Evaluation of anticipation bias for RPE during progressive exercise testing.

This study evaluated a possible anticipation bias when ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were obtained during submaximal progressive exercise testing. Perceptual estimates were obtained using the CR-10 category-ratio scale. 13 subjects, 7 men and 6 women (M age = 26.8 +/- 6.4 yr., height = 2.7 +/- .17 m, weight = 73.0 +/- 18.2 kg, VO2 peak = 46.7 +/- 5.6 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1) for men and 47.8 +/- 7.3 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1) for women) recruited from the university student population participated. Each subject underwent two submaximal progressive exercise tests separated by at least 48 hr. using the cycle as test mode and the YMCA protocol. Power outputs established during the first test were presented in random order during the second test. Differentiated RPE for the Peripheral, Respiratory-Metabolic, and the undifferentiated signals, and heart rate, were measured during the last 15 sec. of each of the four stages of exercise. In comparing responses between the two tests, significant differences were observed for both heart rate and the Respiratory-Metabolic signal during power output 4, using repeated-measures analysis of variance. However, a 95% limit of agreement test was significant only for heart rate as the 95% confidence interval for the Respiratory-Metabolic signal overlapped zero and thus was not significantly different. No significant differences were found for the undifferentiated or peripheral signals between the two tests. Results indicate that both undifferentiated and differentiated RPE are given without significant anticipation bias during submaximal progressive cycle exercise.