| Title |
Role of Ratings of Perceived Exertion during Self-Paced Exercise: What are We Actually Measuring?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sports Medicine, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40279-015-0344-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chris R. Abbiss, Jeremiah J. Peiffer, Romain Meeusen, Sabrina Skorski |
| Abstract |
Ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) and effort are considered extremely important in the regulation of intensity during self-paced physical activity. While effort and exertion are slightly different constructs, these terms are often used interchangeably within the literature. The development of perceptions of both effort and exertion is a complicated process involving numerous neural processes occurring in various regions within the brain. It is widely accepted that perceptions of effort are highly dependent on efferent copies of central drive which are sent from motor to sensory regions of the brain. Additionally, it has been suggested that perceptions of effort and exertion are integrated based on the balance between corollary discharge and actual afferent feedback; however, the involvement of peripheral afferent sensory feedback in the development of such perceptions has been debated. As such, this review examines the possible difference between effort and exertion, and the implications of such differences in understanding the role of such perceptions in the regulation of pace during exercise. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 9 | 21% |
| Ireland | 4 | 9% |
| Australia | 4 | 9% |
| United States | 2 | 5% |
| Singapore | 2 | 5% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 20 | 47% |
| Members of the public | 20 | 47% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 314 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 308 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 56 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 11% |
| Researcher | 30 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 5% |
| Other | 61 | 19% |
| Unknown | 69 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 125 | 40% |
| Psychology | 19 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 40 | 13% |
| Unknown | 84 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 08 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,318,065
of 23,510,717 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,070
of 2,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,369
of 267,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#17
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,510,717 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 52.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 267,764 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.