The focusing of the public's attention with respect to the economy, the environment, each other, etc would make for an interesting and maybe even useful study.
Might be why the “fartlek” workout has been a fixture in running plans for decades. In Swedish it means speedplay and the original structure of the workout was there is no structure. Start running, spot a landmark like a pole, run hard to it, jog until you see another one like a tree, run hard to it, and repeat. This research might suggest this type of activity let’s athletes run harder than they normally would.
Nowadays many coaches prescribe timed intervals to structure the fatlek, so the original idea behind it has kinda been lost though. In fact, timed workouts actually have the opposite effect where athletes perform worse at the same rate of perceived effort than distance based workouts.
> Our findings revealed when participants adopted a dissociative-external focus of attention, they consumed less oxygen, had lower blood lactate, and a lower rating of perceived exertion compared with trials completed using an associative attention strategy. The findings of this study demonstrate that running economy is improved and feelings of fatigue are lowest when using a combination of a dissociative-external focus of attention.
I’m not sure how certain can we be on where participants actually focused their attention, as it’s hard (impossible?) to measure. Separately from that, I believe the exact location of associative-internal focus matters.
For example, the experimenters used this method to trigger associative-internal focus:
> the examiner repeated the phrase “Focus on the muscles in your feet” during the running action.
I suspect that:
— It’s possible to hear this phrase without actually directing the focus anywhere.
— Engaging verbal mechanism could actually be counter-productive, if it triggers inner monologue and keeps part of the attention in one’s head so to speak.
— Focusing on the muscles in the feet might not be conducive to good running form. Could that focus lead to tensing up of those muscles? I generally attempt to engage the core and keep the extremities relaxed. That said, I don’t have the relevant expertise and am willing to be corrected.
Anecdotally, I noticed that external focus of attention sometimes makes physical effort easier in the moment but does not necessarily help maintain good form (unless it’s already well-developed enough to be maintained automatically, which isn’t a given considering participant selection method), while what seems to be referred to as “associative-internal focus of attention” IMO takes some time and effort but, used appropriately, helps maintain good form and aligns with economy over long time periods.
> The findings of this study demonstrate that running economy is improved and feelings of fatigue are lowest when using a combination of a dissociative-external focus of attention.
So, optimal training would be chasing your Ketamine dealer?
Working out or running purely for exercise are contrived from an evolutionary perspective. For millions of years of the homo genus we only ran or exercised because it was in the context of a useful task, like getting dinner, clearing land, or being playful. In these forms of running or weight lifting your mind would have only been focused externally on the tasks it's connected to.
Does it make it difference? Since mind and body are interconnected, of course it does.
I'm weird but I do sometimes run and imagine I'm actually persistence hunting an antelope, and that some hypothetical tribe would be thrilled to have it. It does supply a boost of energy and makes the run easier. Evolution hacking I suppose.
I find that when I remember, and remember to keep on focusing on a visual metaphor I have for running form and economy the perceived effort doesn't change but suddenly you're going 1 or 2 minutes per mile faster. It's absolutely magic.
10 comments
[ 8.1 ms ] story [ 36.5 ms ] threadNowadays many coaches prescribe timed intervals to structure the fatlek, so the original idea behind it has kinda been lost though. In fact, timed workouts actually have the opposite effect where athletes perform worse at the same rate of perceived effort than distance based workouts.
I’m not sure how certain can we be on where participants actually focused their attention, as it’s hard (impossible?) to measure. Separately from that, I believe the exact location of associative-internal focus matters.
For example, the experimenters used this method to trigger associative-internal focus:
> the examiner repeated the phrase “Focus on the muscles in your feet” during the running action.
I suspect that:
— It’s possible to hear this phrase without actually directing the focus anywhere.
— Engaging verbal mechanism could actually be counter-productive, if it triggers inner monologue and keeps part of the attention in one’s head so to speak.
— Focusing on the muscles in the feet might not be conducive to good running form. Could that focus lead to tensing up of those muscles? I generally attempt to engage the core and keep the extremities relaxed. That said, I don’t have the relevant expertise and am willing to be corrected.
Anecdotally, I noticed that external focus of attention sometimes makes physical effort easier in the moment but does not necessarily help maintain good form (unless it’s already well-developed enough to be maintained automatically, which isn’t a given considering participant selection method), while what seems to be referred to as “associative-internal focus of attention” IMO takes some time and effort but, used appropriately, helps maintain good form and aligns with economy over long time periods.
So, optimal training would be chasing your Ketamine dealer?
Does it make it difference? Since mind and body are interconnected, of course it does.
I'm weird but I do sometimes run and imagine I'm actually persistence hunting an antelope, and that some hypothetical tribe would be thrilled to have it. It does supply a boost of energy and makes the run easier. Evolution hacking I suppose.