Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAndersen, Vidar
dc.contributor.authorFimland, Marius Steiro
dc.contributor.authorIversen, Vegard Moe
dc.contributor.authorPedersen, Helene
dc.contributor.authorBalberg, Kristin
dc.contributor.authorGåsvær, Maria
dc.contributor.authorRise, Katarina
dc.contributor.authorSolstad, Tom Erik Jorung
dc.contributor.authorStien, Nicolay
dc.contributor.authorSæterbakken, Atle Hole
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-27T13:09:46Z
dc.date.available2022-12-27T13:09:46Z
dc.date.created2022-06-16T14:17:05Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.issn1664-1078
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3039549
dc.description.abstractThe 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, p < 0.001, ES = 0.96) and RPD (1.0 points, p = 0.008, ES = 0.47) and tended to be higher for sPDF, i.e., more pleasurable, (p = 0.059, ES = 0.25) compared to the traditional session. There was no difference in EES (p = 0.661, ES = 0.05). The traditional session led to significantly increased training volume (4.2%, p = 0.011, ES = 0.34) and lasted 23 min (66%, p < 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.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherFrontiersen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleA Comparison of Affective Responses Between Time Efficient and Traditional Resistance Trainingen_US
dc.title.alternativeA Comparison of Affective Responses Between Time Efficient and Traditional Resistance Trainingen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.journalFrontiers in Psychologyen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fpsyg.2022.912368
dc.identifier.cristin2032517
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal