|
|
|
|
JOURNAL
OF
SPORTS SCIENCE &
MEDICINE
|
 |
|
Research
article
|
THE VALIDITY OF SUBMAXIMAL RATINGS OF PERCEIVED EXERTION TO PREDICT ONE REPETITION MAXIMUM |
|||||||||
Roger Eston 
and Harrison James Llewelyn Evans |
|||||||||
School of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK. |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
© Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2009) 8, 567 - 573 |
|||||||||
|
|
| ABSTRACT | |||
| The One Repetition Maximum (1-RM) test is commonly used to assess
strength. However, direct assessments of 1-RM are time consuming and unsafe
for novice lifters. Whilst various equations exist to predict 1-RM, there
is limited research on the validity of these equations. The purpose of this
study was to assess the validity of using sub-maximal ratings of perceived
exertion (RPE) to predict 1-RM in young adults, using the Borg 6-20 RPE
Scale. Twenty healthy participants (ten male (Mean ± SD, 20.8 ± 0.6 y, 75.7
± 9.3 kg, 1.8 ± 0.07 m) and ten female (20.3 ± 0.7 y, 68.4 ± 10.0 kg, 1.68
± 0.03 m)) completed two trials involving resistance exercises for both
the upper and lower body. In the first trial the 1-RM for the bilateral
biceps curl (BC) and the bilateral knee extension (KE) were determined for
each participant. In the second trial, participants performed blinded repetitions
which were equivalent to 20, 40 and 60 % of 1-RM for both exercises. The
RPE was recorded immediately after two repetitions had been completed at
each intensity. The order of intensity of the repetitions was randomly assigned
with participants wearing blindfolds to exclude the possibility of pre-determined
judgments about load and RPE. Individual RPE recorded at each intensity
was subjected to linear regression analysis and the line of best fit was
extrapolated to RPE 20 to predict 1-RM in both exercises. There was no significant
difference (p > 0.05) between the 1-RM predicted from RPE 20 and measured
1-RM for both exercises for the men and women. Measured and predicted values
for men were 46.0 ± 4.6 and 45.2 ± 6. 1 kg for biceps curl, and 46.3 ± 3.8
and 43.0 ± 7.1 kg for knee extension, respectively. Measured and predicted
values for women were 18.6 ± 5.7 and 19.3 ± 5.6 kg for biceps curl, and
25.5 ± 9.6 and 27.2 ± 12.6 kg for knee extension, respectively. Pearson
product-moment correlation coefficients between actual and predicted 1-RM
for the BC and KE were 0.97 and 0.92, respectively. These results provide
evidence that submaximal ratings of perceived exertion can be used to provide
reasonably accurate estimates of 1-RM in young and active men and women. Key words: Effort perception, resistance training. |
|