion
(RPE) of 11 (fairly light) to 15 (hard) on the Borg scale (26).
By determining the efficiency of different exercise modalities,
recommendations regarding the modality used for health-
related physical activity can be made that may result in
substantial benefits and help to promote long-term exercise
adherence (15,26).
Exercising on a treadmill (TM) is very common, and this
exercise modality allows people to engage in the most com-
mon form of physical activity among those persons who
engage in regular physical activity—walking (2,6). Exercising
on a TM has been reported to produce the greatest caloric
Address correspondence to Gregory A. Brown, brownga@unk.edu.
24(6)/1643–1649
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó2010 National Strength and Conditioning Association
VOLUME 24 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2010 | 1643
expenditure for the same RPE compared to a cross-country
skiing simulator, rowing ergometer, stair stepper, and cycle
ergometer (29). Elliptical devices (EL) are a relatively new
modality of exercise and are advertised to be superior to
a treadmill because of the low joint impact and the more
reasonable costs of an EL compared to a TM. Exercise on
an EL has been evaluated for heart rate, RPE, and oxygen
consumption during a single session of exercise (7,16). Fur-
thermore, Egana and Donne (13) observed similar enhance-
ments in fitness during a 12-week stair-climbing, EL, or TM
training program. However, TM and EL exercise has not
been compared for oxygen consumption, energy expendi-
ture, and heart rate during a single session of exercise. Given
the purported benefits of exercising on an EL compared to
TM, and the utility of having several modalities of exercise
available for cross training or non-competition specific
exercise (20), an understanding of the physiological response
to exercise on an EL compared to a TM is desirable.
The purpose of this investigation was to examine the
oxygen consumption, energy expenditure, and heart rate at
the same perceived intensity of exercise during a single session
of exercise on a TM and EL in untrained college-aged males
and females. Based on the results of Egana and Donne (13),
it is hypothesized that there will be no differences in oxygen
consumption, energy expenditure, and heart rate between
TM and EL exercise.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
To evaluate for possible differences in oxygen consumption,
energy expenditure, and heart rate between treadmill and
elliptical exercise, subjects were evaluated for maximum
oxygen uptake (
_
VO
2
max) on a treadmill and elliptical device,
then performed submaximal exercise at the same moderate-
intensity RPE on both devices. Prior to any testing, subjects
were given instructions regarding the proper use of the
exercise equipment and were also familiarized with the
15-point (6–20) Borg RPE scale (10). Subjects were also
questioned about their use of, and familiarity with, the exer-
cise equipment and were required to demonstrate compe-
tence and correct form (e.g., not leaning on the handrails
and ability to maintain balance on the devices) in the use of
a TM and EL. If needed, a 10-minute practice session was
performed on one or both pieces of equipment on a non-
testing day before any experimental testing. Each subject
then participated in 3 separate exercise sessions. The first
2 sessions involved assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness
(
_
VO
2
peak) on a treadmill TM and elliptical device EL. The
2
_
VO
2
peak assessments were completed in random order at
least 48 hours apart and completed within a 1-week time
frame. At least 48 hours after the second
_
VO
2
peak assessment,
the subjects completed a 15-minute submaximal exercise
session on each device, in random order, with exercise
sessions separated by 15 minutes of seated rest to allow for
recovery between sessions. All aspects of this project were
conducted in the same year during the months of May,
June, and July in the Human Performance Laboratory at
the University of Nebraska at Kearney.
Subjects
Eighteen, 19–24-year-old males (n= 9) and females (n=9)
who had no history of participation in structured aerobic or
resistance training volunteered to participate in this project.
Personal and immediate family health histories were
obtained from each subject prior to acceptance into the
program using a health and exercise history that met the
suggestions provided by the American College of Sports
Medicine (1) to exclude persons with known metabolic or
health condition(s) such as diabetes, heart complications,
and/or orthopedic limitations and to ensure that the subjects
were not regularly (more than once per week) engaging in
any form of exercise. In addition, subjects taking medications
or supplements that could affect physical performance or
metabolism (e.g., cardiac drugs, thyroid drugs, stimulants),
pregnant females, and subjects who smoked or used tobacco
products were excluded. Prior to beginning this project,
which was approved by the University of Nebraska at
Kearney Institutional Review Board, each subject read and
signed a document of informed consent. The body mass of
each subject was measured to the nearest 0.01 kg using
a digital platform scale (PS6600, Befour Inc., Saukville, WI,
USA), and body height was measured to the nearest 0.25 cm
using a stadiometer (Model 115, Seca, Hamburg, Germany).
