Comparison of affective responses between an online and in-person high-intensity functional training session in sports students.

IF 3 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living Pub Date : 2026-09-24 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fspor.2026.1916043
Anine Brudeseth, Tom Erik Jorung Solstad, Amund Riiser, Atle Hole Sæterbakken, Espen Hermans, Jon Ingulf Medbø, Ove Sollie, Vidar Andersen
{"title":"Comparison of affective responses between an online and in-person high-intensity functional training session in sports students.","authors":"Anine Brudeseth, Tom Erik Jorung Solstad, Amund Riiser, Atle Hole Sæterbakken, Espen Hermans, Jon Ingulf Medbø, Ove Sollie, Vidar Andersen","doi":"10.3389/fspor.2026.1916043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study was to compare affective responses between a synchronous online and an in-person high-intensity functional training (HIFT) group exercise session on perceived effort, discomfort, displeasure/pleasure, enjoyment and preference in sports students. Using a randomized crossover design, 24 participants (14 men, 10 women, mean age 22) were randomized into two groups. Both groups completed in randomized order two standardized HIFT sessions, one in-person and one synchronous online. Rating of perceived effort, rate of perceived discomfort, session displeasure/pleasure and exercise enjoyment were measured immediately after ending each session. In addition, 48 h after the last session the participants answers which session they preferred and gave reasons for their preference. The reported pleasure (2.0 ± 2.2 vs. 3.1 ± 1.7, ES = 0.47, scale -5 to +5) and exercise enjoyment (4.2 ± 1.2 vs. 5.1 ± 1.0, ES = 0.56, scale 1-7) were lower conducting the online HIFT session than the in-person HIFT session. The online HIFT session were perceived less effortful than the in-person HIFT session (5.6 ± 1.7 vs. 6.7 ± 1.7, respectively, ES = 0.48, scale 0-10), but no difference in perceived discomfort (4.4 ± 2.0 vs. 4.7 ± 1.9, ES = 0.12, scale 0-10). There was no detectable cross-over effect of the order of the two training sessions (<i>p</i> ≥ 0.29). The large majority of participants (<i>n</i> = 22, 92%) preferred in-person group exercise, while only two participants (8%) preferred the online session. In sports students with prior group-training experience, in-person HIFT session demonstrated great perceived effort, pleasure and enjoyment when using self-reported perceptual measures, and was the preferred exercise modality compared with the online session.</p>","PeriodicalId":12716,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","volume":"8 ","pages":"1916043"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13646083/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2026.1916043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare affective responses between a synchronous online and an in-person high-intensity functional training (HIFT) group exercise session on perceived effort, discomfort, displeasure/pleasure, enjoyment and preference in sports students. Using a randomized crossover design, 24 participants (14 men, 10 women, mean age 22) were randomized into two groups. Both groups completed in randomized order two standardized HIFT sessions, one in-person and one synchronous online. Rating of perceived effort, rate of perceived discomfort, session displeasure/pleasure and exercise enjoyment were measured immediately after ending each session. In addition, 48 h after the last session the participants answers which session they preferred and gave reasons for their preference. The reported pleasure (2.0 ± 2.2 vs. 3.1 ± 1.7, ES = 0.47, scale -5 to +5) and exercise enjoyment (4.2 ± 1.2 vs. 5.1 ± 1.0, ES = 0.56, scale 1-7) were lower conducting the online HIFT session than the in-person HIFT session. The online HIFT session were perceived less effortful than the in-person HIFT session (5.6 ± 1.7 vs. 6.7 ± 1.7, respectively, ES = 0.48, scale 0-10), but no difference in perceived discomfort (4.4 ± 2.0 vs. 4.7 ± 1.9, ES = 0.12, scale 0-10). There was no detectable cross-over effect of the order of the two training sessions (p ≥ 0.29). The large majority of participants (n = 22, 92%) preferred in-person group exercise, while only two participants (8%) preferred the online session. In sports students with prior group-training experience, in-person HIFT session demonstrated great perceived effort, pleasure and enjoyment when using self-reported perceptual measures, and was the preferred exercise modality compared with the online session.

体育学生在线与现场高强度功能训练的情感反应比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
459
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书