School of Public Health, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.
Sylvan Adams Sports Institute, Tel Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.
PLoS One. 2021 Aug 18;16(8):e0256231. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256231. eCollection 2021.
In resistance-training (RT), the number of repetitions is traditionally prescribed using a predetermined approach (e.g., three sets of 10 repetitions). An emerging alternative is the estimated repetitions to failure (ERF) approach (e.g., terminating sets two repetitions from failure). Despite the importance of affective responses experienced during RT, a comparison between the two approaches on such outcomes is lacking.
Twenty women (age range: 23-45 years) without RT experience completed estimated one repetition maximum (RM) tests in four exercises. In the next two counterbalanced sessions, participants performed the exercises using 70%1RM. Participants completed ten repetitions in all three sets (predetermined condition) or terminated the sets when perceived to be two repetitions away from task-failure (ERF condition). Primary outcomes were affective-valence, enjoyment, and approach-preference and secondary outcomes were repetition-numbers completed in each exercise.
We observed trivial differences in the subjective measures and an approximately even approach-preference split. Under the ERF condition, we observed greater variability in repetition-numbers between participants and across exercises. Specifically, the mean number of repetitions was slightly lower in the chest-press, knee-extension, and lat-pulldown (~1 repetition) but considerably higher in the leg-press (17 vs. 10, p<0.01).
Both approaches led to comparable affective responses and to an approximately even approach preference. Hence, prior to prescribing either approach, coaches should consider trainee's preferences. Moreover, under the ERF condition participants completed a dissimilar number of repetitions across exercises while presumably reaching a similar proximity to task-failure. This finding suggests that ERF allows for better effort regulation between exercises.
在抗阻训练（RT）中，传统上使用预定方法（例如，三组 10 次重复）来规定重复次数。一种新兴的替代方法是估计失败重复次数（ERF）方法（例如，从失败中终止两组两次重复）。尽管在 RT 期间经历的情感反应很重要，但缺乏这两种方法在这些结果上的比较。
20 名没有 RT 经验的女性（年龄范围：23-45 岁）在四项运动中完成了估计的一次最大重复（RM）测试。在下两个平衡的会话中，参与者使用 70%1RM 进行练习。所有三组参与者都完成了十次重复（预定条件）或在感觉离任务失败还有两次重复时终止了这些组（ERF 条件）。主要结果是情感效价、享受和接近偏好，次要结果是每项练习中完成的重复次数。
我们观察到主观测量值和接近偏好的细微差异。在 ERF 条件下，我们观察到参与者之间和运动之间的重复次数变化更大。具体来说，胸部按压、膝盖伸展和 lat-pulldown 的平均重复次数略低（约 1 次），而腿部按压的重复次数明显较高（17 次对 10 次，p<0.01）。
两种方法都导致了类似的情感反应和大约相同的接近偏好。因此，在规定任何一种方法之前，教练都应该考虑学员的偏好。此外，在 ERF 条件下，参与者在不同的练习中完成的重复次数不同，而在接近任务失败的情况下，他们的努力程度可能相似。这一发现表明，ERF 可以更好地调节练习之间的努力程度。