Body mass index (kg/m
2
) was then calculated for each
subject. The male subjects were taller and had a larger body
mass (p,0.05) than did the females (Table 1).
Cardiorespiratory Fitness Assessment
Subjects performed a maximal graded exercise test on the
TM and EL for determination of cardiorespiratory fitness
(
_
VO
2
peak) in a randomized, crossover pattern on 2 separate
days separated by 48 hours. For measurement of
_
VO
2
peak on
the TM (Model 2000, SensorMedics Inc., Yorba Linda, CA,
USA), subjects performed a modified Balke protocol (1),
which consisted of walking at 3.4 mph while the grade
increased 2.5% every 2 minutes until volitional fatigue. There
does not appear to be an established protocol for measuring
_
VO
2
peak using an elliptical device, so in the present
investigation the subjects performed continuous exercise at
150 revolutions/minute with the grade crossramp set at 8%
and resistance increasing 2 units every 2 minutes until
volitional fatigue on the elliptical device (EFX 546, Precor
USA, Woodinville, WA, USA). For a
_
VO
2
peak test to be
considered valid, the subject must have met 3 out of the
following 4 physiological markers: (a) maximal heart rate
(HR
max
) within 10 beats per minute (bpm) of age-predicted
maximum heart rate (calculated as 2202age); (b) maximal
respiratory exchange ratio (RER) of $1.10; (c) maximal
oxygen consumption plateaued within 150 mL in the last
minute of exercise; and (d) a rating of perceived exertion of
$18 (1). If 3 out of the 4 criteria were not met, the subject was
1644
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Energy Expenditure: Treadmill vs. Elliptical
asked to repeat the test on a separate day. During both
_
VO
2
peak tests and submaximal exercise tests, expired air was
measured for quantity, oxygen, and carbon dioxide content at
20-second intervals using a metabolic cart (2900, Sensor-
Medics. Inc., Yorba Linda, CA, USA) and heart rate was
assessed with a heart rate monitor (Polar Vantage XL, Polar
Electro Inc., Lake Success, NY, USA). Heart rate and RPE
were collected at the end of each 2-minute stage and at the
final stopping point when the subject terminated the test as
a result of maximal exhaustion.
Submaximal Exercise
Each submaximal TM and EL exercise session included
a 5-minute warm-up, followed by 15 minutes of exercise at an
RPE of 12–13 on the Borg 15-point scale (10). The 5-minute
warm-up was utilized to provide a familiarization period for
the subjects to adjust the exercise intensity on each piece of
equipment to attain an intensity that was perceived to be at
an RPE level of 12–13 and was sustainable for the 15-minute
exercise session. Prior to participation in the exercise sessions
of this study, all participants were shown the Borg ratings of
perceived exertion scale as illustrated by Heyward (18) and
read the same description of how to rate perceived exertion
during exercise as described by Birk and Birk (8). During
exercise, subjects pointed to the number on the chart that
corresponded to their RPE. In a review, Dishman (11)
concluded that RPE is an acceptable method for regulating
exercise intensity across different modalities of exercise,
particularly when the RPE is between 10 and 16.
Furthermore, it has been observed that using RPE provide
acceptable control of exercise intensity when comparing TM
and EL (16). During the submaximal exercise session, the
treadmill grade was maintained at 0% and the crossramp
setting on the elliptical device was maintained at 10, so the
subjects only adjusted speed on
the treadmill or resistance on
the elliptical. After the warm-
up, expired air was measured
continuously for quantity, oxy-
gen, and carbon dioxide con-
tent (as explained previously)
and averaged every 20 seconds
throughout the 15-minute ex-
ercise session. Heart rate was
collected automatically every
15 seconds for each 15-minute
submaximal exercise session
using the same heart rate
monitor that was used for the
fitness testing. Ratings of per-
ceived exertion were collected
every 2 minutes throughout the
exercise session by having the
subjects point at a chart of the
Borg RPE scale. Following the
first exercise session, the subjects were allowed 15 minutes of
seated rest to allow for heart rate recovery before beginning
the subsequent exercise session.
Calculation of Energy Expenditure
Average RER was used with the total
_
VO
2
to calculate energy
expenditure (EE) in kJ from nonprotein RER fat and
carbohydrate oxidation using stoichiometric equations (14).
