affect and enjoyment associated with crossfit exercise · 2019-01-28 · crossfit is a workout...
TRANSCRIPT
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT ASSOCIATED WITH CROSSFIT EXERCISE
Reed J. Kaus
A Thesis
Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF EDUCATION
May 2014
Committee:
David Tobar, Advisor
Bonnie Berger
Vikki Krane
© 2014
Reed J. Kaus
All Rights Reserved
iii ABSTRACT
David Tobar, Advisor
Exercise has been known to impact affective states, however there is a discrepancy in the
field regarding an optimal exercise intensity. It has been tradition to recommend moderate
exercise intensities over high intensities and to promote cardiovascular activity over resistance
training to individuals seeking desirable mood changes. The primary purpose of this study was to
examine the affective changes that occur during and after a bout of CrossFit exercise, which the
CrossFit community touts as a high intensity form of exercise, and includes aspects of
cardiovascular and resistance training. The secondary purpose of the study was to examine
exercise enjoyment as well as ratings of perceived exertion (RPE). The independent variable was
experience (current CrossFitters; novice CrossFitters). Participants included 16 CrossFitters (n =
8 men, n = 8 women) and 13 regular exercisers (n = 6 men; n = 7 women); mean age = 33.0 ±
11.6 years. The CrossFit workout “Cindy” was selected in accordance with the Berger and Motl
(2000) taxonomy for enhancing the psychological benefits of exercise. Participants reported
affect prior to, during, and after (0, 30, 60, and 120 minutes) exercise. No differences in affect
were observed between the experienced and novice groups, but there was a significant change in
affect over time. Specifically, negative affect and fatigue increased during exercise, and returned
to baseline immediately post-exercise and 30 minutes post-exercise, respectively. Positive affect
remained stable during and after exercise while tranquility remained stable until 60 minutes post-
exercise, at which time it was reported to be greater than at baseline and remained elevated 120
minutes post-exercise. Similarly, participants reported no differences in RPE between novice and
experienced participants, but ratings increased at 10 and 15 minutes into the exercise bout.
Finally, the groups did not differ in reported trait exercise enjoyment, but the greater amount of
iv state exercise enjoyment in the experienced group was a meaningful difference. It was concluded
that desirable increases in affect can occur following CrossFit exercise in both experienced and
novice CrossFit exercisers. Nonetheless, state exercise enjoyment must be considered, and
novice participants need encouragement and reassurance until they increase their activity
enjoyment.
v
This work is dedicated to Dale and Donna Brown, who taught me to always see the good in
others and to be respectful in all that I do.
vi ACKNOWLEDEGMENTS
I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who have been invaluable to me
throughout this process. First, a very big thank you to Dr. David Tobar, for his continued input
and contribution to this paper, as well as always being available to listen and discuss any
concerns I had. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Dr. Vikki Krane for her consistent
guidance in both my professional and academic endeavors at Bowling Green State University,
and helping me grow as a practitioner, and to Dr. Bonnie Berger for always being willing to
share her expertise and insights, and providing me with as many resources she possibly could.
I also want to recognize the importance of my fellow students during this process, for
they all helped me grow personally. First, to Melissa Fawcett, for always being there to and
discuss different theoretical concepts in various classes, and to confide in when personal issues
arose. And of course, to Dano Tolusso. I have never had a friend as selfless or dedicated as
Dano, and his support through the early mornings and late nights and ability to provide a
different perspective made a difficult process that much easier, and I will never be able to repay
him for the balance he helped me achieve in life.
Finally, there is no way I would be where I am today without the love and support of my
family. Thank you, Big Poppa Pump, for showing me that hard work does pay off, and helping
me in any way possible. Thank you, Momma, for teaching me what unconditional love looks
like, and always being there to listen when things seem to be at their lowest point. To Grandpa
Jim and Grandma Pat, thank you for showing me the importance of an education and
encouraging me to be the very best that I can be and making that process possible.
