Acute Effects of Different Training Loads on Affective Responses in Resistance-trained Men

Abstract

The main purpose of the present study was to investigate the acute effects of different training loads on ratings of perceived exertion and discomfort and feelings of pleasure/displeasure in resistance-trained men. Twelve resistance-trained men (26.7±3.5 years, 85.1±17.5 kg, and 174. 9±9.9 cm) performed 3 sets of the bench press, squat on a hack machine, and lat pulldown, until volitional concentric failure in two separate conditions: a moderate load (MOD) consisting of a relative load of 8–12 repetitions maximum (RM), and a light load (LIT) consisting of a relative load of 25–30RM. The session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE), session rating of perceived discomfort (sRPD), and session pleasure/displeasure feelings (sPDF) were assessed after 15 min after the ending of each session. A randomized, counterbalanced, crossover study was performed with 48 h recovery afforded between sessions. Differences between conditions were observed for sRPE and sRPD, in which scores for LIT were greater than MOD (sRPE: MOD=5.5±1.0 vs. LIT=6.4±0.7; sRPD: MOD=6.7±1.7 vs. LIT=8.7±1.0). For sPDF, MOD reported feelings of pleasure (1.2), whereas the LIT presented a feeling of displeasure (–2.3). Results suggest that resistance training performed with a light load until failure induces higher degrees of effort, discomfort and displeasure compared to a moderate load.

Loading Recommendations for Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Local Endurance: A Re-Examination of the Repetition Continuum

“…From a practical standpoint, however, a case can be made that moderate loads provide the most efficient means to achieve muscle development given that light load training involves performing many more repetitions compared to the use of heavier loads, which in turn increases the time spent training. Moreover, the high levels of metabolic acidosis that accompany the use of light loads tends to cause discomfort [81], which in turn can negatively impact adherence. Alternatively, evidence suggests that heavy load training requires more sets to achieve comparable hypertrophy to moderate loads.…”

“…However, it is important to note that the number of repetitions achieved at a given percentage of 1RM varies widely between individuals and, in addition to involving genetic factors, specific values ultimately will depend on considerations such as modality (free weights vs. machines), area of the body trained (e.g., upper vs. lower), single vs. multi-joint exercises, and perhaps others [1]. Additionally, while it generally seems that the theory proposed in the repetition continuum is not necessarily valid for hypertrophy, training with low-loads tends to produce more discomfort, displeasure, and a higher rating of perceived exertion than training with moderate-to-high loads [80,81]. Therefore, from a practical standpoint, training with moderate loads is likely to be more enjoyable, which might also impact long-term adherence.…”

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

“…The sPDF scale was presented with the following phrase: “ How was your workout? ” ( Ribeiro et al, 2019 ). The upper and lower limit were anchored by the following sentence “-5 can be described as perceiving the session as one of the worst/least pleasurable training sessions you have ever conducted while 5 would be one of the best/most pleasurable training sessions you have ever conducted.” How much the participants enjoyed the sessions was measured using the exercise enjoyment scale (EES).…”

Resistance Training Recommendations to Maximize Muscle Hypertrophy in an Athletic Population: Position Stand of the IUSCA

“…There may be a practical benefit to prioritizing the use of moderate loads in hypertrophy-oriented training, given that it is more time-efficient than lighter loads and less taxing on the joints and neuromuscular system than very heavy loads. Furthermore, it should be considered that training with low-loads tends to produce more discomfort, displeasure, and a higher rating of perceived effort than training with moderate-to-high loads (101). While training with moderate loads seems to produce the greatest practical advantages, preliminary evidence suggests a potential hypertrophic benefit to employing a combination of loading ranges.…”