Williams Emily L, Jones Hollie S, Sparks S Andy, Midgley Adrian W, Marchant David C, Bridge Craig A, McNaughton Lars R
Sports Performance Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, Lancashire, UNITED KINGDOM.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015 Nov;47(11):2423-30. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000694.
Deceptive manipulations of performance intensity have previously been investigated in cycling time trials (TT) but used different magnitudes, methods, and task durations. This study examines previously used magnitudes of deception during 16.1-km TT and explores yet unexamined psychological responses.
Twelve trained cyclists completed five TT, performing two baseline trials alone, one against a simulated dynamic avatar representing 102% of fastest baseline trial (TT(102%)), one against a 105% avatar (TT(105%)), and one against both avatars (TT(102%,105%)).
Deceptive use of competitors to disguise intensity manipulation enabled accomplishment of performance improvements greater than their perceived maximal (1.3%-1.7%). Despite a similar improvement in performance, during TT(102%,105%), there was significantly lower affect and self-efficacy to continue pace than those during TT(105%) (P < 0.05), significantly lower self-efficacy to compete than that during TT(102%) (P = 0.004), and greater RPE than that during TTFBL (P < 0.001).
Because the interpretation of performance information and perceptions depends on the manner in which it is presented, i.e., "framing effect," it could be suggested that the summative effect of two opponents could have evoked negative perceptions despite eliciting a similar performance. Magnitudes of deception produce similar performance enhancement yet elicit diverse psychological responses mediated by the external competitive environment the participants were performing in.
以往曾在自行车计时赛（TT）中研究过对运动强度的欺骗性操控，但所采用的幅度、方法和任务时长各不相同。本研究考察了在16.1公里计时赛中以往使用的欺骗幅度，并探索尚未研究过的心理反应。
12名训练有素的自行车运动员完成了5次计时赛，单独进行了2次基线试验，一次与代表最快基线试验102%的模拟动态虚拟形象对抗（TT(102%)），一次与105%的虚拟形象对抗（TT(105%)），还有一次与两个虚拟形象对抗（TT(102%,105%)）。
通过欺骗性地利用竞争对手来掩盖强度操控，使得成绩提高幅度大于他们所认为的最大值（1.3%-1.7%）。尽管成绩有类似的提高，但在TT(102%,105%)期间，继续保持节奏的情感体验和自我效能感显著低于TT(105%)期间（P<0.05），竞争的自我效能感显著低于TT(102%)期间（P = 0.004），且主观用力程度高于TTFBL期间（P<0.001）。
由于对成绩信息的解读和认知取决于其呈现方式，即“框架效应”，因此可以认为，尽管引发了类似的成绩表现，但两个对手的累加效应可能引发了负面认知。欺骗幅度产生了类似的成绩提升，但在参与者所处的外部竞争环境的介导下引发了不同的心理反应。
