Investigating the relationship between cognitions, pacing strategies and performance in 16.1 km cycling time trials using a think aloud protocol

Abstract

Objectives Three studies involved the investigation of concurrent cognitive processes and pacing behaviour during a 16.1km cycling time trial (TT) using a novel Think Aloud (TA) protocol. Study 1 examined trained cyclist's cognitions over time whilst performing a real-life 16.1km time trial (TT), using TA protocol. Study 2, included both trained and untrained participants who performed a 16.1 km TT in a laboratory whilst using TA. Study 3 investigated participants' experiences of using TA during a TT performance. Method: Study 1 involved 10 trained cyclists performing a real life 16.1km TT. Study 2 included 10 trained and 10 untrained participants who performed a laboratory-based 16.1km TT. In both studies, all participants were asked to TA. Time, power output, speed and heart rate were measured. Verbalisations were coded into the following themes (i) internal sensory monitoring, (ii) active self-regulation, (iii) outward monitoring (iv) distraction. Cognitions and pacing strategies were compared between groups and across the duration of the TT. In study 3 all participants were interviewed post TT to explore perceptions of using TA. Results: Study 1 and 2 found cognitions and pacing changed throughout the TT. Active self-regulation was verbalised most frequently. Differences were found between laboratory and field verbalisations and trained and untrained participants. Study 3 provided support for the use of TA in endurance research. Recommendations were provided for future application. Conclusion: Through the use of TA this study has been able to contribute to the pacing and cycling literature and to the understanding of endurance athletes' cognitions.

Developing mixed methods research in sport and exercise psychology: potential contributions of a critical realist perspective

“…Thelwell et al (2018) stated that they adopted "the post-positivist approach to the data collection" (p. 136) in the qualitative phase, "but progressed via the adoption of a pragmatic stance to address the research question at a different level that in this case, required a shift from epistemological purity" (p. 139). Whitehead et al (2018) adopted an expansion approach, where a series of three studies were conducted to gain different insights into the same topic. They described assuming a post-positivist stance in the first two studies and switching to a relativist-interpretivist perspective in the third study.…”

“…In terms of evaluating research rigour, some researchers addressed integrative quality criteria that they framed as applicable to the study as a whole (e.g., Karageorghis et al, 2018;Mallinson-Howard et al, 2018;Rumbold et al, 2018;Thrower et al, 2019), but more often quantitative and qualitative parts of the study were evaluated separately (e.g., Kacperski & Hall, 2017;Middleton et al, 2017;Redwood-Brown et al, 2018;Richard et al, 2017;Whitehead et al, 2018). From the integrative perspective, Thrower et al (2019) suggested that "taken as a whole, this study can be judged on the capacity to which it is relevant for the research questions, is transparent, has a rationale for using mixed methods, and requires the integration of mixed-method findings", while at the same time maintaining that "the quality criteria for each aspect of the study should be considered separately" (p. 4).…”

“…Tracy's (2010) criteria were mentioned in one study; other markers of quality included prolonged engagement, collaborative coding, audit trail and self-reflective diary. Whitehead et al (2018) used inter-rater reliability in their post-positivist phase, and critical friends in their relativist-interpretivist phase, echoing Smith and McGannon's (2018) and Sparkes's (2015) suggestion that validity considerations should be specific to the adopted paradigm.…”

Self-regulation in endurance sports: theory, research, and practice

“…measuring self-efficacy during endurance performance poses practical difficulties, recent research suggests that a think-aloud protocol can be used with runners (Samson et al, 2017) and cyclists (Whitehead et al, 2017) to gain understanding of their thoughts. This may also provide further insight into the cyclical nature of self-regulation.…”

Learning Strategies Focused on Decision Making and Collaboration on Physical Education

“…In this case, the reflections in the class journal were maintained and did not diminish neither were they abandoned even in the moments of evaluation. This shows that communication and reflection strategies whether journals, self-talk [51] or think-aloud [52], and narrative interviews [53] are all working. Ekkekakis and Brand [54] insist that knowing how people feel when they are learning, and practicing is important to predict their perseverance.…”