Suppr超能文献

高效训练与传统阻力训练的情感反应比较

A Comparison of Affective Responses Between Time Efficient and Traditional Resistance Training.

作者信息

Andersen Vidar, Fimland Marius Steiro, Iversen Vegard Moe, Pedersen Helene, Balberg Kristin, Gåsvær Maria, Rise Katarina, Solstad Tom Erik Jorung, Stien Nicolay, Saeterbakken Atle Hole

机构信息

Faculty of Education, Arts and Sports, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway.

Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2022 Jun 16;13:912368. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.912368. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the acute effects of traditional resistance training and superset training on training duration, training volume and different perceptive measures. Twenty-nine resistance-trained participants (27 ± 7 years, 173 ± 9 cm, and 70 ± 14 kg) performed a whole-body workout (i) traditionally and (ii) as supersets of exercises targeting different muscle groups, in a randomized-crossover design. Each session was separated by 4-7 days, and consisted of eight exercises and three sets to failure. Training duration and number of repetitions lifted were recorded during the sessions. Rate of perceived exertion for effort (RPE), rate of perceived exertion for discomfort (RPD), session displeasure/pleasure (sPDF), and exercise enjoyment (EES) were measured 15 min after each session. Forty-eight hours after the final session participants reported which session they preferred. The superset session led to significantly higher values for RPE (1.3 points,  < 0.001, ES = 0.96) and RPD (1.0 points,  = 0.008, ES = 0.47) and tended to be higher for sPDF, i.e., more pleasurable, ( = 0.059, ES = 0.25) compared to the traditional session. There was no difference in EES ( = 0.661, ES = 0.05). The traditional session led to significantly increased training volume (4.2%,  = 0.011, ES = 0.34) and lasted 23 min (66%,  < 0.001, ES = 7.78) longer than the superset session. Eighteen of the participants preferred the superset session, while 11 preferred the traditional session. In conclusion, performing a whole-body workout as a superset session was more time-efficient, but reduced the training volume and was perceived with greater exertion for effort and discomfort than a traditional workout.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较传统抗阻训练和超级组训练对训练时长、训练量以及不同感知指标的急性影响。29名有抗阻训练经验的参与者(年龄27±7岁,身高173±9厘米,体重70±14千克)以随机交叉设计进行了一次全身训练,(i)采用传统方式,(ii)作为针对不同肌肉群的超级组训练。每次训练间隔4 - 7天,每次训练包含八个练习动作,每组练至力竭,共三组。训练过程中记录训练时长和举起的重复次数。每次训练结束15分钟后测量用力的自觉用力程度(RPE)、不适的自觉用力程度(RPD)、训练的不愉快/愉快程度(sPDF)以及运动愉悦感(EES)。最后一次训练48小时后,参与者报告他们更喜欢哪一次训练。与传统训练相比,超级组训练的RPE值显著更高(高1.3分,<0.001,效应量ES = 0.96),RPD值也显著更高(高1.0分,= 0.008,效应量ES = 0.47),且sPDF值有更高的趋势,即更愉悦(= 0.059,效应量ES = 0.25)。EES方面无差异(= 0.661,效应量ES = 0.05)。传统训练导致训练量显著增加(4.2%,= 0.011,效应量ES = 0.34),且比超级组训练持续时间长23分钟(长66%,<0.001,效应量ES = 7.78)。18名参与者更喜欢超级组训练,而11名更喜欢传统训练。总之,将全身训练作为超级组训练更节省时间,但训练量减少,且与传统训练相比,自觉用力和不适程度更高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/444a/9243264/ca791377fc22/fpsyg-13-912368-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验