PMID 28076352

Research
All papers

High-Intensity Interval Training Elicits Higher Enjoyment than Moderate Intensity Continuous Exercise

Thum JS, Parsons G, Whittle T, Astorino TA

Question

Does an acute cycling HIIT bout differ from moderate-intensity continuous cycling in enjoyment, affect, perceived exertion, heart rate, and blood lactate in recreationally active adults?

Summary

In 12 healthy recreationally active adults, a single low-volume cycling HIIT session was more enjoyable than a 20-minute moderate continuous cycling session, even though HIIT felt harder, produced higher heart rate and lactate, and less positive in-task affect. Eleven of 12 participants preferred HIIT. This was an acute laboratory preference study, not a training trial.

Methodology

  • Twelve healthy, non-obese recreationally active adults.
  • 12 participants.
  • Cycle ergometer.
  • Work intervals: 60 s at 85% Wmax.
  • Recovery: 60 s at 25% Wmax.
  • Intensity: 85% Wmax work; peak HR about 89% HRmax.
  • 16 min main set plus 5 min warm-up.
  • Single acute trial.
  • Acute crossover study.
  • Randomized crossover repeated-measures laboratory study with VO2max testing followed by one HIIT and one MICT trial.
  • Enjoyment, Affect, Perceived exertion, and Heart rate and blood lactate were tracked.

Outcomes

Enjoyment

PACES enjoyment was higher after HIIT than MICT; 92% preferred HIIT.

HIIT 103.8 +/- 9.4 vs MICT 84.2 +/- 19.1; p=0.013; d=1.54.

Improved

Exercise intensity markers

HIIT produced higher heart rate and blood lactate than MICT.

HR regime x time F(4,40)=10.0, p<0.001; lactate F(3,30)=14.6, p<0.001.

Mixed

Perceived exertion and affect

HIIT produced higher RPE and less positive affect during exercise than MICT.

RPE F(4,40)=9.6, p=0.003; affect F(4,40)=7.1, p=0.004.

Mixed

Insights

  • A short 1:1 interval structure can be more enjoyable than continuous moderate cycling for active adults.
  • Separate post-session enjoyment from in-session affect because hard intervals may feel unpleasant during work yet still be preferred afterward.
  • Use caution applying this to sedentary or clinical users.

Limitations

  • Very small sample.
  • Healthy recreationally active participants only.
  • Acute preference study, not a longitudinal adherence trial.
  • HIIT and MICT were not equal in duration or physiological strain.

Safety

  • All participants completed all bouts without incident.
  • Participants were screened for health status and knee ailments.