高强度间歇训练的自主性和变异:对运动后享受、自我效能和意图的影响

G. Mastrofini, R. P. Collins, Jorge A. Rosa, K. Sipos, Brian J Waddell, M. Kilpatrick
{"title":"高强度间歇训练的自主性和变异:对运动后享受、自我效能和意图的影响","authors":"G. Mastrofini, R. P. Collins, Jorge A. Rosa, K. Sipos, Brian J Waddell, M. Kilpatrick","doi":"10.1249/01.mss.0000671276.17604.ab","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Benefits associated with high-intensity interval training (HIIT) are established and research demonstrates that HIIT is well-tolerated in a variety of populations, protocols, and modalities. However, relatively little is known about the impact of variation and self-selection of work intervals on post-exercise perceptions. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of autonomy and variation on exercise enjoyment and both self-efficacy for and intention to repeat HIIT exercise. METHODS: Twenty-one physically active participants (12 male, 9 female; mean BMI = 27 + 3; mean age = 28 + 6) completed three, 20-minute HIIT trials after completion of maximal testing. All experimental trials included a total of 10 minutes of work and 10 minutes of recovery. Work and recovery were conducted at 90% and 10% of peak work, respectively. Trials included: a standard interval bout with repeating 60-sec work and recovery segments (Traditional), an interval bout with a mix of predetermined 30-, 60-, 90-, & 120-second segments (Varied), and a bout with a self-selected number of 30-, 60-, 90-, & 120-second segments (Autonomous). In-task affective valence and enjoyment were measured four times during work and recovery. Data was analyzed using dependent t-tests. RESULTS: Enjoyment measured via questionnaire post-exercise revealed no significant differences between the three trials (P > 0.05) suggesting similar levels of enjoyment for all trials. All three trials were deemed to be enjoyable exercise sessions (scores ranging from 95-100 on the 18-126 scale). Self-efficacy for completing HIIT (measured on a 0-100 scale) was greater for the Autonomous trial compared to the Varied trial (77% vs. 70%; P < 0.05) and intention to exercise (measured on a 1-7 scale) was not different across trials, but there was a trend towards Autonomous HIIT producing stronger intentions than Varied HIIT (4.3 vs. 3.7; P < 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that each trial of HIIT was enjoyable and produced relatively positive ratings for exercise self-efficacy and intention. These findings suggest that provision of autonomy during HIIT exercise sessions can produce more desirable psychological responses for self-efficacy and possibly exercise intention.","PeriodicalId":14781,"journal":{"name":"Journal is not defined within the JOURNAL database.","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"AUTONOMY AND VARIATION IN HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING: IMPACTS ON POST-EXERCISE ENJOYMENT, SELF-EFFICACY, AND INTENTION\",\"authors\":\"G. Mastrofini, R. P. Collins, Jorge A. Rosa, K. Sipos, Brian J Waddell, M. Kilpatrick\",\"doi\":\"10.1249/01.mss.0000671276.17604.ab\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Benefits associated with high-intensity interval training (HIIT) are established and research demonstrates that HIIT is well-tolerated in a variety of populations, protocols, and modalities. However, relatively little is known about the impact of variation and self-selection of work intervals on post-exercise perceptions. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of autonomy and variation on exercise enjoyment and both self-efficacy for and intention to repeat HIIT exercise. METHODS: Twenty-one physically active participants (12 male, 9 female; mean BMI = 27 + 3; mean age = 28 + 6) completed three, 20-minute HIIT trials after completion of maximal testing. All experimental trials included a total of 10 minutes of work and 10 minutes of recovery. Work and recovery were conducted at 90% and 10% of peak work, respectively. Trials included: a standard interval bout with repeating 60-sec work and recovery segments (Traditional), an interval bout with a mix of predetermined 30-, 60-, 90-, & 120-second segments (Varied), and a bout with a self-selected number of 30-, 60-, 90-, & 120-second segments (Autonomous). In-task affective valence and enjoyment were measured four times during work and recovery. Data was analyzed using dependent t-tests. RESULTS: Enjoyment measured via questionnaire post-exercise revealed no significant differences between the three trials (P > 0.05) suggesting similar levels of enjoyment for all trials. All three