Cited by 23Cardiovascular and exercise physiologySports Performance and TrainingSport Psychology and Performance

A Methodological Checklist for Studies of Pleasure and Enjoyment Responses to High-Intensity Interval Training: Part II. Intensity, Timing of Assessments, Data Modeling, and Interpretation

Ekkekakis, Panteleimon, Hartman, Mark E., Ladwig, Matthew A.·2023·Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology

Abstract

Recent studies have concluded that high-intensity interval training should be seen as a “viable alternative” to, and may be more enjoyable than, moderate-intensity continuous exercise. If true, these claims have the potential to revolutionize the science and practice of exercise, establishing high-intensity interval training as not only a physiologically effective exercise modality but also a potentially sustainable one. However, these claims stand in contrast to voluminous evidence according to which high levels of exercise intensity are typically experienced as less pleasant than moderate levels. To help researchers, peer reviewers, editors, and critical readers appreciate possible reasons for the apparently conflicting results, we present a checklist that identifies crucial methodological elements in studies investigating the effects of high-intensity interval training on affect and enjoyment. This second installment covers how “high-intensity” and “moderate-intensity” experimental conditions are defined, the timing of assessments of affect, the modeling of affective responses, and data interpretation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1123/jsep.2022-0029

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Although compliance and adherence to exercise were relatively high, the distinction between HIIT and MICT could be decreased if individuals were unable to achieve and/or maintain higher-intensity efforts.

    “It could be the case that although compliance and adherence to exercise were relatively high, the distinction between HIIT and MICT could be decreased in instances where individuals were unable to achieve and/or maintain higher-intensity efforts [20].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ekkekakis, P., Hartman, M. E., & Ladwig, M. A.
Affiliations
  • Department of Kinesiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
  • University of Rhode Island (US)
  • Purdue University Northwest (US)
Venue
Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology
Published
2023-04-01
Volume
45
Issue
2
Pages
92-109
ISSN
  • 0895-2779 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-2904
OpenAlex
W4323908313
Cited by
23
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4
FWCI
6.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
Keywords
high-intensity interval training, exercise enjoyment, affective responses to exercise, exercise intensity classification, moderate-intensity continuous training, data interpretation, exercise adherence
MeSH terms
High-Intensity Interval Training, Happiness, Humans, Oxygen Consumption, Pleasure, Checklist

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review