Impact of High-Intensity Interval Duration on Perceived Exertion

Abstract

These findings suggest that 30-s HIT protocols limit the perceptual drift that occurs during exercise, in comparison to HC exercise. Moreover, performing more intervals of shorter durations appears to produce lower postexercise RPE values than performing fewer intervals of longer duration and equal intensity. Because effort perception may influence behavior, these results could have implications for the prescription of interval training in overweight sedentary adults.

Low-Active Male Adolescents

“…The HIIT protocol used was an adaptation of that developed by Tabata et al (36) and was favored because of its short exercise bouts and brief overall duration (27). Each ''set'' consisted of four bouts of ''all-out'' maximal exercise (90%-100% HRmax) lasting 20 s, interspersed with 10 s of passive rest periods.…”

Modified sprint interval training protocols. Part II. Psychological responses

“…When considering the role of psychological perceptions (such as affect and enjoyment) in HIIT and SIT as types of PA, results to date have been equivocal (Oliveira et al 2013;Kilpatrick and Greeley 2014;Kilpatrick et al 2015b;Saanijoki et al 2015), though some reports demonstrate greater enjoyment of HIIT compared with MICT in overweight and healthy individuals (Bartlett et al 2011;Crisp et al 2012). Interestingly, direct comparison between SIT (8 × 30 s at 130% maximal work separated by 90 s of recovery, ϳ79% age-predicted maximal heart rate) and HIIT (8 × 60 s at 85% maximal work with 1 min of recovery, ϳ77% age-predicted maximal heart rate) in young active individuals found that the affective responses were similar despite greater blood lactate concentrations and perceived exertion during SIT (Wood et al 2016).…”

“…Additionally, the few studies on the psychological aspects of SIT have been limited in the constructs assessed (e.g., perceived exertion (Kilpatrick et al 2015b)). Another SIT study only assessed traditional (30 s) or longer sprint bouts (60 s) in young healthy participants (Kilpatrick and Greeley 2014), although the practicality is questionable considering traditional 30-s SIT is already highly demanding.…”

“…Together with the idea that the prolonged maintenance of power output drives the negative psychological perceptions of HIIT/SIT (Kilpatrick and Greeley 2014;Kilpatrick et al 2015b), the current study aimed to determine if manipulating the sprint and recovery duration, while maintaining the traditional 1:8 work to rest ratio, could yield more favourable perceptions of SIT. Considering the countless possible variations of SIT protocols and the lack of research into their psychological perceptions, it is valuable to perform an in-depth evaluation of SIT before attempting to make comparisons to other protocols (e.g., MICT and HIIT).…”

Perceptual Changes in Response to Two Regimens of Interval Training in Sedentary Women

“…The purpose of this study was to assess acute and chronic changes in RPE, affect, and arousal in response to 2 HIIT regimens in untrained women, which with exception of a recent study (35) is a population infrequently included in studies examining perceptual responses to interval training. Moreover, it is evident that fitness level mediates perceptual responses to exercise, as Rose and Parfitt (46) demonstrated that sedentary women express lower competence, selfefficacy, and less positive affect versus their active counterparts during exercise.…”