Statistical Analyses
Data were analyzed using SigmaStat 3.11 (Systat Software,
Point Richmond, CA, USA) with an alevel of p#0.05.
Descriptive data were analyzed for gender differences using
an independent sample t-test. A 2-way (gender 3mode)
repeated-measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to
analyze for differences in the submaximal exercise session
for
_
VO
2
, HR, RPE, and EE. Specific mean differences were
then identified using a Newman-Keuls post-hoc comparison.
Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated using
techniques described by Bartko (5) for RPE using the RPE
during submaximal exercise and the RPE measured during
the fitness assessment at a corresponding oxygen consump-
tion. Data are presented as means 6SEM.
RESULTS
No gender-related difference was seen in regards to body
mass index, with both males and females falling in the over-
weight range (25–30 kg/m
2
; Table 1). Absolute (L/min
21
)
and relative (ml/kg
21
/min
21
)
_
VO
2
peak were significantly
higher (p,0.05) in the males for both modes of exercise, but
there were no mode-related differences in
_
VO
2
peak. No
significant differences were seen between genders or exercise
modes for either predicted or measured maximum heart rate.
During EL, the resistance was 7.2 61.3 for the females
and 8.9 60.9 for the males. During TM, the speed was
TABLE 1. Subject descriptive characteristics.
Male Female
Number of subjects (n) 9 9
Age (years) 21.6 60.3 20.6 60.4
Height (cm) 184.9 63.2 165.0 62.0*
Body mass (kg) 91.3 64.4 71.0 64.0*
Body mass index (kg/m
2
) 26.7 63.5 26.1 63.8
TM
_
VO
2
peak (ml/kg/min) 48.6 61.5 41.7 61.8*
TM
_
VO
2
peak (L/min) 4.4 60.1 2.9 60.1*
TM HR
Max
(beats/min) 198.6 62.8 197.9 61.6
EL
_
VO
2
peak (L/min) (ml/kg/min) 45.2 61.6 38.8 62.2*
EL
_
VO
2
peak (L/min) (L/min) 4.1 60.1 2.7 60.2*
EL HR
max
(beats/min) 200.8 62.5 198.9 61.4
TM = treadmill exercise; EL = elliptical exercise.
Data are presented as means 6standard error of the mean.
*Significant difference between genders (main effect; p,0.05).
VOLUME 24 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2010 | 1645
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
5.8 60.3 miles/hour
21
for the females and 7.1 60.3
miles/hour
21
for the males.
There were no differences in RPE between TM and EL
(Figure 1). Average RPE during the submaximal exercise
sessions were significantly higher (main effect; p,0.05) in
the females (12.6 60.1 for EL and 12.4 60.1 for TM) than
the males (12.3 60.2 for EL and 12.1 60.1 for TM). There
were no gender 3mode differences in RPE. The intraclass
correlation coefficient for RPE was 0.89.
There were no differences in total oxygen consumption
between TM and EL (Figure 2). Overall, males consumed
(main effect; p,0.05) more total oxygen (34.9 62.2 L for
EL and 30.8 62.2 L for TM) than females (26.9 61.7 L for
EL and 24.1 61.8 L for TM) during the 15-minute exercise
sessions. There were no gender 3mode differences in total
oxygen consumption, although there was a trend (p= 0.079)
for a difference in total oxygen consumption between EL and
TM. Pooling the data for males and females, and using an
alpha level of 0.05 with a power of 80%, 47 total subjects
would be required to detect a difference in total oxygen
consumption between EL and TM. Females exercised at
a higher (p,0.05) percentage of
_
VO
2
peak than did males,
and EL elicited a higher (p,0.05) percentage of
_
VO
2
peak
than did TM. When expressed as a percentage of the
_
VO
2
peak achieved during maximal testing on the respective
device, males achieved a 71 63% during EL and 58 63%
during TM, whereas females achieved 82 64% during EL
and 68 64% during TM.
There were no differences in EE between TM and EL
(Figure 3). Overall, males experienced significantly
higher total EE (main effect; p,0.05) (171.9 610.5 kcal
for EL and 150.9 611.0 kcal for TM) than females (132.3 6
8.2 kcal for EL and 117.9 69.2 kcal for TM) during
the 15-minute exercise session on both TM and EL. There
were no gender 3mode differences for total EE, although
there was a trend (p= 0.064) for a difference in EE between
EL and TM. Pooling the data for males and females, and
using an alpha level of 0.05 with a power of 80%, 42 total
subjects would be required to detect a difference in total
oxygen consumption between EL and TM.