vii TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
CrossFit .......... .................................................................................................................... 3
Hypotheses .... .................................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 7
A Tentative Taxonomy for Enhancing the Psychological Benefits of Exercise ................ 7
Mode requirement ................................................................................................... 7
Practice/training requirements ................................................................................. 9
Hypothesized Mechanisms for Mood Enhancement Through Exercise .......................... 10
Physiological mechanisms ..................................................................................... 10
Psychological mechanisms .................................................................................... 12
Measures for Assessing Subjective Well-being ............................................................... 13
Exercise and Subjective Well-being ................................................................................. 17
Aerobic exercise .................................................................................................... 17
Anaerobic exercise ................................................................................................ 22
Summary of Exercise and Subjective Well-being ............................................................ 25
Intensity and Subjective Well-being ................................................................................ 25
Aerobic exercise .................................................................................................... 25
Anaerobic exercise ................................................................................................ 35
Summary of Intensity and Subjective Well-being ............................................................ 37
Individual Differences and Subjective Well-being .......................................................... 38
Summary of Individual Differences and Subjective Well-being ..................................... 45
Exercise Enjoyment and Subjective Well-being .............................................................. 45
viii Summary of Literature Review ........................................................................................ 48
CHAPTER III: METHOD ............................................................................................................ 51
Participants .... .................................................................................................................. 51
Instruments .... .................................................................................................................. 52
Demographic data sheet ........................................................................................ 52
Exertion ................................................................................................................. 53
Affect .. .................................................................................................................. 53
Exercise enjoyment ................................................................................................ 54
Feeling . .................................................................................................................. 55
Procedure ....... .................................................................................................................. 55
Analysis ......... .................................................................................................................. 59
CHAPTER IV: RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 61
Affective States ................................................................................................................ 61
Feeling ........... .................................................................................................................. 64
Exertion ......... .................................................................................................................. 65
State and Trait Exercise Enjoyment ................................................................................. 66
Correlations of Affect and Feeling ................................................................................... 67
CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................... 68
Affective States ................................................................................................................ 68
Exertion ......... .................................................................................................................. 72
State and Trait Exercise Enjoyment ................................................................................. 73
Limitations ..... .................................................................................................................. 75
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 76
ix Conclusion ..... .................................................................................................................. 77
REFERENCES .......... .................................................................................................................. 79
APPENDIX A: ACSM RISK STRATIFICATION AND HEALTH QUESTIONNAIRE ....... 100
APPENDIX B: RATING OF PERCEIVED EXERTION ......................................................... 103
APPENDIX C: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AFFECT SCALE ...................................................... 104
APPENDIX D: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ENJOYMENT STATE SCALE ............................... 105
APPENDIX E: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ENJOYMENT TRAIT SCALE ................................ 106
APPENDIX F: FEELING SCALE ............................................................................................. 107
APPENDIX G: RECRUITMENT FLYER ................................................................................ 108
APPENDIX H: RECRUITMENT SCRIPT FOR VERBAL COMMUNICATION .................. 109
APPENDIX I: INFORMED CONSENT .................................................................................... 110
APPENDIX J: POST-EXERCISE SCRIPT ............................................................................... 111
x LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Participant Characteristics ................................................................................................ 52
2 Testing Protocol ................................................................................................................ 59
3 PAAS Subscale ANOVAs Results ................................................................................... 93
4 Positive Affect Planned Contrasts .................................................................................... 93
5 Negative Affect Planned Contrasts .................................................................................. 93
6 Fatigue Planned Contrasts ................................................................................................ 94
7 Tranquility Planned Contrasts .......................................................................................... 94
8 Feeling Scale Planned Contrasts ...................................................................................... 95
9 FS and PAAS Correlation Matrix ..................................................................................... 95
10 Descriptive Statistics for Affect Stratified by Time ......................................................... 96
11 Multivariate Tests for PAAS and Experience Levels ....................................................... 98
12 Univariate Tests for PAAS Subscales .............................................................................. 99
xi LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Exercise taxonomy for maximizing the psychological benefits of exercise ...................... 8
2 Main effect of time on positive affect during and after CrossFit exercise. ...................... 61
3 Main effect of time on negative affect during and after CrossFit exercise ...................... 62
4 Main effect of time on fatigue during and after CrossFit exercise ................................... 63
5 Main effect of time on tranquility during and after CrossFit exercise ............................. 64
6 Changes in pleasure during and after CrossFit exercise. .................................................. 65
7 Increase in RPE during CrossFit exercise ........................................................................ 66
8 State enjoyment of CrossFit exercise by group ................................................................ 67
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 1 CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
The many benefits of exercise have long been known, with early philosophers like Plato
and Aristotle encouraging physical activity (Ozoliņš, 2013). These benefits include, but certainly
are not limited to protection from obesity (Schwingshackl, Dias, Strasser, & Hoffmann, 2013),
cardiovascular disease (Schuler, Adams, & Goto, 2013), metabolic syndrome (Montesi,
Moscatiello, Malavolti, Marzocchi, & Marchesini, 2013), and exercise can lead to desirable
mood changes (Reed & Buck, 2009). The known importance of exercise has led to numerous
studies attempting to define a minimum amount of exercise required to acquire both
physiological and psychological benefits. Of the latter, a particular interest has been devoted to
how exercise may enhance our Quality of Life (QoL), defined by Kaplan (1994) as one’s ability
to do activities and to live long enough to do so.
