The Effects of Lifting Lighter and Heavier Loads on Subjective Measures

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

Background: Despite the progress made in the study of subjective measures in resistance training, some questions remain unanswered. Here the authors investigated if ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) can predict task failure and bar velocity across exercises and loads as a primary outcome and whether a battery of subjective measures differ as a function of the lifted loads as a secondary outcome. Methods: In this preregistered study, 20 resistance-trained subjects (50% female) first completed a 1-repetition-maximum test of the barbell squat and bench press. In the second and third sessions, they completed 2 sets of squats followed by 2 sets of bench press to task failure, using 70% or 83% of 1-repetition maximum, while bar velocity was recorded. RPE scores were recorded after every repetition. In addition to RPE, rating of fatigue, affective valence, enjoyment, and load preferences were collected after set and session completion. Results: Across conditions, RPE was strongly correlated with reaching task failure (r = .86) and moderately correlated with bar velocity (r = −.58). The model indicates that an increase in 1 RPE unit is associated with an 11% shift toward task failure and a 4% reduction in bar velocity, with steeper slopes observed in the heavier condition. Negligible differences were observed between the load conditions in rating of fatigue, affective valence, enjoyment, and load preference. Conclusion: RPE scores, collected on a repetition-by-repetition basis, accurately reflected reaching task failure across loads and conditions. Hence, RPE can be used to prescribe repetition numbers during ongoing sets. The negligible differences between load conditions in rating of fatigue, affective valence, enjoyment, and load preference indicate that when sets are taken to task failure, loads can be selected based on individual preferences.

The authors are with the School of Public Health, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, and 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.
  • 1.

    Csapo R, Alegre LM. Effects of resistance training with moderate vs heavy loads on muscle mass and strength in the elderly: a meta-analysis: strength training: high vs lighter loads. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016;26:9951006. PubMed ID: 26302881 doi:

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

    Morton RW, Oikawa SY, Wavell CG, et al. Neither load nor systemic hormones determine resistance training-mediated hypertrophy or strength gains in resistance-trained young men. J Appl Physiol. 2016;121:129138. PubMed ID: 27174923 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, Ogborn D, Krieger JW. Strength and hypertrophy adaptations between low- vs. high-load resistance training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res. 2017;31:35083523. PubMed ID: 28834797 doi:

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

    Ribeiro AS, dos Santos ED, Nunes JP, Schoenfeld BJ. Acute effects of different training loads on affective responses in resistance-trained Men. Int J Sports Med. 2019;40:850855. PubMed ID: 31499564 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Halperin I, Emanuel A. Rating of perceived effort: methodological concerns and future directions. Sports Med. 2019;19:19.

  • 6.

    Shimano T, Kraemer WJ, Spiering BA, et al. Relationship between the number of repetitions and selected percentages of one repetition maximum in free weight exercises in trained and untrained men. J Strength Cond Res. 2006;20:819823. PubMed ID: 17194239

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

    Fisher JP, Steele J. Heavier and lighter load resistance training to momentary failure produce similar increases in strength with differing degrees of discomfort: responses to training loads. Muscle Nerve. 2017;56:797803. PubMed ID: 28006852 doi:

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

    Naclerio F, Rodríguez-Romo G, Barriopedro-Moro MI, Jiménez A, Alvar BA, Triplett NT. Control of resistance training intensity by the omni perceived exertion scale. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:18791888. PubMed ID: 21399534 doi:

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

    Chapman M, Larumbe-Zabala E, Gosss-Sampson M, Colpus M, Triplett NT, Naclerio F. Perceptual, mechanical, and electromyographic responses to different relative loads in the parallel squat. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33:816. PubMed ID: 28338528 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Chapman M, Larumbe-Zabala E, Goss-Sampson M, Triplett NT, Naclerio F. Using perceptual and neuromuscular responses to estimate mechanical changes during continuous sets in the bench press. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33:27222732. PubMed ID: 29481450 doi:

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

    Stuart C, Steele J, Gentil P, Giessing J, Fisher JP. Fatigue and perceptual responses of heavier- and lighter-load isolated lumbar extension resistance exercise in males and females. PeerJ. 2018;6:e4523. PubMed ID: 29576983 doi:

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

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

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

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

  • 14.

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

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

    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;9:231245. PubMed ID: 18496608 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Pritchett R, Green J, Wickwire P, Kovacs M. Acute and session RPE responses during resistance training: bouts to failure at 60% and 90% of 1RM. S Afr J Sports Med. 2009;21:2326. doi:

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

    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 Trainol. 2016;6:18. doi:

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

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

  • 19.

    Stanley DM, Williams SE, Cumming J. Preliminary validation of a single-item measure of exercise enjoyment: the exercise enjoyment scale. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2019;31:S138S139.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Emanuel A, Smukas IR, Halperin I. How one feels during resistance exercises: a repetition by repetition analysis across exercises and loads [Internet]. SportRxiv, 2019. https://doi.org/10.31236/osf.io/4qbgj. Cited January 22, 2020.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

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

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    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;17:354373. PubMed ID: 22799625 doi:

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

    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
  • 24.

    Bakdash JZ, Marusich LR. Repeated measures correlation. Front Psychol. 2017;8:456. PubMed ID: 28439244 doi:

  • 25.

    Davies T, Orr R, Halaki M, Hackett D. Effect of training leading to repetition failure on muscular strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2016;46:487502. PubMed ID: 26666744 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Sampson JA, Groeller H. Is repetition failure critical for the development of muscle hypertrophy and strength? Failure is not necessary for strength gain. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016;26:375383. PubMed ID: 25809472 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Buskard ANL, Jacobs KA, Eltoukhy MM, et al. Optimal approach to load progressions during strength training in older adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019;51:22242233. PubMed ID: 31107348 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 354 354 82
Full Text Views 7 7 1
PDF Downloads 7 7 1