↓ Skip to main content

The effects of traditional, superset, and tri-set resistance training structures on perceived intensity and physiological responses

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
57 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
5 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
289 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effects of traditional, superset, and tri-set resistance training structures on perceived intensity and physiological responses
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00421-017-3680-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathon J. S. Weakley, Kevin Till, Dale B. Read, Gregory A. B. Roe, Joshua Darrall-Jones, Padraic J. Phibbs, Ben Jones

Abstract

Investigate the acute and short-term (i.e., 24 h) effects of traditional (TRAD), superset (SS), and tri-set (TRI) resistance training protocols on perceptions of intensity and physiological responses. Fourteen male participants completed a familiarisation session and three resistance training protocols (i.e., TRAD, SS, and TRI) in a randomised-crossover design. Rating of perceived exertion, lactate concentration ([Lac]), creatine kinase concentration ([CK]), countermovement jump (CMJ), testosterone, and cortisol concentrations was measured pre, immediately, and 24-h post the resistance training sessions with magnitude-based inferences assessing changes/differences within/between protocols. TRI reported possible to almost certainly greater efficiency and rate of perceived exertion, although session perceived load was very likely lower. SS and TRI had very likely to almost certainly greater lactate responses during the protocols, with changes in [CK] being very likely and likely increased at 24 h, respectively. At 24-h post-training, CMJ variables in the TRAD protocol had returned to baseline; however, SS and TRI were still possibly to likely reduced. Possible increases in testosterone immediately post SS and TRI protocols were reported, with SS showing possible increases at 24-h post-training. TRAD and SS showed almost certain and likely decreases in cortisol immediately post, respectively, with TRAD reporting likely decreases at 24-h post-training. SS and TRI can enhance training efficiency and reduce training time. However, acute and short-term physiological responses differ between protocols. Athletes can utilise SS and TRI resistance training, but may require additional recovery post-training to minimise effects of fatigue.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 289 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 289 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 51 18%
Student > Master 34 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 10%
Researcher 13 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 4%
Other 43 15%
Unknown 108 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 107 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Social Sciences 6 2%
Other 15 5%
Unknown 119 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 120. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 February 2024.
All research outputs
#348,780
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#77
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,364
of 324,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#1
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.