How One Feels During Resistance Exercises: A Repetition-by-Repetition Analysis Across Exercises and Loads

in International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $112.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $149.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $213.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $284.00

Context: The Feeling Scale (FS) is a unique and underexplored scale in sport sciences that measures affective valence. The FS has the potential to be used in athletic environments as a monitoring and prescription tool. Purpose: To examine whether FS ratings, as measured on a repetition-by-repetition basis, can predict proximity to task failure and bar velocity across different exercises and loads. Methods: On the first day, 20 trained participants (10 females) completed 1-repetition-maximum (1-RM) tests in the barbell bench and squat exercises and were introduced to the FS. In the following 3 sessions, participants completed 3 sets to task failure with either (1) 70% 1-RM bench press, (2) 70% 1-RM squat (squat-70%), or (3) 80% 1-RM squat (squat-80%). Sessions were completed in a randomized, counterbalanced order. After every completed repetition, participants verbally reported their FS ratings. Bar velocity was measured via a linear position transducer. Results: FS ratings predicted failure proximity and bar velocity in all 3 conditions (P < .001, R2 .66–.85). Based on the analysis, which included over 2400 repetitions, a reduction of 1 unit in the FS corresponded to approaching task failure by 14%, 11%, and 11%, and to a reduction in bar velocity of 10%, 4%, and 3%, in the bench, squat-70%, and squat-80%, respectively. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate whether the FS can be used in resistance-training environments among resistance-trained participants on a repetition-by-repetition basis. The results indicate that the FS can be used to monitor and prescribe resistance training and that its benefits should be further explored.

The authors are with the School of Public Health, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, and the Sylvan Adams Sports Inst, and Emanuel, also the School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Halperin (ihalperin@tauex.tau.ac.il) is corresponding author.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Materials (pdf 382 KB)
  • 1.

    Ekkekakis P, Hall EE, Petruzzello SJ. Some like it vigorous: measuring individual differences in the preference for and tolerance of exercise intensity. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2005;27(3):350374. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Faulkner J, Eston RG. Perceived exertion research in the 21st century: developments, reflections and questions for the future. J Exerc Sci Fit. 2008;6(1):15.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Thorpe RT, Atkinson G, Drust B, Gregson W. Monitoring fatigue status in elite team-sport athletes: implications for practice. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017;12(suppl 2):S2-27S2-34. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Halson SL. Monitoring training load to understand fatigue in athletes. Sports Med. 2014;44(suppl 2):139147. doi:

  • 5.

    Haddad M, Stylianides G, Djaoui L, Dellal A, Chamari K. Session-RPE method for training load monitoring: validity, ecological usefulness, and influencing factors. Front Neurosci. 2017;11(2):612.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Zourdos MC, Klemp A, Dolan C, et al. Novel resistance training–specific rating of perceived exertion scale measuring repetitions in reserve. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(1):267275. PubMed ID: 26049792 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Chen MJ, Fan X, Moe ST. Criterion-related validity of the Borg ratings of perceived exertion scale in healthy individuals: a meta-analysis. J Sports Sci. 2002;20(11):873899. PubMed ID: 12430990 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Bellezza PA, Hall EE, Miller PC, Bixby WR. The influence of exercise order on blood lactate, perceptual, and affective responses. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23(1):203208. PubMed ID: 19130645 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Halperin I, Emanuel A. Rating of perceived effort: methodological concerns and future directions. Sports Med. 2020;50(4):679687. PubMed ID: 31745731 doi:

  • 10.

    Bibeau WS, Moore JB, Mitchell NG, Vargas-Tonsing T, Bartholomew JB. Effects of acute resistance training of different intensities and rest periods on anxiety and affect. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(8):21842191. PubMed ID: 19834350 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Greene DR, Petruzzello SJ. More isn’t necessarily better: examining the intensity–affect–enjoyment relationship in the context of resistance exercise. Sport Exerc Perform Psychol. 2015;4(2):7587. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Russell JA. A circumplex model of affect. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1980;39(6):11611178. doi:

  • 13.

    Berridge KC. Affective valence in the brain: modules or modes? Nat Rev Neurosci. 2019;20(4):225234. PubMed ID: 30718826 doi:

  • 14.

