scholarly journals An analysis of the perceived causes leading to task-failure in resistance-exercises

PeerJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. e9611
Author(s):  
Aviv Emanuel ◽  
Isaac Isur Rozen Smukas ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Logistic Regression Model ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Limiting Factors ◽  
Trained Subjects ◽  
Task Failure ◽  
Reaching Task ◽  
Resistance Exercises ◽  
Perceived Reasons ◽  
Cardiovascular Strain

Background While reaching task-failure in resistance-exercises is a topic that attracts scientific and applied interest, the underlying perceived reasons leading to task-failure remain underexplored. Here, we examined the reasons subjects attribute to task-failure as they performed resistance-exercises using different loads. Methods Twenty-two resistance-trained subjects (11-females) completed one Repetition-Maximum (RM) tests in the barbell squat and bench-press. Then, in the next two counterbalanced sessions, subjects performed two sets to task-failure in both exercises, using either 70% or 83% of 1RM. Approximately 30 seconds after set-completion, subjects verbally reported the reasons they perceived to have caused them to reach task-failure. Their answers were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. The differences between the frequencies of the identified categories were then tested using a mixed logistic regression model. Results The most commonly reported reason was muscle fatigue (54%, p < 0.001), mostly of the target muscles involved in each exercise. However, remote muscles involved to a lesser extent in each exercise were also reported. Approximately half of the remaining reasons included general fatigue (26%), pain (12%), cardiovascular strain (11%), and negative affect (10%), with the latter three reported more often in the squat (p = 0.022). Conclusions In contrast to our expectations, task-failure was perceived to be caused by a range of limiting factors other than fatigue of the target muscles. It now remains to be establishedwhether different perceived limiting factors of resistance-exercises lead to different adaptations, such as muscular strength and hypertrophy.

scholarly journals An analysis of the perceived causes leading to task-failure in resistance-exercises

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aviv Emanuel ◽  
Itzhak Rozen Smukas ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Limiting Factors ◽  
Trained Subjects ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Task Failure ◽  
Reaching Task ◽  
Resistance Exercises ◽  
Cardiovascular Strain

Background: While reaching task-failure in resistance-exercises is a topic that attracts scientific and applied interest, the underlying reasons leading to task-failure remain underexplored. Here, we examined the reasons subjects attribute to task-failure as they performed resistance-exercises using different loads.Methods: First, twenty-two resistance-trained subjects (11-females) completed one Repetition-Maximum (RM) tests in the barbell squat and bench-press. In the next two sessions, subjects performed two sets to task-failure in both exercises, using either 70% or 83% of 1RM. Immediately after set-completion, subjects verbally reported the reasons they perceived to cause task-failure. Their answers were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. The differences between the frequencies of the identified categories were then tested using a mixed logistic regression model.Results: The most commonly reported reason was muscle fatigue (54%, p&lt;.001), mostly of the target muscles involved in each exercise. However, remote muscles involved to a lesser extent in each exercise were also reported. Approximately half of the remaining reasons included general fatigue (26%), pain (12%), cardiovascular strain (11%), and negative affect (10%), with the latter reported more often in the squat (p=.022).Conclusions: In contrast to our expectations, task-failure was perceived to be caused by a range of limiting factors other than fatigue of the target muscles. It now remains to be established whether different perceived limiting factors of resistance-exercises lead to different adaptations, such as muscular strength and hypertrophy.

scholarly journals How one feels during resistance exercises: A repetition by repetition analysis across exercises and loads

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aviv Emanuel ◽  
Itzhak Rozen Smukas ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Resistance Training ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Affective Valence ◽  
Trained Subjects ◽  
Task Failure ◽  
Position Transducer ◽  
Feeling Scale ◽  
Resistance Exercises ◽  
Bar Velocity