According to Spitzer, Dobson, and Hall (1981), outlook plays a critical role in QoL,
which can be influenced by the appraisal of positive and negative affect. The authors highlight
the ability of exercise to impact subjective well-being by enhancing the mood states of
individuals, even in a short time frame, which some argue can increase exercise adherence
(Berger, Pargman, & Weinberg, 2007; Williams, 2008; William et al., 2008). Most of the
historical and contemporary research on acute responses to exercise focuses on the facilitation of
mood alterations after one bout of exercise, and the psychological responses within a 2-4 hour
window (Berger et al., 2007; Reed & Ones, 2006).
Though it is not clear what specific mechanisms are involved in the improvement in
affect and mood following exercise, Berger and Motl (2000) proposed a tentative taxonomy for
enhancing the psychological benefits of exercise. The taxonomy suggests when certain
requirements of exercise are met while an individual participates in exercise she or he enjoys, the
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 2 likelihood of positive mood alteration is increased. The taxonomy addresses characteristics of the
exercise which includes mode requirements and practice requirements. Mode requirements
include: (a) abdominal, rhythmical breathing; (b) absence of interpersonal competition; and (c)
closed, predictable, rhythmical and repetitive movement. The practice requirements include: (a)
moderate exercise intensity; (b) 20 to 30 minutes in duration; and (c) at least 3 times a week.
Though the model does not address specific individual differences, recent research has
suggested that exercise does not impact all individuals in the same manner. For example,
Ekkekakis and Lind (2006) found that overweight participants gradually became more displeased
throughout the course of prescribed-intensity exercise, while those of a normal weight
maintained a consistent mood state. Furthermore, Hoffman and Hoffman (2008) discovered that
acute mood responses vary based on differences in fitness level. In this study nonexercisers,
moderate exercisers, and ultramarathon runners completed the Profile of Mood States (POMS)
before exercising and five minutes post-exercise. The two groups of exercisers received nearly
twice the psychological benefits of exercise as the nonexercisers. Alternatively, Focht and
Koltyn (1999) observed no differences in mood and state anxiety between experienced and
novice weight lifters in assessments following exercise; however, no assessments were made
during exercise, and initial fitness levels were not obtained.
Additionally, there is controversy in the field regarding what levels of intensity maximize
mood benefits, as some researchers have found no mood changes following low-intensity
exercise (Daley & Huffen, 2003; Raglin, 1997), but others have observed meaningful mood
benefits (Reed & Buck, 2009). Furthermore, the American College of Sports Medicine (2011)
has noted that there are lower adherence rates with high intensity exercise, possibly due to a lack
of positive mood changes. Alternatively, Cox, Thomas, Hinton, & Donahue (2004) discovered
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 3 that women who exercised at 80% of their VO2max had greater decreases in the state portion of
the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, Gorsuch, Lushene, Vagg, & Jacobs, 1983)
than those who exercised at 60% VO2max throughout measurements recorded at 30, 60, and 90
minutes post-exercise. Observing an interaction of fitness levels and intensity, Blachard,
Rodgers, Spence, and Courneya (2001) found those individuals who were more fit did not
receive the same psychological detriments at high intensity exercise as their unfit counterparts as
measured by the Exercise-Induced Feeling Index (EFI; Gauvin & Rejeski, 1993). Despite
contemporary findings regarding the benefits of high intensity exercise on mood, individuals
typically engage in exercises and intensities that make them happy and avoid those that make
them feel bad (Ekkekakis, Backhouse, Gray, & Lind, 2008; Ekkekakis, Parfitt, & Petruzzello,
2011).