    Isen AM, Rosenzweig AS, Young MJ. The influence of positive affect on clinical problem solving. Med Decis Making. 1991;11(3):221227. PubMed ID: 1881279 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Cohen S, Pressman SD. Positive affect and health. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2006;15(3):122125. doi:

  • 16.

    Williams DM, Dunsiger S, Ciccolo JT, Lewis BA, Albrecht AE, Marcus BH. Acute affective response to a moderate-intensity exercise stimulus predicts physical activity participation 6 and 12 months later. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2008;9(3):231245. PubMed ID: 18496608 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Ifcher J, Zarghamee H. Happiness and time preference: the effect of positive affect in a random-assignment experiment. Am Econ Rev. 2011;101(7):31093129. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Cavarretta DJ, Hall EE, Bixby WR. Affective responses from different modalities of resistance exercise: timing matters! Front Sports Act Liv. 2019;1:5. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Ekkekakis P, Parfitt G, Petruzzello SJ. The pleasure and displeasure people feel when they exercise at different intensities: decennial update and progress towards a tripartite rationale for exercise intensity prescription. Sports Med. 2011;41(8):641671. PubMed ID: 21780850 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Arent SM, Landers DM, Matt KS, Etnier JL. Dose-response and mechanistic issues in the resistance training and affect relationship. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2005;27(1):92110. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Hardy CJ, Rejeski WJ. Not what, but how one feels: the measurement of affect during exercise. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 1989;11(3):304317. doi:

  • 22.

    Ekkekakis P, Hall EE, Petruzzello SJ. Practical markers of the transition from aerobic to anaerobic metabolism during exercise: rationale and a case for affect-based exercise prescription. Prev Med. 2004;38(2):149159. PubMed ID: 14715206 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Ekkekakis P. Pleasure and displeasure from the body: perspectives from exercise. Cogn Emot. 2003;17(2):213239. PubMed ID: 29715726 doi:

  • 24.

    Elsangedy HM, Machado DGDS, Krinski K, et al. Let the pleasure guide your resistance training intensity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018;50(7):14721479. PubMed ID: 29432325 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Rose EA, Parfitt G. Can the feeling scale be used to regulate exercise intensity? Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(10):18521860. PubMed ID: 18799997 doi:

  • 26.

    Hutchinson JC, Tenenbaum G. Perceived effort—can it be considered gestalt? Psychol Sport Exerc. 2006;7(5):463476. doi:

  • 27.

    Lemyre P-N, Treasure DC, Roberts GC. Influence of variability in motivation and affect on elite athlete burnout susceptibility. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2006;28(1):3248. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Higgins ET. Promotion and prevention: regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In: Zanna MP, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol 30. San Diego, CA: Elsevier;1998:146.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Hutchinson JC, Zenko Z, Santich S, Dalton PC. Increasing the pleasure and enjoyment of exercise: a novel resistance training protocol. SportRxiv. 2019. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Kraemer WJ, Ratamess NA. Fundamentals of resistance training: progression and exercise prescription. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(4):674688. PubMed ID: 15064596 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Brechue WF, Mayhew JL. Lower-body work capacity and one-repetition maximum squat prediction in college football players. J Strength Cond Res. 2012;26(2):364372. PubMed ID: 22233793 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    Micklewright D, St Clair Gibson A, Gladwell V, Al Salman A. Development and validity of the rating-of-fatigue scale. Sports Med. 2017;47(11):23752393. PubMed ID: 28283993 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Steele J, Fisher J, McKinnon S, McKinnon P. Differentiation between perceived effort and discomfort during resistance training in older adults: reliability of trainee ratings of effort and discomfort, and reliability and validity of trainer ratings of trainee effort. J Train. 2016;6(1):18. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Sperber AD. Translation and validation of study instruments for cross-cultural research. Gastroenterology. 2004;126(suppl 1):S124S128. PubMed ID: 14978648 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Rhemtulla M, Brosseau-Liard , Savalei V. When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychol Methods. 2012;17(3):354373. doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Bliese PD, Ployhart RE. Growth modeling using random coefficient models: model building, testing, and illustrations. Org Res Methods. 2002;5:362387. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Lee HH, Emerson JA, Williams DM. The exercise–affect–adherence pathway: an evolutionary perspective. Front Psychol. 2016;7:1285. PubMed ID: 27610096

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 455 455 126
Full Text Views 12 12 7
PDF Downloads 12 12 7