The mean heart rate for both genders during EL was higher
(main effect; p,0.05) than TM (Figure 4). Females experi-
enced a significantly higher (main effect; p,0.05) average
HR (169.2 65.4 beats/min
21
for EL and 152.9 66.1 beats/
min
21
for TM) than the males (157.0 65.1 beats/min
21
for
Figure 1. Rating of perceived exertion for each subject (males, n=9;
females, n= 9) while engaging in exercise on either a treadmill or elliptical
device for 15 minutes when using rating of perceived exertion to achieve
the same intensity of exercise on each device. Open circles connected by
dashed lines represent overall means. There were no differences resulting
from mode of exercise.
Figure 2. Total oxygen consumption for each subject (males, n=9;
females, n= 9) while engaging in exercise on either a treadmill or elliptical
device for 15 minutes when using rating of perceived exertion to achieve
the same intensity of exercise on each device. Open circles connected by
dashed lines represent overall means. There were no differences resulting
from mode of exercise.
Figure 3. Total energy expenditure for each subject (males, n=9;
females, n= 9) while engaging in exercise on either a treadmill or elliptical
device for 15 minutes when using rating of perceived exertion to achieve
the same intensity of exercise on each device. Open circles connected by
dashed lines represent overall means. There were no differences resulting
from mode of exercise.
1646
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Energy Expenditure: Treadmill vs. Elliptical
EL and 138.8 64.8 beats/min
21
for TM). Females exercised
at a higher (main effect; p,0.05) percentage of maximum
heart rate than did males, and EL elicited a higher (main
effect; p,0.05) percentage of maximal heart rate than did
TM. When expressed as a percentage of the maximal heart
rate achieved during maximal testing on the respective device,
males achieved 78 63% during EL and 70 63% maximal
heart rate during TM, whereas females achieved 85 65%
during EL and 77 63% maximal heart rate during TM.
Mean RER for both genders during EL was higher (main
effect; p,0.05) than TM (Figure 5). There were no gender
or gender 3mode differences in RER.
DISCUSSION
The primary findings of the present investigation indicate that
when healthy, nonphysically active, college-aged men and
women exercise at the same moderate level of perceived
exertion there are no differences in total oxygen consumption
or energy expenditure between exercise on a treadmill or
an elliptical exercise device. However, at the same level of
perceived exertion, exercise on an elliptical device results in a
higher heart rate, higher percent of maximal oxygen
consumption, and higher respiratory exchange ratio than
does exercise on a treadmill.
The American College of Sports Medicine recommends
that to improve cardiorespiratory fitness healthy adults
should exercise for 20–60 minutes at a moderate intensity
(17), which should correspond to an RPE of ;12–17 (10).
The use of perceived exertion to select an exercise intensity is
commonly used for describing exercise intensity, and
correlations of 0.80–0.90 have been found between the
15-point Borg scale of perceived exertion and heart rate (24).
The use of self-selected intensities of exercise has been
advocated as a means to increase adherence to an exercise
program (11,12). However, there is concern that by allowing
self-selection of intensity, participants may not choose an
intensity that is inadequate to produce health benefits (15).
There is considerable variation in the interpretation of RPE
based on not only the exercise stimulus, but also the health
and mode of the person exercising (10). Green et al. (16)
observed no difference in overall RPE between treadmill or
elliptical exercise when participants exercise at the same
heart rate in both modes, but the subjects perceived that the
elliptical was more difficult for their legs. Batte et al. (7)
observed that when exercising on an elliptical device, heart
rate and oxygen consumption were higher than what would
have been expected based on the rating of perceived exertion.
In agreement with Batte et al. (7), the present data indicate
that individuals exercising at an RPE of 12–13 exhibit a
higher heart rate and percent of maximal oxygen consump-
tion when exercising on an elliptical device compared to
a treadmill. Taken together, these finding suggest that when
the intensity of exercise is prescribed based on RPE, the
overall exercise stimulus from an elliptical device may be
higher than would occur if a treadmill were used.
