2017
DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Influence of Mid-Event Deception on Psychophysiological Status and Pacing Can Persist across Consecutive Disciplines and Enhance Self-paced Multi-modal Endurance Performance

Abstract: Purpose: To examine the effects of deceptively aggressive bike pacing on performance, pacing, and associated physiological and perceptual responses during simulated sprint-distance triathlon.Methods: Ten non-elite, competitive male triathletes completed three simulated sprint-distance triathlons (0.75 km swim, 500 kJ bike, 5 km run), the first of which established personal best “baseline” performance (BL). During the remaining two trials athletes maintained a cycling power output 5% greater than BL, before com… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…). As such, despite recent evidence suggesting RPE may play a role in modulating pacing strategies (Taylor and Smith ) and limit time to exhaustion (Salam et al. ) the development and continual adjustment of perceived exertion during self‐paced exercise, is yet to be confirmed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…). As such, despite recent evidence suggesting RPE may play a role in modulating pacing strategies (Taylor and Smith ) and limit time to exhaustion (Salam et al. ) the development and continual adjustment of perceived exertion during self‐paced exercise, is yet to be confirmed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…), remaining duration (Hamilton and Behm ), previous experience (Micklewright et al. ), and physiological responses (Taylor and Smith ). However, due to varying exercise protocols, training status of participants and magnitude of deception experienced (Stone et al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%