LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Interval running with self-selected recovery: Physiology, performance, and perception

Photo by sharonmccutcheon from unsplash

Abstract This study (1) compared the physiological responses and performance during a high-intensity interval training (HIIT) session incorporating externally regulated (ER) and self-selected (SS) recovery periods and (2) examined the… Click to show full abstract

Abstract This study (1) compared the physiological responses and performance during a high-intensity interval training (HIIT) session incorporating externally regulated (ER) and self-selected (SS) recovery periods and (2) examined the psychophysiological cues underpinning SS recovery durations. Following an incremental maximal exercise test to determine maximal aerobic speed (MAS), 14 recreationally active males completed 2 HIIT sessions on a non-motorised treadmill. Participants performed 12 × 30 s running intervals at a target intensity of 105% MAS interspersed with 30 s (ER) or SS recovery periods. During SS, participants were instructed to provide themselves with sufficient recovery to complete all 12 efforts at the required intensity. A semi-structured interview was undertaken following the completion of SS. Mean recovery duration was longer during SS (51 ± 15 s) compared to ER (30 ± 0 s; p < .001; d = 1.46 ± 0.46). Between-interval heart rate recovery was higher (SS: 19 ± 9 b min−1; ER: 8 ± 5 b min−1; p < .001; d = 1.43 ± 0.43) and absolute time ≥90% maximal heart rate (HRmax) was lower (SS: 335 ± 193 s; ER: 433 ± 147 s; p = .075; d = 0.52 ± 0.39) during SS compared to ER. Relative time ≥105% MAS was greater during SS (90 ± 6%) compared to ER (74 ± 20%; p < .01; d = 0.87 ± 0.40). Different sources of afferent information underpinned decision-making during SS. The extended durations of recovery during SS resulted in a reduced time ≥90% HRmax but enhanced time ≥105% MAS, compared with ER exercise. Differences in the afferent cue utilisation of participants likely explain the large levels of inter-individual variability observed.

Keywords: recovery; selected recovery; physiology; interval; performance; self selected

Journal Title: European Journal of Sport Science
Year Published: 2018

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.