The higher heart rate response to exercise on an elliptical
device compared to a treadmill could be the result of a
number of reasons. Heart rates tend to be higher when an
individual is exposed to an exercise stimulus to which they are
not accustomed (3), and so the experience of exercising on an
elliptical device may have caused increased heart rate during
exercise in the subjects because of their unfamiliarity with this
mode of exercise. Furthermore, when the arms are used to
support one’s body mass during exercise the heart rate is
higher than when the arms are less active (22), and the
subjects in the present investigation while exercising on the
elliptical device may have used their arms to support their
Figure 4. Mean heart rate for each subject (males, n= 9; females, n=9)
while engaging in exercise on either a treadmill or elliptical device for
15 minutes when using rating of perceived exertion to achieve the
same intensity of exercise on each device. Open circles connected by
dashed lines represent overall means. *Heart rate was higher (main effect;
p,0.05) during exercise on the elliptical device.
Figure 5. Mean respiratory exchange ratio for each subject (males, n=9;
females, n= 9) while engaging in exercise on either a treadmill or elliptical
device for 15 minutes when using rating of perceived exertion to achieve
the same intensity of exercise on each device. Open circles connected
by dashed lines represent overall means. *RER was higher (main effect;
p,0.05) during exercise on the elliptical device.
VOLUME 24 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2010 | 1647
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
body more than when walking on a treadmill, despite being
instructed to use their arms only to maintain balance. Heart
rate is frequently used to predict oxygen consumption, and
the higher heart rate in the subjects while exercising on the
treadmill may have contributed to the higher percent of
maximal oxygen consumption attained during elliptical
exercise (3).
Oxygen consumption during exercise may be influenced
by a number of factors. For instance, at the same speed of
walking, increasing or decreasing the stride length or stride
frequency from the usual preferred pattern will increase
oxygen consumption (25). Similarly, increasing the pedaling
speed while cycling can increase oxygen consumption even if
the power output is not altered (23). The stride frequency in
the present study was not controlled, so the higher percent of
_
VO
2
peak observed during elliptical exercise may have been
the result of a faster rate of foot turnover. However, there
were no differences between exercise modes in terms of total
oxygen consumption or energy expenditure.
In the present investigation,
_
VO
2
peak, total oxygen
consumption during submaximal exercise, and total energy
expenditure during submaximal exercise were higher in the
males than the females regardless of mode of exercise. These
findings are not unexpected, given the overall larger body
mass of the male subjects and the well-documented gender
differences in
_
VO
2
peak and absolute oxygen consumption
during exercise in males (19,21). The higher heart rate
exhibited by the female subjects are likely a result of the
higher RPE at which the female subjects exercised.
Egana and Donne (13) observed no difference in the
adaptations to exercise due to a 12-week exercise program in
participants who exercised on a treadmill, stair climber, or
elliptical device when heart rate and exercise duration were
the same between modes. In the present investigation, there
was a trend toward a significant difference in total oxygen
consumption (p= 0.079) and energy expenditure (p= 0.064)
between the modes of exercise. As exemplified with the
sample size calculations, it would be necessary to more than
double the number of subjects to detect a difference in total
oxygen consumption or energy expenditure. In agreement
with Egana and Donne (13), the lack of difference in the total
oxygen consumption or energy expenditure between exercise
on an elliptical device or a treadmill may suggest that the
long-term exercise stimulus would be the same and result in
the same adaptations.
Overall, the present data indicate that using an elliptical
device is a viable alternative when engaging in physical
activity for health enhancement. Although there are scant
data, it would appear that when exercising at a self-selected
rating of perceived exertion, using an elliptical device would
result in similar adaptations to using a treadmill.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The present data suggest that using an elliptical exercise
device as a component of an aerobic training program will
provide the same stimulus for developing cardiovascular
fitness as a treadmill. This is of fundamental importance for
novice and experienced exercisers who may desire variety in
their training program to avoid staleness. Furthermore, for
athletes in the many running competitions, an elliptical device
may provide an alternative for cross training during an active
resting phase in a periodized training program.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This project was supported with funds from the Summer
Student Research Program at the University of Nebraska at
Kearney.
REFERENCES
1. ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. Philadelphia:
Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins, 2000.
2. Compliance with physical activity recommendations by walking for
exercise—Michigan, 1996 and 1998. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
49: 560–565, 2000.
3. Achten, J and Jeukendrup, AE. Heart rate monitoring: Applications
and limitations. Sports Med 33: 517–538, 2003.
4. Adams, TM and Brynteson, P. A comparison of attitudes and
exercise habits of alumni from colleges with varying degrees of
physical education activity programs. Res Q Exerc Sport 63: 148–152,
1992.
5. Bartko, JJ. The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of
reliability. Psychol Rep 19: 3–11, 1966.
