■我们在运动过程中的感受受到外在的影响(例如,视觉)和互感(即,内部身体信号)感官信息,以及我们以前的经验和期望。关于一个人在运动中的表现的欺骗性视觉线索可以提高工作效率,而不会对情感效价(好/坏反应)或感知到的努力产生负面影响。然而,人们不太理解的是,对锻炼经历本身的感知是否可以改变,如果工作率保持不变。在这里,我们旨在调查在控制体力时,通过虚拟现实(VR)循环体验中的虚幻山丘进行欺骗性视觉是否会改变情感效价和感知的努力。我们还评估了检测相互感受线索的准确性是否会影响欺骗性视觉信息可以改变运动体验的程度。
■共有20名参与者(10名女性;30.2±11.2岁)完成了三个VR循环条件,每个条件为10分钟,在一个随机的,平衡秩序。踏板阻力/节奏是个性化的(在通气阈值附近运动强度),并在各种条件下保持恒定;只有视觉线索有所不同。两个条件提供了关于地形的欺骗性视觉线索(虚幻的上坡,虚幻的下坡;阻力没有改变);一种情况提供了准确的视觉线索(平坦的地形)。在每种VR条件下,在标准化的时间点获得了情感效价(感觉量表)和感知劳累(Borg'sRPE)的评分。通过心跳检测测试测量交互感受的准确性。
■线性混合效应模型表明,欺骗性视觉线索改变了情感效价(f2=0.0198)。相对于平坦的地形,虚幻的下坡降低的情感效价(Est=-0.21,p=0.003),但是虚幻的上坡并没有显着改善情感效价(Est=0.107,p=0.14)。欺骗性的视觉线索改变了感知的努力,这受到相互感觉准确性水平的调节(条件-相互感觉相互作用,p=0.00000024,f2=0.0307)。较高的感知力准确性水平导致在虚幻的下坡条件下更高的感知力(vs平坦),而较低的感知力会导致在虚幻的丘陵条件下(相对于平坦)和更大幅度的变化。
■当体力不变化时,欺骗性的视觉线索会影响运动过程中的知觉反应,对于感知到的努力,给予视觉外感受线索的权重是由检测内感受线索的准确性决定的。与我们的假设相反,欺骗性视觉线索并不能改善情感效价。我们的研究结果表明,感知准确性较低的人最受益于欺骗性视觉线索,提供对个性化运动处方的初步见解,以促进积极(并避免消极)的运动体验。
How we feel during exercise is influenced by exteroceptive (e.g., vision) and interoceptive (i.e., internal body signals) sensory information, and by our prior experiences and expectations. Deceptive visual cues about one\'s performance during exercise can increase work rate, without negatively impacting affective valence (good/bad responses) or perceived exertion. However, what is less understood is whether the perception of the exercise experience itself can be shifted, if work rate is held constant. Here we aimed to investigate whether deceptive vision-via illusory hills in a virtual reality (VR) cycling experience-alters affective valence and perceived exertion when physical effort is controlled. We also evaluated whether the accuracy with which one detects interoceptive cues influences the extent to which deceptive visual information can shift exercise experiences.
A total of 20 participants (10 female; 30.2 ± 11.2 yrs) completed three VR cycling conditions each of 10-min duration, in a randomised, counterbalanced order. Pedal resistance/cadence were individualised (to exercise intensity around ventilatory threshold) and held constant across conditions; only visual cues varied. Two conditions provided deceptive visual cues about the terrain (illusory uphill, illusory downhill; resistance did not change); one condition provided accurate visual cues (flat terrain). Ratings of affective valence (Feeling Scale) and of perceived exertion (Borg\'s RPE) were obtained at standardised timepoints in each VR condition. Interoceptive accuracy was measured via a heartbeat detection test.
Linear mixed effects models revealed that deceptive visual cues altered affective valence (f2 = 0.0198). Relative to flat terrain, illusory downhill reduced affective valence (Est = -0.21, p = 0.003), but illusory uphill did not significantly improve affective valence (Est = 0.107, p = 0.14). Deceptive visual cues altered perceived exertion, and this was moderated by the level of interoceptive accuracy (Condition-Interoception interaction, p = 0.00000024, f2 = 0.0307). Higher levels of interoceptive accuracy resulted in higher perceived exertion in the illusory downhill condition (vs flat), while lower interoceptive accuracy resulted in lower perceived exertion in both illusory hill conditions (vs flat) and shifts of greater magnitude.
Deceptive visual cues influence perceptual responses during exercise when physical effort does not vary, and for perceived exertion, the weighting given to visual exteroceptive cues is determined by accuracy with which interoceptive cues are detected. Contrary to our hypotheses, deceptive visual cues did not improve affective valence. Our findings suggest that those with lower levels of interoceptive accuracy experience most benefit from deceptive visual cues, providing preliminary insight into individualised exercise prescription to promote positive (and avoid negative) exercise experiences.