Acute Effects of Different Training Loads on Affective Responses in Resistance-trained Men

Alex S. Ribeiro; Erick D. dos Santos; João Pedro Nunes; Brad J. Schoenfeld

doi:10.1055/a-0997-6680

International Journal of Sports Medicine, Table of Contents

Int J Sports Med 2019; 40(13): 850-855
DOI: 10.1055/a-0997-6680

Training & Testing

Acute Effects of Different Training Loads on Affective Responses in Resistance-trained Men

Alex S. Ribeiro

¹Center for Research in Health Sciences, University of Northern Paraná, Londrina, Brazil

,

Erick D. dos Santos

¹Center for Research in Health Sciences, University of Northern Paraná, Londrina, Brazil

,

João Pedro Nunes

²Metabolism, Nutrition and Exercise Laboratory, Londrina State University, Londrina, Brazil

,

Brad J. Schoenfeld

³Lehman College of CUNY Department of Health Sciences, Exercise Science Department, Bronx, United States

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

The main purpose of the present study was to investigate the acute effects of different training loads on ratings of perceived exertion and discomfort and feelings of pleasure/displeasure in resistance-trained men. Twelve resistance-trained men (26.7±3.5 years, 85.1±17.5 kg, and 174. 9±9.9 cm) performed 3 sets of the bench press, squat on a hack machine, and lat pulldown, until volitional concentric failure in two separate conditions: a moderate load (MOD) consisting of a relative load of 8–12 repetitions maximum (RM), and a light load (LIT) consisting of a relative load of 25–30RM. The session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE), session rating of perceived discomfort (sRPD), and session pleasure/displeasure feelings (sPDF) were assessed after 15 min after the ending of each session. A randomized, counterbalanced, crossover study was performed with 48 h recovery afforded between sessions. Differences between conditions were observed for sRPE and sRPD, in which scores for LIT were greater than MOD (sRPE: MOD=5.5±1.0 vs. LIT=6.4±0.7; sRPD: MOD=6.7±1.7 vs. LIT=8.7±1.0). For sPDF, MOD reported feelings of pleasure (1.2), whereas the LIT presented a feeling of displeasure (–2.3). Results suggest that resistance training performed with a light load until failure induces higher degrees of effort, discomfort and displeasure compared to a moderate load.