Purpose: The feeling scale (FS) is a unique and underexplored scale in sport sciences that measures affective valence. FS has the potential to be used in athletic environments as a monitoring and prescription tool. We sought to examine whether FS ratings, as measured on a repetition-by-repetition basis, can predict proximity to task-failure and bar velocity across different exercises and loads. Methods: On the first day, 20 trained subjects (10 females) completed 1RM tests in the barbell bench and squat exercises and were introduced to the FS. On the following three sessions, subjects completed three sets to task-failure with either 1) 70%1RM bench-press, 2) 70%1RM squat (squat-70%), or 3) 80%1RM squat (squat-80%). Sessions were completed in a randomized, counter-balanced order. After every completed repetition, subjects verbally reported their FS ratings. Bar velocity was measured via linear position transducer. Results: FS ratings predicted failure-proximity and bar velocity in all three conditions (p&lt;0.001, R2 range: 0.66-0.85). Specifically, a reduction of one unit in the FS corresponded to approaching task-failure by 14%, 11% and 11%, and to a reduction in bar velocity of 10%, 4% and 3%, in the bench, squat-70% and squat-80%, respectively. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate if the FS can be used in RT environments among trained subjects, on a repetition-by-repetition basis. The results show strong predictive abilities of the FS, indicating that the scale can be used to monitor and prescribe resistance training, and that its benefits should be further explored.

scholarly journals The effects of lifting lighter and heavier loads on subjective measures

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aviv Emanuel ◽  
Itzhak Rozen Smukas ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Bench Press ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Subjective Measures ◽  
Affective Valence ◽  
Task Failure ◽  
Reaching Task ◽  
Perceived Effort ◽  
Failure Loads ◽  
Bar Velocity ◽  
Load Conditions

Background: Despite the progress made in the study of subjective measures in resistance-training, some questions remain unanswered. Here we investigated if ratings of perceived effort (RPE) can predict task-failure and bar-velocity across exercises and loads as a primary outcome, and whether a battery of subjective measures differ as a function of the lifted loads as a secondary outcome. Methods: In this preregistered study, twenty resistance-trained subjects (50%-females) first completed one repetition-maximum (RM) tests of the barbell-squat and bench-press. On the second and third sessions, subjects completed two sets of squats followed by two sets of bench-press to task-failure, using 70% or 83% of 1RM, while bar-velocity was recorded. RPE scores were recorded after every repetition. In addition to RPE, Rating-of-fatigue, affective-valence, enjoyment, and load-preferences were collected after sets- and sessions-completion. Results: Across conditions, RPE was strongly correlated with reaching task-failure (r= .86) and moderately correlated with bar-velocity (r= -.58). Our model indicates that an increase in one RPE unit is associated with an 11% shift towards task-failure, and a 4% reduction in bar-velocity, with steeper slopes observed in the heavier condition. Negligible differences were observed between the load-conditions in rating-of-fatigue, affective-valence, enjoyment, and load-preference. Conclusion: RPE scores, collected on a repetition-by-repetition basis, accurately reflected reaching task-failure across loads and conditions. Hence, RPE can be used to prescribe repetition numbers during ongoing sets. The negligible differences between load conditions in rating-of-fatigue, affective-valence, enjoyment, and load-preference indicate that when sets are taken to task-failure, loads can be selected based on individual preferences.

scholarly journals The Effects of Lifting Lighter and Heavier Loads on Subjective Measures

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aviv Emanuel ◽  
Isaac Isur Rozen Smukas ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Perceived Exertion ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Subjective Measures ◽  
Affective Valence ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Task Failure ◽  
Reaching Task ◽  
Bar Velocity ◽  
Load Conditions

Background: Despite the progress made in the study of subjective measures in resistance training, some questions remain unanswered. Here the authors investigated if ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) can predict task failure and bar velocity across exercises and loads as a primary outcome and whether a battery of subjective measures differ as a function of the lifted loads as a secondary outcome. Methods: In this preregistered study, 20 resistance-trained subjects (50% female) first completed a 1-repetition-maximum test of the barbell squat and bench press. In the second and third sessions, they completed 2 sets of squats followed by 2 sets of bench press to task failure, using 70% or 83% of 1-repetition maximum, while bar velocity was recorded. RPE scores were recorded after every repetition. In addition to RPE, rating of fatigue, affective valence, enjoyment, and load preferences were collected after set and session completion. Results: Across conditions, RPE was strongly correlated with reaching task failure (r = .86) and moderately correlated with bar velocity (r = −.58). The model indicates that an increase in 1 RPE unit is associated with an 11% shift toward task failure and a 4% reduction in bar velocity, with steeper slopes observed in the heavier condition. Negligible differences were observed between the load conditions in rating of fatigue, affective valence, enjoyment, and load preference. Conclusion: RPE scores, collected on a repetition-by-repetition basis, accurately reflected reaching task failure across loads and conditions. Hence, RPE can be used to prescribe repetition numbers during ongoing sets. The negligible differences between load conditions in rating of fatigue, affective valence, enjoyment, and load preference indicate that when sets are taken to task failure, loads can be selected based on individual preferences.

