↓ Skip to main content

The Influence of Collective Behavior on Pacing in Endurance Competitions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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 Influence of Collective Behavior on Pacing in Endurance Competitions
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2015.00373
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Renfree, Everton Crivoi do Carmo, Louise Martin, Derek M. Peters

Abstract

A number of theoretical models have been proposed in recent years to explain pacing strategies observed in individual competitive endurance events. These have typically related to the internal regulatory processes that inform the making of decisions relating to muscular work rate. Despite a substantial body of research which has investigated the influence of collective group dynamics on individual behaviors in various animal species, this issue has not been comprehensively studied in individual athletic events. This is somewhat surprising given that athletes often directly compete in close proximity to one another, and that collective behavior has also been observed in other human environments including pedestrian interactions and financial market trading. Whilst the reasons for adopting collective behavior are not fully understood, collective behavior is thought to result from individual agents following simple local rules that result in seemingly complex large systems that act to confer some biological advantage to the collective as a whole. Although such collective behaviors may generally be beneficial, competitive endurance events are complicated by the fact that increasing levels of physiological disruption as activity progresses may compromise the ability of some individuals to continue to interact with other group members. This could result in early fatigue and relative underperformance due to suboptimal utilization of physiological resources by some athletes. Alternatively, engagement with a collective behavior may benefit all due to a reduction in the complexity of decisions to be made and a subsequent reduction in cognitive loading and mental fatigue. This paper seeks evidence for collective behavior in previously published analyses of pacing behavior and proposes mechanisms through which it could potentially be either beneficial, or detrimental to individual performance. It concludes with suggestions for future research to enhance understanding of this phenomenon.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Lecturer 5 6%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 21 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 30 39%
Psychology 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 24 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 12 January 2024.
All research outputs
#3,174,433
of 25,162,879 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#1,690
of 15,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,880
of 401,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#18
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,162,879 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,471 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 401,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.