Work Distribution Influences Session Ratings of Perceived Exertion Response During Resistance Exercise Matched for Total Volume

Abstract

Session ratings of perceived exertion (SRPE) are sensitive to changes in total work volume and work rate during resistance training. This study examined the influence of work distribution (varied load, set, and repetitions [reps]) on SRPE in 2 resistance exercise trials matched for total work volume (sets × reps × percentage of 1 repetition maximum [% 1RM]) and work rate (total work volume/time). Participants completed a low load/high rep (LLHR) trial (2 sets × 12 reps × 3-minute recovery at ∼60% 1RM) and a high load/low rep (HLLR) trial (3 sets × 6 reps × 1.5-minute recovery at ∼80% 1RM) of the bench press, lat pull-down, overhead press, upright row, triceps extension, and biceps curl. A 2-minute recovery separated each exercise in both trials. Session ratings of perceived exertion and recovery heart rate (HR) were recorded 20 minutes after exercise. Preset and postset RPE and HR were higher for HLLR vs. LLHR (3.1 ± 1.6; 104 ± 15 b·min-1 vs. 2.1 ± 1.3; 98 ± 10 b·min-1) and (5.5 ± 0.9; 139 ± 14 b·min-1 vs. 4.4 ± 0.9; 131 ± 12 b·min-1), respectively. Session RPE was higher for HLLR (5.7 ± 1.4) vs. LLHR (4.3 ± 1.4) with no difference in recovery HR. Session ratings of perceived exertion was greater with higher load despite matched total volumes and work rates. Higher preset acute RPE and HR in HLLR may indicate differences in recovery between sets. Higher postset acute RPE and HR in HLLR indicated increased difficulty of individual sets in HLLR, which likely contributed to SRPE differences. Practitioners can be confident that SRPE accurately reflects changes in training load when the number of sets, reps, and loads are altered within routine training.

Loading Intensity Prediction by Velocity and the OMNI-RES 0–10 Scale in Bench Press

“…Due to the impracticability of using these methods during each training session, researchers have sought easier methods to monitor resistance training. In recent years, perceived exertion scales have been successfully used to regulate resistance exercise intensities (10), monitor the progression of fatigue during workouts (16), estimate changes in the movement velocity or power within a singular set (23), and select the initial training load (17). Robertson et al developed prediction models, which use OMNI-Resistance This is a non-final version of an article published in final form in (provide complete journal citation)…”

The Moderating Role of Insulin-Like Growth Factor 1 in the Relationship Between Cognitive and Aerobic Endurance Change

“…Additionally, while the current work allows examination of these factors within MCI, future work should incorporate comparison samples of healthy older adults, individuals with Alzheimer disease, and sedentary individuals with MCI. Finally, while our analyses accounted for RPE during the exercise intervention, which is associated with resistance load, 34 we did not control for resistance load itself (eg, percentage of 1-repetition maximum); this may be relevant for our results, as IGF-1 may be more strongly influenced by resistance versus aerobic exercise. 35-36 The role of brain-derived neurotrophic factor must also be considered in future studies, as aerobic exercise increases peripheral brain-derived neurotrophic factor, 37 potentially influencing cognitive change.…”

Autoregulation in Resistance Training for Lower Limb Tendinopathy: A Potential Method for Addressing Individual Factors, Intervention Issues and Inadequate Outcomes

“…The rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale has been found to be a reliable measure of not only training session intensity, but also specific exercise intensity within a session [234][235]. Although most studies have found RPE an accurate measure of fatigue during strength training, some have found it not to be [236][237][238][239].…”