# Continuous and high-intensity interval training: which promotes higher pleasure?

PMID: 24302993
Journal: PloS One
Published: 2013
Authors: Oliveira BR, Slama FA, Deslandes AC, Furtado ES, Santos TM

## Question

When average exercise intensity is similar, do treadmill continuous training and high-intensity interval training produce different acute psychological responses?

## Summary

In this acute crossover treadmill study, 15 men completed one continuous session and one high-intensity interval session with similar average oxygen uptake. The HIT session produced worse in-session feelings, higher arousal and effort, and more fatigue afterward, even though post-session enjoyment was not different; eight participants could not finish the HIT session because of fatigue.

## Population

- Low cardiovascular-risk men from a university community
- Sample size: 15
- Age: 24 +/- 4 years
- Sex: Men only
- Fitness level: Apparently healthy young men with VO2peak 47.9 +/- 7.4 ml/kg/min
- Health status: Low cardiovascular risk, no diagnosed mental disorder

## Methodology

- Randomized counterbalanced acute crossover trial
- Single-session comparison across two exercise visits
- Laboratory treadmill testing
- Randomized and controlled study design.

## Protocol

- Treadmill HIT.
- Modality: Treadmill running.
- Work intervals: 2 minutes.
- Recovery: Recovery at 0% intensity; duration adjusted, average 57 seconds.
- Sets or repetitions: Average 6.6 stimuli completed.
- Intensity: 100% VO2peak during stimuli; average intensity 85% of RCP.
- Session duration: Average 19.2 minutes because many stopped early.
- Frequency: Single session.
- Program length: Acute crossover visit.
- Progression: None.
- Continuous treadmill training.
- Modality: Treadmill running.
- Intensity: Average intensity 85% of RCP.
- Session duration: 23.9 +/- 3.2 minutes.
- Frequency: Single session.
- Program length: Acute crossover visit.
- Progression: None.

## Outcomes

### Feeling
Status: worse/safety concern
HIT produced lower feeling-scale responses than CT.

p<=0.01.

### Arousal and effort
Status: worse/safety concern
HIT produced higher arousal and perceived exertion.

Felt arousal p<=0.001; RPE higher during HIT.

### Enjoyment
Status: no clear change
Post-session enjoyment did not significantly differ between HIT and CT.

PAES p=0.779.

### Completion
Status: worse/safety concern
Eight of 15 participants could not complete HIT because of fatigue.

Descriptive completion result.

## Practical Insights

- HIIT enjoyment and HIIT in-session pleasure are different outcomes.
- Short-recovery, 100% VO2peak treadmill intervals may be a poor adherence choice for many users.
- Workout apps should consider perceived pleasure during intervals, not only completion or post-workout enjoyment.

## Limitations

- Acute single-session study.
- Small sample of men only.
- No lactate monitoring.
- Affect during HIT was measured after work stimuli rather than after recovery.
- Laboratory treadmill setting.

## Safety And Adherence

- Eight participants stopped the HIT session early because of fatigue.
- No injury or formal adverse-event count was reported.
- Participants were screened as low cardiovascular risk.

## Original Sources

- [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24302993/) (pubmed)
- [DOI](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079965) (doi)
- [PMC full text](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3841165/) (full text)

## Agent Guidance

Preserve the paper-level scope of this note. Do not generalize beyond the population, protocol, measured outcomes, and limitations above.