AIM: The primary purpose of this study was to examine the effect of attempting to exercise supra-maximally on reaction time and movement time in a non-compatible response time task. METHODS: Subjects (n=9) undertook a 4-choice non-compatible response time test at rest, while cycling at 70 rpm with a resistance of 35 W (low intensity exercise), cycling at 70% of their maximum power output (MPO), cycling at 100% MPO and attempting to cycle at 70 rpm, with a resistance that was 28 W greater than the resistance required to elicit MPO (supra-maximal effort). RESULTS: Reaction time, movement time, intra-individual variations in reaction time and movement time at each exercise intensity were compared by a series of repeated measures analyses of variance. A significant effect of exercise was shown for movement time, F(4,32)=6.05, p<0.001, eta2=0.44, Power=0.97 and intra-individual variation in reaction time, F(4,32)=4.98, p<0.005, eta2=0.38, Power=0.93. For movement time, Tukey post-hoc tests showed that performance at rest was significantly slower than that during exercise at 70%, 100% MPO and supra-maximal effort. Performance at low intensity exercise was significantly slower than that at MPO. For intra-individual variations in reaction time, Tukey tests found that variations under supra-maximal effort and MPO were significantly greater than those at low intensity and 70% MPO. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that exercise facilitates speed of movement when the limbs used for the motor task are not the ones that are being exercised. Reaction time during maximal and supra-maximal exercise demonstrates large intra-individual variations.
AIM: The primary purpose of this study was to examine the effect of attempting to exercise supra-maximally on reaction time and movement time in a non-compatible response time task. METHODS: Subjects (n=9) undertook a 4-choice non-compatible response time test at rest, while cycling at 70 rpm with a resistance of 35 W (low intensity exercise), cycling at 70% of their maximum power output (MPO), cycling at 100% MPO and attempting to cycle at 70 rpm, with a resistance that was 28 W greater than the resistance required to elicit MPO (supra-maximal effort). RESULTS: Reaction time, movement time, intra-individual variations in reaction time and movement time at each exercise intensity were compared by a series of repeated measures analyses of variance. A significant effect of exercise was shown for movement time, F(4,32)=6.05, p<0.001, eta2=0.44, Power=0.97 and intra-individual variation in reaction time, F(4,32)=4.98, p<0.005, eta2=0.38, Power=0.93. For movement time, Tukey post-hoc tests showed that performance at rest was significantly slower than that during exercise at 70%, 100% MPO and supra-maximal effort. Performance at low intensity exercise was significantly slower than that at MPO. For intra-individual variations in reaction time, Tukey tests found that variations under supra-maximal effort and MPO were significantly greater than those at low intensity and 70% MPO. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that exercise facilitates speed of movement when the limbs used for the motor task are not the ones that are being exercised. Reaction time during maximal and supra-maximal exercise demonstrates large intra-individual variations.