Affecting Effects on Affect: The Impact of Protocol Permutations on Affective Responses to Sprint Interval Exercise; A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Pooled Individual Participant Data
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Responses to sprint interval exercise (SIE) are hypothesized to be perceived as unpleasant, but SIE protocols are diverse, and moderating effects of various SIE protocol parameters on affective responses are unknown. We performed a systematic search to identify studies (up to 01/05/2021) measuring affective valence using the Feeling Scale during acute SIE in healthy adults. Thirteen studies involving 18 unique trials and 316 unique participant (142 women and 174 men) affective responses to SIE were eligible for inclusion. We received individual participant data for all participants from all studies. All available end-of-sprint affect scores from each trial were combined in a linear mixed model with sprint duration, mode, intensity, recovery duration, familiarization and baseline affect included as covariates. Affective valence decreased significantly and proportionally with each additional sprint repetition, but this effect was modified by sprint duration: affect decreased more during 30 s (0.84 units/sprint; 95% CI: 0.74–0.93) and 15–20 s sprints (1.02 units/sprint; 95% CI: 0.93–1.10) compared with 5–6 s sprints (0.20 units/sprint; 95% CI: 0.18–0.22) (both p < 0.0001). Although the difference between 15–20 s and 30 s sprints was also significant ( p = 0.02), the effect size was trivial ( d = −0.12). We observed significant but trivial effects of mode, sprint intensity and pre-trial familiarization, whilst there was no significant effect of recovery duration. We conclude that affective valence declines during SIE, but the magnitude of the decrease for an overall SIE session strongly depends on the number and duration of sprints. This information can be applied by researchers to design SIE protocols that are less likely to be perceived as unpleasant in studies of real-world effectiveness. Systematic Review Registration Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/sbyn3 .
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it