ReviewSports medicine and health science2022
Why Pheidippides could not believe in the 'Central Governor Model': Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories.
Review in Sports medicine and health science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging Inductive and Deductive Reasoning: A Proposal to Enhance the Evaluation and Development of Models in Sports and Exercise Science.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- [Fatigue in chronic physical diseases].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Review
- Optimal dose of vigorous physical activity on cardiorespiratory and perceptual response for sedentary youths using internal load monitoring.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Cardiorespiratory Coordination in Collegiate Rowing: A Network Approach to Cardiorespiratory Exercise Testing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- How to be a better scientist: Lessons from scientific philosophy, the historical development of science, and past errors within exercise physiology.Sports medicine and health science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An important epistemological problem has been faced by Exercise Physiologists. On one hand, one theory explains the fatigue through a ceiling effect of oxygen uptake. On the other hand, the new theory proposes that an encephalon mechanism would stop the effort before a catastrophic homeostasis failure. Many physiologists have looked for evidence to support their favourite theory even though the induction logic problem does not allow to prove whether truth is discovered; however, it is possible to prove that it does not occur. When some researchers fail to test their hypotheses, they use relativism to bring up their theories again. Noakes and his colleagues have based their theory on relativism, because it is impossible to refute by empirical observation. It also doesn't explain all phenomena that the oldest Hill's theory is able to explain. Noakes's theory isn't more accurate in its previsions. Noakes did not check whether the oxygen uptake plateau occurs in suitable tests to measure on the mouth what happens in the muscles. Finally, it doesn't propose new tests for the encephalon role during maximal effort, as that is expected in scientific work. For all of these reasons, it is possible to conclude there are no advantages in switching to the "Central Governor" theory.
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.