↓ Skip to main content

The rate of increase in rating of perceived exertion predicts the duration of exercise to fatigue at a fixed power output in different environmental conditions

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, May 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 Mendeley
Title
The rate of increase in rating of perceived exertion predicts the duration of exercise to fatigue at a fixed power output in different environmental conditions
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, May 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00421-008-0741-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen Crewe, Ross Tucker, Timothy D. Noakes

Abstract

This study tested the hypothesis that the increase in rating of perceived exertion (RPE) predicts the duration of exercise to exhaustion during exercise in hot conditions. Seven subjects performed five cycling trials in an environmental chamber at temperatures of 15 degrees C (C) and 35 degrees C (H). The cool trials were performed at intensities of 65 and 70% and the hot trials at 55, 60 and 65%. RPE, rectal and skin temperature were measured during trials. Duration to fatigue was significantly shorter in H65 and C70 than H60, C65 and H55 (P < 0.05). RPE rose linearly throughout each trial and the rate of increase in RPE was significantly faster in H65 and C70 than H55 (P < 0.05). There was an inverse linear relationship between trial duration and rate of increase in RPE (r = 0.83). Rectal temperature increased linearly throughout the trial and correlated significantly with RPE (r = 0.92). This study shows that the rate of increase in RPE predicts the duration of exercise to exhaustion at a constant power output in different environmental conditions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 6 3%
United States 5 2%
Brazil 3 1%
South Africa 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 187 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 20%
Student > Bachelor 37 18%
Student > Master 36 18%
Researcher 21 10%
Student > Postgraduate 16 8%
Other 55 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 117 57%
Unspecified 23 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 6%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Other 22 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 March 2018.
All research outputs
#10,154,828
of 12,706,057 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology
#2,383
of 2,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,167
of 208,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology
#37
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,706,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 208,254 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.