trials were deemed to be enjoyable exercise sessions (scores ranging from 95-100 on the 18-126 scale). Self-efficacy for completing HIIT (measured on a 0-100 scale) was greater for the Autonomous trial compared to the Varied trial (77% vs. 70%; P < 0.05) and intention to exercise (measured on a 1-7 scale) was not different across trials, but there was a trend towards Autonomous HIIT producing stronger intentions than Varied HIIT (4.3 vs. 3.7; P < 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that each trial of HIIT was enjoyable and produced relatively positive ratings for exercise self-efficacy and intention. These findings suggest that provision of autonomy during HIIT exercise sessions can produce more desirable psychological responses for self-efficacy and possibly exercise intention.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14781,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal is not defined within the JOURNAL database.\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal is not defined within the JOURNAL database.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000671276.17604.ab\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal is not defined within the JOURNAL database.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000671276.17604.ab","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

高强度间歇训练(HIIT)的益处已经确立,研究表明,HIIT在各种人群、方案和方式中都具有良好的耐受性。然而,对于工作间隔的变化和自我选择对运动后感知的影响,人们知之甚少。目的:本研究的目的是确定自主和变异对运动享受、自我效能和重复HIIT运动意愿的影响。方法:21名体育锻炼参与者(男性12人,女性9人;平均BMI = 27 + 3;平均年龄= 28 + 6)在完成最大测试后完成3次20分钟的HIIT试验。所有的实验包括总共10分钟的工作和10分钟的恢复。工作和恢复分别以峰值工作的90%和10%进行。试验包括:重复60秒工作和恢复片段的标准间歇回合(传统),预先确定的30、60、90和120秒片段混合的间歇回合(可变),以及自选的30、60、90和120秒片段的回合(自主)。在工作和恢复期间,对任务内情感效价和享受进行了四次测量。数据分析采用相关t检验。结果:通过运动后问卷测量的乐趣显示,三个试验之间没有显著差异(P > 0.05),表明所有试验的享受水平相似。所有三个试验都被认为是令人愉快的锻炼过程(在18-126的范围内得分在95-100之间)。自主性试验完成HIIT的自我效能感(以0-100量表测量)比可变试验更高(77%对70%;P < 0.05)和运动意图(以1-7的量表测量)在试验之间没有差异,但自主HIIT比可变HIIT产生更强的意图的趋势(4.3 vs 3.7;P < 0.10)。结论:研究结果表明,每次HIIT试验都是愉快的,并且在运动自我效能感和意图方面产生了相对积极的评分。这些发现表明,在HIIT锻炼过程中提供自主性可以产生更理想的自我效能和运动意图的心理反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
AUTONOMY AND VARIATION IN HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING: IMPACTS ON POST-EXERCISE ENJOYMENT, SELF-EFFICACY, AND INTENTION
Benefits associated with high-intensity interval training (HIIT) are established and research demonstrates that HIIT is well-tolerated in a variety of populations, protocols, and modalities. However, relatively little is known about the impact of variation and self-selection of work intervals on post-exercise perceptions. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of autonomy and variation on exercise enjoyment and both self-efficacy for and intention to repeat HIIT exercise. METHODS: Twenty-one physically active participants (12 male, 9 female; mean BMI = 27 + 3; mean age = 28 + 6) completed three, 20-minute HIIT trials after completion of maximal testing. All experimental trials included a total of 10 minutes of work and 10 minutes of recovery. Work and recovery were conducted at 90% and 10% of peak work, respectively. Trials included: a standard interval bout with repeating 60-sec work and recovery segments (Traditional), an interval bout with a mix of predetermined 30-, 60-, 90-, & 120-second segments (Varied), and a bout with a self-selected number of 30-, 60-, 90-, & 120-second segments (Autonomous). In-task affective valence and enjoyment were measured four times during work and recovery. Data was analyzed using dependent t-tests. RESULTS: Enjoyment measured via questionnaire post-exercise revealed no significant differences between the three trials (P > 0.05) suggesting similar levels of enjoyment for all trials. All three trials were deemed to be enjoyable exercise sessions (scores ranging from 95-100 on the 18-126 scale). Self-efficacy for completing HIIT (measured on a 0-100 scale) was greater for the Autonomous trial compared to the Varied trial (77% vs. 70%; P < 0.05) and intention to exercise (measured on a 1-7 scale) was not different across trials, but there was a trend towards Autonomous HIIT producing stronger intentions than Varied HIIT (4.3 vs. 3.7; P < 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that each trial of HIIT was enjoyable and produced relatively positive ratings for exercise self-efficacy and intention. These findings suggest that provision of autonomy during HIIT exercise sessions can produce more desirable psychological responses for self-efficacy and possibly exercise intention.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信