Comparison of rates of perceived exertion between active video games and traditional exercise : original research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Research regarding the Nintendo WiiTM has focused on rehabilitation and balance benefits as well as energy expenditure for games such as boxing and tennis. There is a gap, however, in the literature regarding perceived exertion of the WiiTM compared to other modes of exercise. Research question:The purpose of this laboratory-based study was to compare perceived exertion on the Nintendo WiiTM and two traditional modes of exercise : the treadmill and cycle ergometer. It was expected that the WiiTM would show lower ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) values. Type of study: A repeated measures design was used. Methods: Five healthy males (average age = 21.4 years) and seven females (average age = 22.1 years) completed three 20 minute exercise sessions in random order, one each using the cycle ergometer, the treadmill and the Nintendo Wii Fit PlusTM. Exercise intensity was fixed at 65% (± 5 bpm) of each participant's age predicted maximum heart rate. Ratings of perceived exertion and HR were measured every minute. Additionally overall RPE was collected at the end of each trial. Results: Repeated measures analysis of variance confirmed that although exercise intensity was consistent across the three exercise methods, overall RPE was lowest for the Nintendo WiiTM (9.50) followed by the treadmill (9.92) and finally the cycle ergometer (11.08), F(1,11) = 10.17, p<0.01. Conclusions: When compared to certain traditional exercise modalities the Nintendo Wii Fit PlusTM was perceived to require less effort. Therefore, using the Nintendo Wii Fit PlusTM is likely to result in higher exercise adherence rates.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".