MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989687837 · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000000494

Music Enhances Performance and Perceived Enjoyment of Sprint Interval Exercise

2014· article· en· W1989687837 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSprintWingate testPsychologyInterval trainingAffect (linguistics)Session (web analytics)Cycle ergometerAnaerobic exercisePhysical therapyTask (project management)Interval (graph theory)AudiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineMathematicsHeart rateCommunicationComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Interval exercise training can elicit physiological adaptations similar to those of traditional endurance training, but with reduced time. However, the intense nature of specific protocols, particularly the "all-out" efforts characteristic of sprint interval training (SIT), may be perceived as being aversive. The purpose of this study was to determine whether listening to self-selected music can reduce the potential aversiveness of an acute session of SIT by improving affect, motivation, and enjoyment, and to examine the effects of music on performance. METHODS: Twenty moderately active adults (22 ± 4 yr) unfamiliar with interval exercise completed an acute session of SIT under two different conditions: music and no music. The exercise consisted of four 30-s "all-out" Wingate Anaerobic Test bouts on a cycle ergometer, separated by 4 min of rest. Peak and mean power output, RPE, affect, task motivation, and perceived enjoyment of the exercise were measured. Mixed-effects models were used to evaluate changes in dependent measures over time and between the two conditions. RESULTS: Peak and mean power over the course of the exercise session were higher in the music condition (coefficient = 49.72 [SE = 13.55] and coefficient = 23.65 [SE = 11.30]; P < 0.05). A significant time by condition effect emerged for peak power (coefficient = -12.31 [SE = 4.95]; P < 0.05). There were no between-condition differences in RPE, affect, or task motivation. Perceived enjoyment increased over time and was consistently higher in the music condition (coefficient = 7.00 [SE = 3.05]; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Music enhances in-task performance and enjoyment of an acute bout of SIT. Listening to music during intense interval exercise may be an effective strategy for facilitating participation in, and adherence to, this form of training.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it