IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0300776.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceived exertion can be lower when exercising in field versus indoors

Author

Listed:
  • Karin Sofia Elisabeth Olsson
  • Ruggero Ceci
  • Lina Wahlgren
  • Hans Rosdahl
  • Peter Schantz

Abstract

Purpose: Studies indicate that the rated perceived exertion (RPE) during physical exercise can be lower in field environments than indoors. The environmental conditions of those studies are explored. Furthermore, we study if the same phenomenon is valid when cycling indoors versus in cycle commuting environments with high levels of stimuli from both traffic and suburban-urban elements. Methods: Twenty commuter cyclists underwent measurements of heart rate (HR) and oxygen uptake (V˙O2) and RPE assessments for breathing and legs, respectively, while cycling in both laboratory and field conditions. A validated mobile metabolic system was used in the field to measure V˙O2. Three submaximal cycle ergometer workloads in the laboratory were used to establish linear regression equations between RPE and % of HR reserve (%HRR) and %V˙O2max, separately. Based on these equations, RPE from the laboratory was predicted and compared with RPE levels at the participants’ individual cycle commutes at equal intensities. The same approach was used to predict field intensities and for comparisons with corresponding measured intensities at equal RPE levels. Results: The predicted RPE levels based on the laboratory cycling were significantly higher than the RPE levels in cycle commuting at equal intensities (67% of HRR; 65% of V˙O2max). For breathing, the mean RPE levels were; 14.0–14.2 in the laboratory and 12.6 in the field. The corresponding levels for legs were; 14.0–14.2 and 11.5. The range of predicted field intensities in terms of %HRR and %V˙O2max was 46–56%, which corresponded to median differences of 19–30% compared to the measured intensities in field at equal RPE. Conclusion: The cycle commuters perceived a lower exertion during their cycle commutes compared to ergometer cycling in a laboratory at equal exercise intensities. This may be due to a higher degree of external stimuli in field, although influences from other possible causes cannot be ruled out.

Suggested Citation

  • Karin Sofia Elisabeth Olsson & Ruggero Ceci & Lina Wahlgren & Hans Rosdahl & Peter Schantz, 2024. "Perceived exertion can be lower when exercising in field versus indoors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(5), pages 1-23, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0300776
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300776
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300776
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300776&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0300776?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan Andersson & Lina Wahlgren & Karin Sofia Elisabeth Olsson & Peter Schantz, 2023. "Pedestrians’ Perceptions of Motorized Traffic Variables in Relation to Appraisals of Urban Route Environments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-27, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0300776. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.