Self-control training leads to enhanced cardiovascular exercise performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of two weeks of self-control strength training on maximum cardiovascular exercise performance. Forty-one participants completed a cognitive self-control depletion task (Stroop task) followed by a maximal graded cycling test and were randomized to training (maximal endurance contractions of spring handgrip trainers, twice daily) or no-treatment control groups. At follow-up (2 weeks), half of each group completed either a time-matched or trial-matched Stroop task followed by another maximal graded cycling test. Results showed a significant 2-way (training X time) interaction (P < 0.001), and a trend for the 3-way (training X time X cognitive task) interaction (P = 0.07). Decomposition of the interactions revealed that across sessions cycling performance increased in both training groups, did not change in the trial-matched cognitive task control group, and declined in the time-matched control group. We conclude that isometric handgrip training leads to self-control strength adaptations that enhance maximal cardiovascular exercise performance or tolerance of exercise at maximal levels of effort.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".