6. Bassuk, SS and Manson, JE. Physical activity and cardiovascular
disease prevention in women: how much is good enough? Exerc
Sport Sci Rev 31: 176–181, 2003.
7. Batte, AL, Darling, J, Evans, J, Lance, LM, Olson, EI, and
Pincivero, DM. Physiologic response to a prescribed rating of
perceived exertion on an elliptical fitness cross-trainer.
J Sports Med Phys Fitness 43: 300–305, 2003.
8. Birk, TJ and Birk, CA. Use of ratings of perceived exertion for
exercise prescription. Sports Med 4: 1–8, 1987.
9. Blair, SN and Brodney, S. Effects of physical inactivity and obesity
on morbidity and mortality: Current evidence and research issues.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 31: S646–S662, 1999.
10. Borg, GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 14: 377–381, 1982.
11. Dishman, RK. Prescribing exercise intensity for healthy adults using
perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 26: 1087–1094, 1994.
12. Dishman, RK, Farquhar, RP, and Cureton, KJ. Responses to
preferred intensities of exertion in men differing in activity levels.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 26: 783–790, 1994.
13. Egana, M and Donne, B. Physiological changes following a
12 week gym based stair-climbing, elliptical trainer and treadmill
running program in females. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 44: 141–146,
2004.
14. Frayn, KN. Calculation of substrate oxidation rates in vivo from
gaseous exchange. J Appl Physiol 55: 628–634, 1983.
15. Glass, SC and Chvala, AM. Preferred exertion across three common
modes of exercise training. J Strength Cond Res 15: 474–479, 2001.
16. Green, JM, Crews, TR, Pritchett, RC, Mathfield, C, and Hall, L.
Heart rate and ratings of perceived exertion during treadmill and
elliptical exercise training. Percept Mot Skills 98: 340–348, 2004.
17. Haskell, WL, Lee, IM, Pate, RR, Powell, KE, Blair, SN, Franklin, BA,
Macera, CA, Heath, GW, Thompson, PD, and Bauman, A. Physical
activity and public health: Updated recommendation for adults from
the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart
Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39: 1423–1434, 2007.
1648
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Energy Expenditure: Treadmill vs. Elliptical
18. Heyward, VH. Advanced Fitness Assessment and Exercise Prescription
4th ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2002.
19. Jakicic, JM, Clark, K, Coleman, E, Donnelly, JE, Foreyt, J,
Melanson, E, Volek, J, and Volpe, SL. American College of Sports
Medicine position stand. Appropriate intervention strategies for
weight loss and prevention of weight regain for adults. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 33: 2145–2156, 2001.
20. Kibler, WB and Chandler, TJ. Sport-specific conditioning. Am J
Sports Med 22: 424–432, 1994.
21. Kravitz, L, Robergs, RA, Heyward, VH, Wagner, DR, and
Powers,K.Exercisemodeandgender comparisons of energy
expenditure at self-selected intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc
29: 1028–1035, 1997.
22. Londeree, BR, Thomas, TR, Ziogas, G, Smith, TD, and Zhang, Q.
%
_
VO
2
max versus %HRmax regressions for six modes of exercise.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 27: 458–461, 1995.
23. McDaniel, J, Durstine, JL, Hand, GA, and Martin, JC. Determinants
of metabolic cost during submaximal cycling. J Appl Physiol 93: 823–
828, 2002.
24. Mihevic, PM. Sensory cues for perceived exertion: a review. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 13: 150–163, 1981.
25. Morgan, DW and Martin, PE. Effects of stride length alteration on
racewalking economy. Can J Appl Sport Sci 11: 211–217, 1986.
26. Moyna, NM, Robertson, RJ, Meckes, CL, Peoples, JA, Millich, NB,
and Thompson, PD. Intermodal comparison of energy
expenditure at exercise intensities corresponding to the
perceptual preference range. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33: 1404–1410,
2001.
27. Sundquist, J, Winkleby, MA, and Pudaric, S. Cardiovascular disease
risk factors among older black, Mexican-American, and white
women and men: An analysis of NHANES III, 1988–1994. Third
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. J Am Geriatr Soc
49: 109–116, 2001.
28. Tudor-Locke, CE, Bell, RC, and Meyers, AM. Revisiting the role of
physical activity and exercise in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Can
J Appl Physiol 25: 466–492, 2000.
29. Zeni, AI, Hoffman, MD, and Clifford, PS. Energy expenditure with
indoor exercise machines. JAMA 275: 1424–1427, 1996.
VOLUME 24 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2010 | 1649
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
