Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
Influence of accurate and inaccurate ‘split-time’ feedback upon 10-mile time trial cycling performance
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Wilson, Mathew G. Lane, Andy Beedie, Christopher Farooq, Abdulaziz |
| Copyright Year | 2011 |
| Abstract | The objective of the study is to examine the impact of accurate and inaccurate 'split-time' feedback upon a 10-mile time trial (TT) performance and to quantify power output into a practically meaningful unit of variation. Seven well-trained cyclists completed four randomised bouts of a 10-mile TT on a SRM™ cycle ergometer. TTs were performed with (1) accurate performance feedback, (2) without performance feedback, (3) and (4) false negative and false positive 'split-time' feedback showing performance 5% slower or 5% faster than actual performance. There were no significant differences in completion time, average power output, heart rate or blood lactate between the four feedback conditions. There were significantly lower (p < 0.001) average $ \dot{V}{\text{O}}_{2} $ (ml min−1) and $ \dot{V}{\text{E}} $ (l min−1) scores in the false positive (3,485 ± 596; 119 ± 33) and accurate (3,471 ± 513; 117 ± 22) feedback conditions compared to the false negative (3,753 ± 410; 127 ± 27) and blind (3,772 ± 378; 124 ± 21) feedback conditions. Cyclists spent a greater amount of time in a '20 watt zone' 10 W either side of average power in the negative feedback condition (fastest) than the accurate feedback (slowest) condition (39.3 vs. 32.2%, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the 10-mile TT performance time between accurate and inaccurate feedback conditions, despite significantly lower average $ \dot{V}{\text{O}}_{2} $ and $ \dot{V}{\text{E}} $ scores in the false positive and accurate feedback conditions. Additionally, cycling with a small variation in power output (10 W either side of average power) produced the fastest TT. Further psycho-physiological research should examine the mechanism(s) why lower $ \dot{V}{\text{O}}_{2} $ and $ \dot{V}{\text{E}} $ scores are observed when cycling in a false positive or accurate feedback condition compared to a false negative or blind feedback condition. |
| Starting Page | 231 |
| Ending Page | 236 |
| Page Count | 6 |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-011-1977-1 |
| PubMed reference number | 21533806 |
| Journal | Medline |
| Volume Number | 112 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | http://winninglane.com/files/Wilson_2012_-_Accurate_and_Inaccurate_Feeback_upon_10TT_performance.pdf |
| Journal | European Journal of Applied Physiology |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
