ArticleFrontiers in physiology2016
Improvements in Cycling Time Trial Performance Are Not Sustained Following the Acute Provision of Challenging and Deceptive Feedback.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance, cardioventilatory and perceptual responses to perceived opponent ability during head-to-head cycling competition.Experimental physiology · 2026Article
- Assessing the Assisted Six-Minute Cycling Test as a Measure of Endurance in Non-Ambulatory Patients with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA).Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Sensor-based augmented visual feedback for coordination training in healthy adults: a scoping review.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Article
- A Theory of Challenge and Threat States in Athletes: A Revised Conceptualization.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Review
- Self-Selected Pacing during a 24 h Track Cycling World Record.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Pacing Decision Making in Sport and the Effects of Interpersonal Competition: A Critical Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Review
- Goal Orientation and the Presence of Competitors Influence Cycling Performance.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Commentary: Improvements in Cycling Time Trial Performance Are Not Sustained Following the Acute Provision of Challenging and Deceptive Feedback.Frontiers in physiology · 2017Article
- Fatigue Induced by Physical and Mental Exertion Increases Perception of Effort and Impairs Subsequent Endurance Performance.Frontiers in physiology · 2016Review
- Effect of Environmental and Feedback Interventions on Pacing Profiles in Cycling: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The provision of performance-related feedback during exercise is acknowledged as an influential external cue used to inform pacing decisions. The provision of this feedback in a challenging or deceptive context allows research to explore how feedback can be used to improve performance and influence perceptual responses. However, the effects of deception on both acute and residual responses have yet to be explored, despite potential application for performance enhancement. Therefore, this study investigated the effects of challenging and deceptive feedback on perceptual responses and performance in self-paced cycling time trials (TT) and explored whether changes in performance are sustained in a subsequent TT following the disclosure of the deception. Seventeen trained male cyclists were assigned to either an accurate or deceptive feedback group and performed four 16.1 km cycling TTs; (1 and 2) ride-alone baseline TTs where a fastest baseline (FBL) performance was identified, (3) a TT against a virtual avatar representing 102% of their FBL performance (PACER), and (4) a subsequent ride-alone TT (SUB). The deception group, however, were initially informed that the avatar accurately represented their FBL, but prior to SUB were correctly informed of the nature of the avatar. Affect, self-efficacy and RPE were measured every quartile. Both groups performed PACER faster than FBL and SUB (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.