scholarly journals How One Feels During Resistance Exercises: A Repetition-by-Repetition Analysis Across Exercises and Loads

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aviv Emanuel ◽  
Isaac Rozen Smukas ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Resistance Training ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Affective Valence ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Task Failure ◽  
Position Transducer ◽  
Feeling Scale ◽  
Resistance Exercises ◽  
Bar Velocity

Context: The Feeling Scale (FS) is a unique and underexplored scale in sport sciences that measures affective valence. The FS has the potential to be used in athletic environments as a monitoring and prescription tool. Purpose: To examine whether FS ratings, as measured on a repetition-by-repetition basis, can predict proximity to task failure and bar velocity across different exercises and loads. Methods: On the first day, 20 trained participants (10 females) completed 1-repetition-maximum (1-RM) tests in the barbell bench and squat exercises and were introduced to the FS. In the following 3 sessions, participants completed 3 sets to task failure with either (1) 70% 1-RM bench press, (2) 70% 1-RM squat (squat-70%), or (3) 80% 1-RM squat (squat-80%). Sessions were completed in a randomized, counterbalanced order. After every completed repetition, participants verbally reported their FS ratings. Bar velocity was measured via a linear position transducer. Results: FS ratings predicted failure proximity and bar velocity in all 3 conditions (P < .001, R2 .66–.85). Based on the analysis, which included over 2400 repetitions, a reduction of 1 unit in the FS corresponded to approaching task failure by 14%, 11%, and 11%, and to a reduction in bar velocity of 10%, 4%, and 3%, in the bench, squat-70%, and squat-80%, respectively. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate whether the FS can be used in resistance-training environments among resistance-trained participants on a repetition-by-repetition basis. The results indicate that the FS can be used to monitor and prescribe resistance training and that its benefits should be further explored.

Muscular Strength and Power in 3- to 7-Year-Old Children

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew C. Fry ◽  
Carol C. Irwin ◽  
Justin X. Nicoll ◽  
David E. Ferebee
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Mean Power ◽  
Mean Velocity ◽  
Adult Weight ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Resistance Exercises ◽  
Body Resistance

To determine absolute and relative (adjusted for body mass) strength, mean power, and mean velocity for upper and lower body resistance exercises, forty-seven young boys and girls participated in maximal strength testing. Healthy young boys and girls, ages 3- to 7-years old, were tested for one-repetition maximum (1-RM) strength, and 70% of 1-RM to determine mean power and mean velocity on the chest press and leg press exercises. Adult weight machines were modified to accommodate the smaller size and lower strength levels of the children. A 2 × 4 (sex × age) ANOVA was used to determine age and sex differences in performance. No interaction or sex differences were observed for any variable at any age. 1-RM strength, mean power, and mean velocity significantly increased across ages (p ≤ .05). When adjusted for body mass, the changes were insignificant, with one exception. Relative mean power for the bench press increased with age. Data indicated children from 3-7 years of age are capable of performing strength and power tests, but may require more attempts at maximal loads compared with adults. It appears that muscular strength and velocity during this stage of development are primarily dependent on increasing body mass, whereas power is influenced by additional variable(s).

Musculotendinous stiffness: its relationship to eccentric, isometric, and concentric performance

1994 ◽  
Vol 76 (6) ◽  
pp. 2714-2719 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. Wilson ◽  
A. J. Murphy ◽  
J. F. Pryor
Keyword(s):  
Bench Press ◽  
Force Production ◽  
Force Transmission ◽  
Trained Subjects ◽  
Damped Oscillations ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Initial Force ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Maximal Effort ◽  
Musculotendinous Stiffness

