Validity of Self-Reported Training Duration

Abstract

Producing customised training programmes requires the quantification of athletes' training, which may involve athletes self-reporting their exercise The study aim was to determine the relationship between what athletes say they do in training and what they actually do. Physically active participants (n = 29; age = 30 ± 5 years) self reported their average weekly training duration for 3 weeks of ad libitum training. During the following 2 weeks training duration was recorded. There was a significant relationship (r = 0.87) between self-reported and recorded duration with 24% of athletes overestimating, 17% underestimating and 59% accurately estimating their training duration. Maximum heart rate was significantly higher in athletes that overestimated (198 ± 9 b.min−1, n = 7) compared to those that accurately estimated duration (187 ± 6 b.min−1, n = 17; p = 0.025) In conclusion, the margin of error in self-reported training duration may significantly affect the prescription of training.