Noel E Brick1, Mark J Campbell, Richard S Metcalfe, Jacqueline L Mair, Tadhg E Macintyre. 1. 1Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, IRELAND; 2School of Sport, Ulster University, Jordanstown, Newtownabbey, Co Antrim, Northern Ireland, UNITED KINGDOM; and 3Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, IRELAND.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To date, there are no published studies directly comparing self-controlled (SC) and externally controlled (EC) pace endurance tasks. However, previous research suggests pace control may impact on cognitive strategy use and effort perceptions. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effects of manipulating perception of pace control on attentional focus, physiological, and psychological outcomes during running. The secondary aim was to determine the reproducibility of self-paced running performance when regulated by effort perceptions. METHODS: Twenty experienced endurance runners completed four 3-km time trials on a treadmill. Subjects completed two SC pace trials, one perceived exertion clamped (PE) trial, and one EC pace time trial. PE and EC were completed in a counterbalanced order. Pacing strategy for EC and perceived exertion instructions for PE replicated the subjects' fastest SC time trial. RESULTS: Subjects reported a greater focus on cognitive strategies such as relaxing and optimizing running action during EC than during SC. The mean HR was 2% lower during EC than that during SC despite an identical pacing strategy. Perceived exertion did not differ between the three conditions. However, increased internal sensory monitoring coincided with elevated effort perceptions in some subjects during EC and a 10% slower completion time for PE (13.0 ± 1.6 min) than that for SC (11.8 ± 1.2 min). CONCLUSIONS: Altering pace control and pace regulation impacted on attentional focus. External control over pacing may facilitate performance, particularly when runners engage attentional strategies conducive to improved running efficiency. However, regulating pace based on effort perceptions alone may result in excessive monitoring of bodily sensations and a slower running speed. Accordingly, attentional focus interventions may prove beneficial for some athletes to adopt task-appropriate attentional strategies to optimize performance.
PURPOSE: To date, there are no published studies directly comparing self-controlled (SC) and externally controlled (EC) pace endurance tasks. However, previous research suggests pace control may impact on cognitive strategy use and effort perceptions. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effects of manipulating perception of pace control on attentional focus, physiological, and psychological outcomes during running. The secondary aim was to determine the reproducibility of self-paced running performance when regulated by effort perceptions. METHODS: Twenty experienced endurance runners completed four 3-km time trials on a treadmill. Subjects completed two SC pace trials, one perceived exertion clamped (PE) trial, and one EC pace time trial. PE and EC were completed in a counterbalanced order. Pacing strategy for EC and perceived exertion instructions for PE replicated the subjects' fastest SC time trial. RESULTS: Subjects reported a greater focus on cognitive strategies such as relaxing and optimizing running action during EC than during SC. The mean HR was 2% lower during EC than that during SC despite an identical pacing strategy. Perceived exertion did not differ between the three conditions. However, increased internal sensory monitoring coincided with elevated effort perceptions in some subjects during EC and a 10% slower completion time for PE (13.0 ± 1.6 min) than that for SC (11.8 ± 1.2 min). CONCLUSIONS: Altering pace control and pace regulation impacted on attentional focus. External control over pacing may facilitate performance, particularly when runners engage attentional strategies conducive to improved running efficiency. However, regulating pace based on effort perceptions alone may result in excessive monitoring of bodily sensations and a slower running speed. Accordingly, attentional focus interventions may prove beneficial for some athletes to adopt task-appropriate attentional strategies to optimize performance.
Authors: Jeroen Van Cutsem; Samuele Marcora; Kevin De Pauw; Stephen Bailey; Romain Meeusen; Bart Roelands Journal: Sports Med Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Sebastián Del Rosso; Edilberto Barros; Laís Tonello; Iransé Oliveira-Silva; David G Behm; Carl Foster; Daniel A Boullosa Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Flávio O Pires; Fernando L Silva-Júnior; Cayque Brietzke; Paulo E Franco-Alvarenga; Fabiano A Pinheiro; Nanci M de França; Silmar Teixeira; Tony Meireles Santos Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-03-16 Impact factor: 4.566