Resistance Training and the Effect of Load Blinding in Multiple Repetition Maximum Tests

in International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year subscription

USD  $107.00

1 year subscription

USD  $142.00

Student 2 year subscription

USD  $203.00

2 year subscription

USD  $265.00

Purpose: To compare performance in successive 1-repetition maximum (1RM) tests with the load known or unknown. Methods: Thirty-two resistance-trained men were randomly divided into 2 groups: load blinding (BLI; n = 16; age 28.1 [6.9] y, body mass 83.1 [11.5] kg, height 175.3 [5.8] cm) and load nonblinding (nBLI; n = 16; age 27.7 [4.1] y, body mass 83.2 [12.8] kg, height 178.7 [7.3] cm). The groups performed a 1RM test during 4 days (with an interval of 24–48 h) in the horizontal bench press with free weight. Results: In the BLI, there were no significant changes throughout the tests, with a difference of 1.6% between the first and fourth 1RM tests. In the nBLI, there was a significant interaction with time, and the values of the second (P = .03), third (P = .02), and fourth (P = .01) tests were higher than the first test; in addition, the fourth test was significantly higher than the second test (P = .02). The percentage difference between the last and first 1RM tests was 7.1%. The comparison between the groups demonstrated differences in the third (P = .04) and fourth (P = .02) tests with higher values in the nBLI. The intraclass correlation coefficient between the first and fourth 1RM tests was .93 for the BLI and .91 for the nBLI. Conclusion: BLI does not influence 1RM testing in the bench press exercise.

The authors are with Physical Education Dept, Londrina State University, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil.

Polito (marcospolito@uel.br) is corresponding author.
  • 1.

    Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, et al; American College of Sports Medicine. American College of Sports Medicine Position stand: quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43:1334–1359. PubMed ID: 21694556 doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb

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

    Ritti-Dias RM, Avelar A, Salvador EP, Cyrino ES. Influence of previous experience on resistance training on reliability of one-repetition maximum test. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:1418–1422. PubMed ID: 21522076 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d67c4b

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

    Suchomel TJ, Nimphius S, Bellon CR, Stone MH. The importance of muscular strength: training considerations. Sports Med. 2018;48:765–785. PubMed ID: 29372481 doi:10.1007/s40279-018-0862-z

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

    Ploutz-Snyder LL, Giamis EL. Orientation and familiarization to 1RM strength testing in old and young women. J Strength Cond Res. 2001;15:519–523. PubMed ID: 11726267

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    McCurdy K, Langford G, Jenkerson D, Doscher M. The validity and reliability of the 1RM bench press using chain-loaded resistance. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22:678–683. PubMed ID: 18438254 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31816a6ce0

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

    Benton MJ, Raab S, Waggener GT. Effect of training status on reliability of one repetition maximum testing in women. J Strength Cond Res. 2013;27:1885–1890. PubMed ID: 23037618 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182752d4a

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

    Clancy MJ. Overview of research designs. Emerg Med J. 2002;19:546–549. PubMed ID: 12421782

  • 8.

    Kirsch I. Response expectancy and the placebo effect. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018;138:81–93. PubMed ID: 29681336 doi:10.1016/bs.irn.2018.01.003

  • 9.

    Soares-Caldeira LF, Ritti-Dias RM, Okuno NM, Cyrino ES, Gurjão AL, Ploutz-Snyder LL. Familiarization indexes in sessions of 1-RM tests in adult women. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23:2039–2045. PubMed ID: 19855328 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b3e158

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

    Colloca L. The fascinating mechanisms and implications of the placebo effect. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018;138:xv–xx. PubMed ID: 29681338 doi:10.1016/S0074-7742(18)30027-8

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

    Beedie CJ, Foad AJ. The placebo effect in sports performance: a brief review. Sports Med. 2009;39:313–329. PubMed ID: 19317519 doi:10.2165/00007256-200939040-00004

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

    Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: the optimal theory of motor learning. Psychonom Bull Rev. 2016;23:1382–1414. doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0999-9

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 24 24 24
Full Text Views 2 2 2
PDF Downloads 1 1 1