The Biological Sex Of An External Observer Does Not Influence Participant RPE

Studies have shown that the presence of an external observer can influence participant-reported ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) during a bout of exercise. Studies have not compared the general effect of same-sex and opposite-sex observers. PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of same-sex and opposite-sex external observers on reported RPE during a bout of exercise. METHODS: Thirteen subjects, six recreationally active males (Age: 21.0 ± 0.9 yrs, Height: 177.7 ± 7.2 cm, Mass: 87.6 ± 18.1 kg, Body Fat: 19.0 ± 4.6%, Workloadmax: 220.8 ± 71.4 watts) and seven recreationally active females (Age: 20.4 ± 1.5 yrs, Height: 164.2 ± 5.4 cm, Mass: 70.1 ± 7.8 kg, Body Fat: 30.5 ± 7.3%, Workloadmax: 160.7 ± 24.4 watts) participated in the study. The first visit consisted of a body composition assessment and a maximal workload test on the cycle ergometer. On three more visits, subjects were asked to complete a 5-minute warmup on a cycle ergometer, followed by a 20-minute bout at a constant workload equal to 70% of their maximum workload. In each visit, subjects were exposed to a different observer condition: no external observer (C), a same-sex observer (S), and an opposite-sex observer (O). The observers were of similar age to the participants. The testing order of the trials was determined by counterbalanced assignment. RPE overall (RPE-O), peripheral (RPE-P), and heart rate (HR) were assessed every minute. Blood lactate was assessed pre- and post-exercise. Delta-lactate was calculated as the difference between pre- and post-lactate. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to compare the different observer conditions. RESULTS: Average RPE-O (C: 14.6 ± 2.0, S: 13.9 ± 3.0, O: 14.0 ± 1.9; p = .267), peak RPE-O (C: 17.1 ± 2.1, S: 16.5 ± 2.9, O: 16.8 ± 2.0; p = .564), average RPE-P (C: 15.4 ± 2.1, S: 14.5 ± 2.7, O: 14.6 ± 2.0; p = .108), and peak RPE-P (C: 17.7 ± 2.0, S: 17.2 ± 2.6, O: 17.4 ± 2.1; p = .555) were not significantly different across conditions. In addition, no significant differences were observed for average HR (C: 162.9 ± 12.4, S: 161.7 ± 15.0, O: 161.4 ± 13.7 bpm; p = .792), delta-lactate (C: 4.4 ± 2.2, S: 3.9 ± 2.1, O: 3.5 ± 3.1 mmol·L-1; p = .435), or post-lactate (C: 5.5 ± 2.2, S: 5.5 ± 1.8, O: 5.1 ± 2.4 mmol·L-1; p = .560). CONCLUSION: The presence of an external observer during the exercise bout did not impact participant RPE, regardless of the sex of the observer. Supported by Commonwealth University Undergraduate Research, Scholarly, and Creative Activity Research Fund.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001061040.33968.52
Primary Topic
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Biological Sex Of An External Observer Does Not Influence Participant RPE

Ashley Y. Lesniak, Tyler A. Berkheiser, Curt B. Dixon
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
article

The Biological Sex Of An External Observer Does Not Influence Participant RPE

Ashley Y. Lesniak, Tyler A. Berkheiser, Curt B. Dixon
article en

Abstract

Studies have shown that the presence of an external observer can influence participant-reported ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) during a bout of exercise. Studies have not compared the general effect of same-sex and opposite-sex observers. PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of same-sex and opposite-sex external observers on reported RPE during a bout of exercise. METHODS: Thirteen subjects, six recreationally active males (Age: 21.0 ± 0.9 yrs, Height: 177.7 ± 7.2 cm, Mass: 87.6 ± 18.1 kg, Body Fat: 19.0 ± 4.6%, Workloadmax: 220.8 ± 71.4 watts) and seven recreationally active females (Age: 20.4 ± 1.5 yrs, Height: 164.2 ± 5.4 cm, Mass: 70.1 ± 7.8 kg, Body Fat: 30.5 ± 7.3%, Workloadmax: 160.7 ± 24.4 watts) participated in the study. The first visit consisted of a body composition assessment and a maximal workload test on the cycle ergometer. On three more visits, subjects were asked to complete a 5-minute warmup on a cycle ergometer, followed by a 20-minute bout at a constant workload equal to 70% of their maximum workload. In each visit, subjects were exposed to a different observer condition: no external observer (C), a same-sex observer (S), and an opposite-sex observer (O). The observers were of similar age to the participants. The testing order of the trials was determined by counterbalanced assignment. RPE overall (RPE-O), peripheral (RPE-P), and heart rate (HR) were assessed every minute. Blood lactate was assessed pre- and post-exercise. Delta-lactate was calculated as the difference between pre- and post-lactate. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to compare the different observer conditions. RESULTS: Average RPE-O (C: 14.6 ± 2.0, S: 13.9 ± 3.0, O: 14.0 ± 1.9; p = .267), peak RPE-O (C: 17.1 ± 2.1, S: 16.5 ± 2.9, O: 16.8 ± 2.0; p = .564), average RPE-P (C: 15.4 ± 2.1, S: 14.5 ± 2.7, O: 14.6 ± 2.0; p = .108), and peak RPE-P (C: 17.7 ± 2.0, S: 17.2 ± 2.6, O: 17.4 ± 2.1; p = .555) were not significantly different across conditions. In addition, no significant differences were observed for average HR (C: 162.9 ± 12.4, S: 161.7 ± 15.0, O: 161.4 ± 13.7 bpm; p = .792), delta-lactate (C: 4.4 ± 2.2, S: 3.9 ± 2.1, O: 3.5 ± 3.1 mmol·L-1; p = .435), or post-lactate (C: 5.5 ± 2.2, S: 5.5 ± 1.8, O: 5.1 ± 2.4 mmol·L-1; p = .560). CONCLUSION: The presence of an external observer during the exercise bout did not impact participant RPE, regardless of the sex of the observer. Supported by Commonwealth University Undergraduate Research, Scholarly, and Creative Activity Research Fund.

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
West Virginia University (US)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.