Key words

mood - effort - strength training

Full Text

References

References
1 Day ML, McGuigan MR, Brice G, Foster C. Monitoring exercise intensity during resistance training using the session RPE scale. J Strength Cond Res 2004; 18: 353-358
2 Robertson RJ, Goss FL, Rutkowski J, Lenz B, Dixon C, Timmer J, Frazee K, Dube J, Andreacci J. Concurrent validation of the OMNI perceived exertion scale for resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003; 35: 333-341
3 Scott BR, Duthie GM, Thornton HR, Dascombe BJ. Training monitoring for resistance exercise: theory and applications. Sports Med 2016; 46: 687-698
4 Schoenfeld BJ. The mechanisms of muscle hypertrophy and their application to resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 2010; 24: 2857-2872
5 ACSM. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009; 41: 687-708
6 Mitchell CJ, Churchward-Venne TA, West DWD, Burd NA, Breen L, Baker SK, Phillips SM. Resistance exercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in young men. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2012; 113: 71-77
7 Morton RW, Oikawa SY, Wavell CG, Mazara N, McGlory C, Quadrilatero J, Baechler BL, Baker SK, Phillips SM. Neither load nor systemic hormones determine resistance training-mediated hypertrophy or strength gains in resistance-trained young men. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2016; 121: 129-138
8 Schoenfeld BJ, Peterson MD, Ogborn D, Contreras B, Sonmez GT. Effects of low- vs. high-load resistance training on muscle strength and hypertrophy in well-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29: 2954-2963
9 Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, Ogborn D, Krieger JW. Strength and hypertrophy adaptations between low- versus high-load resistance training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 31: 3508-3523
10 Gjovaag T, Hjelmeland AK, Oygard JB, Vikne H, Mirtaheri P. Acute hemodynamic and cardiovascular responses following resistance exercise to voluntary exhaustion. Effects of different loadings and exercise durations. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2016; 56: 616-623
11 González-Hernádez JM, García-Ramos A, Capelo-Ramírez F, Castaño-Zambudio A, Marquez G, Boullosa D, Jiménez-Reyes P. Mechanical, metabolic, and perceptual acute responses to different set configurations in full squat. J Strength Cond Res 2017;
12 Polotow TG, Souza-Junior TP, Sampaio RC, Okuyama AR, Ganini D, Vardaris CV, Alves RC, McAnulty SR, Barros MP. Effect of 1RM, 80%RM, and 50%RM strength exercise in trained individuals on variations in plasma redox biomarkers. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 31: 2489-2497
13 Harriss DJ, Macsween A, Atkinson G. Standards for ethics in sport and exercise science research: 2018 update. Int J Sports Med 2017; 38: 1126-1131
14 Ribeiro AS, Avelar A, Schoenfeld BJ, Fleck SJ, Souza MF, Padilha CS, Cyrino ES. Analysis of the training load during a hypertrophy-type resistance training programme in men and women. Eur J Sport Sci 2015; 15: 256-264
15 Fisher JP, Steele J. Heavier and lighter load resistance training to momentary failure produce similar increases in strength with differing degrees of discomfort. Muscle Nerve 2017; 56: 797-803
16 Hardy CJ, Rejeski WJ. Not what, but how one feels: the measurement of affect during exercise. J Sport Exerc Psychol 1989; 11: 304-317
17 Hiscock DJ, Dawson B, Donnelly CJ, Peeling P. Muscle activation, blood lactate, and perceived exertion responses to changing resistance training programming variables. Eur J Sport Sci 2015; 16: 536-544
18 Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992; 112: 155-159
19 Hopkins WG. A spreadsheet for deriving a confidence interval, mechanistic inference and clinical inference from a P value. Sportscience 2007; http:sportsci.org/2007/wghinf.htm Accessed July 2 2019
20 Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009; 41: 3-12
21 Pritchett RC, Green JM, Wickwire JM, Kovacs MS. Acute and session RPE responses during resistance training: bouts to failure at 60% and 90% of 1RM. S Afr J Sports Med (Online) 2009; 21: 23-26
22 Shimano T, Kraemer WJ, Spiering BA, Volek JS, Hatfield DL, Silvestre R, Vingren JL, Fragala MS, Maresh CM, Fleck SJ, Newton RU, Spreuwenberg LPB, Häkkinen K. Relationship between the number of repetitions and selected percentages of one repetition maximum in free weight exercises in trained and untrained men. J Strength Cond Res 2006; 20: 819-823
23 Gearhart R, Goss F, Lagally K, Jakicic J, Gallagher J, Gallagher K, Robertson RJ. Ratings of perceived exertion in active muscle during high-intensity and low-intensity resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res 2002; 16: 87-91
24 Sweet TW, Foster C, McGuigan MR, Brice G. Quantitation of resistance training using the session rating of perceived exertion method. J Strength Cond Res 2004; 18: 796-802
25 Diniz RCR, Martins-Costa HC, Machado SC, Lima FV, Chagas MH. Repetition duration influences ratings of perceived exertion. Percept Mot Skills 2014; 118: 261-273
26 Boyas S, Guével A. Neuromuscular fatigue in healthy muscle: underlying factors and adaptation mechanisms. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 2011; 54: 88-108
27 Gandevia SC. Spinal and supraspinal factors in human muscle fatigue. Physiol Rev 2001; 81: 1725-1789
28 Behm DG, Reardon G, Fitzgerald J, Drinkwater E. The effect of 5, 10, and 20 repetition maximums on the recovery of voluntary and evoked contractile properties. J Strength Cond Res 2002; 16: 209-218
29 Lagally K, McCaw ST, Young GT, Medema HC, Thomas DQ. Ratings of perceived exertion and muscle activity during the bench press exercise in recreational and novice lifters. J Strength Cond Res 2004; 18: 359-364