The availability of task-specific feedback does not affect 20 km time trial cycling performance or test-retest reliability in trained cyclists

David N Borg; John Owen Osborne; Ian B Stewart; Joseph T Costello; Jonathon Headrick; Benjamin S McMaster; Samantha J Borg; Geoffrey M Minett

doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2019.12.024

Back

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

The availability of task-specific feedback does not affect 20 km time trial cycling performance or test-retest reliability in trained cyclists

David N Borg, John Owen Osborne, Ian B Stewart, Joseph T Costello, Jonathon Headrick, Benjamin S McMaster, Samantha J Borg and Geoffrey M Minett

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, Vol.23(8), pp.758-763

2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2019.12.024

PMID: 31892509

Files and links (1)

pdf

The_availability_of_task_specific_feedback462.74 kBDownload View

Accepted VersionCC BY-NC-ND V4.0, Open Access

Abstract

Behaviour

Exercise

Pacing

Reproducibility

Variation

This study examined the influence of the availability of task-specific feedback on 20 km time trial (20TT) cycling performance and test-retest reliability. Thirty trained, club-level cyclists completed two 20TT’s on different days, with (feedback, FB) or without (no-feedback, NFB) task-specific feedback (i.e., power output, cadence, gear and heart rate [HR]). Elapsed distance was provided in both conditions. During trials, ergometer variables and HR were continuously recorded, and a rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was collected every 2 km. Data were analysed using linear mixed-effects models in a Bayesian framework, and Cohen’s d was calculated for standardised differences. The reliability of finish time and mean power output (PO) was determined via multiple indices, including intraclass correlations (ICC). Performance, pacing behaviour, and RPE were not statistically different between conditions. The posterior mean difference [95% credible interval] between TT1 and TT2 for FB and NFB was 10s [−5, 25] and −2s [−17, 14], respectively. In TT2, HR was statistically higher (∼8bmin−1) in FB compared to NFB after 13 km (d = 2.08–2.25). However, this result was explained by differences in maximal HR. Finish time (FB: ICC= 0.99; NFB: ICC=0.99) and mean power output (FB: ICC=0.99; NFB: ICC=0.99) in each condition were substantially reliable. The availability of task-specific information did not affect 20TT performance or reliability. Except for elapsed distance, task-specific feedback should be withheld from trained cyclists when evaluating interventions that may affect performance, to prevent participants from recalling previous performance settings.

Details

Title: The availability of task-specific feedback does not affect 20 km time trial cycling performance or test-retest reliability in trained cyclists
Authors: David N Borg (Corresponding Author) - Queensland University of Technology
John Owen Osborne - Queensland University of Technology
Ian B Stewart - Queensland University of Technology
Joseph T Costello - University of Portsmouth
Jonathon Headrick - Griffith University
Benjamin S McMaster - Queensland University of Technology
Samantha J Borg - Griffith University
Geoffrey M Minett - Queensland University of Technology
Publication details: Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, Vol.23(8), pp.758-763
Publisher: Elsevier Australia
Date published: 2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2019.12.024
ISSN: 1878-1861; 1440-2440
PMID: 31892509
Organisation Unit: School of Health
Language: English
Record Identifier: 991112952602621
Output Type: Journal article

Metrics

1 File views/ downloads

14 Record Views

1 Times Cited - Web of Science

See more details

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Web Of Science research areas: Sport Sciences