What I see and what I feel: the influence of deceptive visual cues and interoceptive accuracy on affective valence and sense of effort during virtual reality cycling

Author:

Mouatt Brendan12,Smith Ashleigh E.3,Parfitt Gaynor3,Stanford Ty34,McDade Jeremy5,Smith Ross T.5,Stanton Tasha R.12

Affiliation:

1. IIMPACT in Health, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

2. Persistent Pain Research Group, Hopwood Centre for Neurobiology, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI), Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

3. Alliance for Research in Exercise Nutrition and Activity (ARENA), Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

4. Clinical & Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

5. Wearable Computer Laboratory, Mawson Lakes Campus, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

Abstract

Background 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. Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusions 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.

Funder

University of South Australia Research Themes Investment Scheme

National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia and Australian Research Council (NHMRC-ARC) Dementia Research Development Fellowship

National Health & Medical Research Council Career Development Fellowship

Publisher

PeerJ

Subject

General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine,General Neuroscience

Reference72 articles.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3