Novel Resistance Training–Specific Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale Measuring Repetitions in Reserve

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to compare rating of perceived exertion (RPE) values measuring repetitions in reserve (RIR) at particular intensities of 1 repetition maximum (RM) in experienced (ES) and novice squatters (NS). Furthermore, this investigation compared average velocity between ES and NS at the same intensities. Twenty-nine individuals (24.0 ± 3.4 years) performed a 1RM squat followed by a single repetition with loads corresponding to 60, 75, and 90% of 1RM and an 8-repetition set at 70% 1RM. Average velocity was recorded at 60, 75, and 90% 1RM and on the first and last repetitions of the 8-repetition set. Subjects reported an RPE value that corresponded to an RIR value (RPE-10 = 0-RIR, RPE-9 = 1-RIR, and so forth). Subjects were assigned to one of the 2 groups: (a) ES (n = 15, training age: 5.2 ± 3.5 years) and (b) NS (n = 14, training age: 0.4 ± 0.6 years). The mean of the average velocities for ES was slower (p ≤ 0.05) than NS at 100% and 90% 1RM. However, there were no differences (p > 0.05) between groups at 60, 75%, or for the first and eighth repetitions at 70% 1RM. In addition, ES recorded greater RPE at 1RM than NS (p = 0.023). In ES, there was a strong inverse relationship between average velocity and RPE at all percentages (r = -0.88, p < 0.001), and a strong inverse correlation in NS between average velocity and RPE at all intensities (r = -0.77, p = 0.001). Our findings demonstrate an inverse relationship between average velocity and RPE/RIR. Experienced squatter group exhibited slower average velocity and higher RPE at 1RM than NS, signaling greater efficiency at high intensities. The RIR-based RPE scale is a practical method to regulate daily training load and provide feedback during a 1RM test.

Does squatting need attention?—A dual-task study on cognitive resources in resistance exercise

“…Then, based on established testing protocols [25], several sets of barbell back squats were performed until a load was found which the participants could lift exactly one time with a proper technique (stance width: shoulder width / squat depth: at least horizontal thighs). Between the testing sets, participants rested for at least three minutes and immediately after each set the perceived exertion was quantified using the Repetitions in Reserve scale (RIR) [26]. The RIR was used as countermeasure to verify that the 1-RM is the maximal load that the participants can lift.…”

Differentiation between perceived effort and discomfort during resistance training in older adults:Reliability of trainee ratings of effort and discomfort,and reliability and validity of trainer ratings of trainee effort

“…Indeed to understand submaximal effort with this conceptualisation some studies have attempted to develop scales that assess effort during RT relative to MF. 21,22 However, a further consideration in this conceptualisation should also be the apparent difficulty people experience in differentiating between perceptions of effort and discomfort.…”

“Just one more rep!” – Ability to predict proximity to task failure in resistance trained persons

“…As noted, familiarization with the scale may be required and greater prior RT experience may improve its utility. The findings of other authors have suggested a higher accuracy in experienced participants (Steele et al, 2017a;Hackett et al, 2012;Hackett et al, 2016;Zourdos et al, 2016), especially when using higher loads (Zourdos et al, 2016). Indeed, predictive ability might be higher using higher loads, as discomfort was shown to be less in this case (Fisher, Farrow & Steele, 2017a;Stuart, Steele, Gentil, Giessing & Fisher, 2018).…”

“…Though rating of perceived effort (RPE) scales are widely employed in physical tasks such as sport and exercise, novel scales have been developed that are aimed at utilizing the feedback from increasing perceptions of fatigue and effort in order to predict proximity to task failure (Coquart et al, 2012;Helms et al, 2016). The application of predictions of proximity to task failure has been a particularly popular approach within resistance training in recent years to manipulate and control the intensity of effort employed in a given bout (Hackett, Johnson, Halaki & Chow, 2012;Hackett, Cobley, Favies, Michael & Halaki, 2016;Helms, Cronin, Storey & Zourdos, 2016;Zourdos et al, 2016). Considering the value of resistance training (RT) to improve physical fitness and health (Steele et al, 2017d), understanding the manipulation of variables such as effort within RT in order to maximize outcomes is of considerable interest.…”

“…However, in to better understand submaximal intensities of effort (i.e. set end-points that occur at different proximities to MF) RT modified RPE scales based upon 'repetitions in reserve' Pre-print article (not peer reviewed) published on 24/05/2020 (doi: 10.31236/osf.io/af6dv)all authors confirm they are happy to share this work 4 (RIR) have been developed (Hackett, Johnson, Halaki & Chow, 2012;Hackett, Cobley, Favies, Michael & Halaki, 2016;Helms, Cronin, Storey & Zourdos, 2016;Zourdos et al, 2016). These RIR scales are designed as a way of assessing/controlling effort by participants estimating how many repetitions they can perform before reaching MF.…”