The purpose of this study was to quantify the relationship between musculotendinous stiffness and performance in eccentric, isometric, and concentric activities. Thirteen trained subjects performed a series of maximal effort eccentric, concentric, and isometric muscular contractions in a bench press-type movement. Additionally, subjects performed a series of quasi-static muscular contractions in a bench press movement. A brief perturbation was applied to the bar while these isometric efforts were maintained, and the resulting damped oscillations provided data pertaining to each subject's musculotendinous stiffness. Musculotendinous stiffness was significantly related to isometric and concentric performance (r = 0.57–0.78) but not to eccentric performance. These results are interpreted as demonstrating that the optimal musculotendinous stiffness for maximum concentric and isometric activities was toward the stiff end of the elasticity continuum. A stiffer musculotendinous unit may facilitate such performances by improving the force production capabilities of the contractile component, due to a combination of improved length and rate of shortening, and additionally by enhancing initial force transmission.

scholarly journals The reliability of the one maximum repetition in sedentary, active and strength-trained subjects

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 700-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Leandro Tiggemann ◽  
Matheus Giacobbo Guedes ◽  
Roberta Bgeginski ◽  
Ronei Silveira Pinto ◽  
Luiz Fernando Martins Kruel
Keyword(s):  
Physical Fitness ◽  
Critical Behavior ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Strength Test ◽  
Maximum Strength ◽  
Trained Subjects ◽  
Anova Test ◽  
Leg Press ◽  
Coefficient Corrélation ◽  
The One

The aim of the study was to verify the reliability of one maximum repetition (1-RM) in three different groups, according levels of physical fitness. The sample was composed for thirty subjects (aged 18 to 34 years old) divided in three groups with ten subjects each: sedentary (SG), physical active (PAG) and strength-trained (STG). The subjects were submitted to two familiarization sessions and two sessions of maximum strength test (1-RM1 and 1-RM2) at the following exercises: bench press and 45º leg press. The comparison between 1-RM values was made by two-way ANOVA (test and group) and association between both by intraclass coefficient correlation (p ≤ 0.05). Data presented high correlation values between both tests (from 0.922 to 0.997; p < 0.001), however, significant differences (p < 0.05) was observed between 1-RM1 and 1-RM2 at bench press exercise in SG (56.40 ± 8.00 kg e 57.60 ± 7.89 kg, respectively), PAG (68,80 ± 9,26 kg e 69,40 ± 8,78 kg, respectively) and STG (87.20 ± 19.94 kg e 88.60 ± 19.86 kg, respectively), as well in the leg press in SG (222,5 ± 38,24 kg e 229,50 ± 38,55 kg, respectively), PAG (238.50 ± 26.25 kg e 244.00 ± 24.70, respectively) and STG (321.50 ± 46.19 kg e 336.40 ± 40.44 kg, respectively). It can be concluded that the subject’s level of physical fitness does not appear to be a critical behavior at 1-RM reliability.

scholarly journals Once a Week Resistance Training Improves Muscular Strength in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 153473541987974 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wanderson Divino Nilo dos Santos ◽  
Amilton Vieira ◽  
Claudio Andre Barbosa de Lira ◽  
João Felipe Mota ◽  
Paulo Gentil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Body Composition ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Leg Press

Background: Exercise has been shown to reduce adverse outcomes related to breast cancer. However, the rate of adherence to physical exercise is very low among breast cancer survivors (BCS). This study investigated the effects of high supervision ratio resistance training (RT), once a week for 8 weeks, on changes in body composition and muscular strength in BCS. Methods: Twenty-five female BCS undergoing hormone therapy were randomized into resistance training group (TG, n = 12) or control (CG, n = 13) group. The TG performed 8 weeks of supervised RT, with 1 trainer per volunteer, once a week. Body composition was evaluated by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and muscle strength was evaluated by 10 repetition maximum (10 RM) for leg press (45°) and bench press exercises. A 1-way analysis of variance was used to compare within-group effects at pre- and post-intervention. An analysis of covariance test was used to compare post-intervention values, using pre-intervention measures as covariates. The effect size (ES) was calculated by Cohen’s d. Results: The TG improved muscle strength in 10 RM leg press (45°; Δ 33.75 ± 11.51 kg, P = .02; ES = 0.96) and bench press (Δ 4.08 ± 1.83 kg, P = .01; ES = 1.15). Adherence to training was more than 99%. Changes in body composition were not detected. There were no changes in the CG for any assessment. Conclusion: Once-weekly supervised RT could be an alternative to increase the adherence to exercise and improve muscular strength in BCS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document