Autoregulation in Resistance Training: Addressing the Inconsistencies
- PDF / 1,078,535 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 92 Downloads / 243 Views
REVIEW ARTICLE
Autoregulation in Resistance Training: Addressing the Inconsistencies Leon Greig1 · Ben Hayden Stephens Hemingway1 · Rodrigo R. Aspe1 · Kay Cooper1 · Paul Comfort2,3,4 · Paul A. Swinton1
© The Author(s) 2020
Abstract Autoregulation is a process that is used to manipulate training based primarily on the measurement of an individual’s performance or their perceived capability to perform. Despite being established as a training framework since the 1940s, there has been limited systematic research investigating its broad utility. Instead, researchers have focused on disparate practices that can be considered specific examples of the broader autoregulation training framework. A primary limitation of previous research includes inconsistent use of key terminology (e.g., adaptation, readiness, fatigue, and response) and associated ambiguity of how to implement different autoregulation strategies. Crucially, this ambiguity in terminology and failure to provide a holistic overview of autoregulation limits the synthesis of existing research findings and their dissemination to practitioners working in both performance and health contexts. Therefore, the purpose of the current review was threefold: first, we provide a broad overview of various autoregulation strategies and their development in both research and practice whilst highlighting the inconsistencies in definitions and terminology that currently exist. Second, we present an overarching conceptual framework that can be used to generate operational definitions and contextualise autoregulation within broader training theory. Finally, we show how previous definitions of autoregulation fit within the proposed framework and provide specific examples of how common practices may be viewed, highlighting their individual subtleties.
Key Points Autoregulation is described by an emergent process that can be used to systematically individualise physical training. This is achieved through a flexible framework that enables practitioners to continually adjust training programmes over time based on measurement of an individual’s performance.
* Paul A. Swinton [email protected] 1
School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen, UK
2
Directorate of Psychology and Sport, University of Salford, Frederick Road, Salford, Greater Manchester, UK
3
Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Carnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK
4
Centre for Exercise and Sport Science Research, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia
Despite substantial developments since the 1940s, the lack of an overarching framework has led to inconsistencies in definitions and terminology used throughout associated research and practice. This has led to an ambiguity surrounding how best to implement a range of autoregulation strategies in practice, and a lack of synthesis within research. Future research should focus attention on identifying key features of the measurement and adjustment process that can be used to ide
Data Loading...
