Affiliation:
1. The University of Tennessee of Knoxville
2. Baldwin Wallace University
Abstract
Abstract
Meta-session autoregulation, a person-adaptive exercise programming approach, is characterized by individuals’ matching exercise demands specifically to their current readiness states. Some consumer wearables provide ‘recovery’ or ‘readiness’ scores, computed primarily based on heart rate variability. Despite the growing popularity of consumer wearables and interest in person-adaptive programming, limited research exists on how exercisers interact, interpret and use these scores. This study explores individuals' experiences with wearable devices and their associated readiness or recovery scores. Seventeen regular exercisers who owned and used a Whoop™ band or Oura™ ring for at least 3 months participated in a one-on-one virtual semi-structured interview. Interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, with themes supported by 'in-vivo' quotes. This paper focuses on three key themes for a comprehensive demonstration. Theme 1, 'It's more about how I can make adjustments to optimize my programming,' (MPR) highlights users' intended use of wearables for guiding training decisions. Theme 2, 'So many things outside of training modifications have changed,' (Misty) reveals that users also modify non-exercise behaviors to manage and optimize their scores. Theme 3, ‘You can’t really capture the complexities of a human on a device’ (Letty) underscores users' recognition of the limitations and errors associated with these devices emphasizing self-reliance to further direct behavioral adjustments. While wearable devices provide a numeric approach to measuring readiness and recovery, users prioritize self-awareness, flexibility, and personal judgment for exercise decisions. Understanding these experiences, in addition to exploring the psycho-behavioral aspects of user interactions, can contribute to refining meta-session autoregulation.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference56 articles.
1. Presenting and evaluating qualitative research;Anderson C;American Journal Of Pharmaceutical Education,2010
2. Antonovsky, A. (1993). Gesundheitsforschung versus Krankheitsforschung. Psychosomatische Gesundheit. Versuch einer Abkehr vom Pathogenese-Konzept:3–14.
3. Exercise makes people feel better but people are inactive: paradox or artifact?;Backhouse SH;Journal Of Sport & Exercise Psychology,2007
4. Borg, G. (1998). Borg's Perceived Exertion And Pain Scales.
5. Employing a Qualitative Description Approach in Health Care Research;Bradshaw C;Global Qualitative Nursing Research,2017