CrossFit
CrossFit is a workout protocol that was developed by Greg Glassman at his gym in Santa
Cruz, CA in the early 2000s (CrossFit, Inc., 2013c). In 2003 the organization created a blog
(www.crossfit.com) to not only post a daily workout, but to spark what the CrossFit, Inc. (2013c)
founders called a “revolution in the fitness industry” (para. 4). The blog made accessing pre-
made workouts easy, and posted videos that provided demonstrations of the exercises so that
new exercisers could have a basic understanding of the body movements involved. The public’s
attraction to this new protocol spawned the inaugural CrossFit Games, which was sponsored by
Reebok in 2007. Following their mantra of “Forging Elite Fitness,” the CrossFit Games winner is
awarded the title of World’s Fittest Man/Woman for the upcoming year (CrossFit, Inc., 2013b,
2013c).
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 4 The organization has continued to grow following the start of the Games. Currently there
are over 5,500 affiliated gyms, and more than 35,000 CrossFit Level 1 trainers (CrossFit, Inc.,
2013c). To become a Level 1 trainer, an individual must attend a class accredited by the
American National Standards Institute, and become trained in the concepts, movements,
programming, and nutrition strategies of CrossFit (CrossFit, Inc., 2013a). Following the class,
attendees must pass a closed-book, 50 question multiple-choice exam. The organization fails to
declare what qualifies as passing, but has an 80% pass rate (CrossFit, Inc., 2011a). Additionally,
if an attendee fails the first test, there is an option to take the test as many times as needed until a
passing score is achieved, and certifications must be renewed every five years.
The interest in CrossFit has resulted in countless blogs, web pages, and even a periodical
for individuals to keep updated on recent news in the CrossFit community. The development of
CrossFit as a community has allowed it to spread by word-of-mouth and it continues to become
part of an increasing number of individuals’ lifestyles. This trend has shown not only in the
United States, but in other parts of the world as well, evidenced by the list of affiliated gyms
worldwide on the organization’s blog (CrossFit, Inc., 2011b) and the registration of athletes from
118 different countries in the 2013 CrossFit games (CrossFit, Inc., 2014).
With time being the primary barrier to exercise for individuals (Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, 2011; Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute, 1996;
Korkiakangas, Alahuhta, & Laitinen, 2009), it is easy to understand why CrossFit has become
popular. Most workouts of the day (WODs) last between 20 and 30 minutes, depending on the
requirements of the workout and the fitness level of the individual, making it an effective option
for exercisers who are pressed for time. The program relies largely on functional lifts (e.g.,
squats and pull ups) in combination with aerobic work (e.g., running and rowing). Despite a
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 5 thorough search of scholarly databases including Ebsco, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google
Scholar on March 9th, 2013, no research was identified that has examined psychological topics
within CrossFit.
The popularity of CrossFit may be beneficial in getting more individuals participating in
exercise, which is an important consideration as the obesity rate increases. In the U.S., 37.5% of
adults are obese (Ogden, Carroll, Kit, & Flegal, 2012), and the worldwide obesity rate has
doubled since 1980 (World Health Organization, 2013). Comorbid with inactivity, this obesity
epidemic persists when 48.6 to 68.5% of those who start an exercise program drop out within
one year (Annesi & Unruh, 2007). A possible contributory factor to the lack of exercise
adherence may be that obese (Ekkekakis & Lind, 2006) and inactive individuals (Hoffman &
Hoffman, 2008) might emotionally respond differently to exercise than those who are at a
healthy weight. Therefore, investigators should consider the variables they are examining, and
carefully control their sample to eliminate possible confounds between groups which is why the
current study examined active, normal-weight, adults.
Additionally, it is possible that CrossFit adheres to the exercise characteristics in the
tentative taxonomy for enhancing the psychological benefits of exercise, originally designed by
Berger (1983/1984), and further developed by Berger (1994, 1996, 2004) and by Berger and
colleagues (Berger & Owen, 1988; Berger et al., 2007; Berger & Tobar, 2007, 2011). In regards
to mode requirements, CrossFit encourages cardiovascular fitness and may produce abdominal,
rhythmical breathing while focusing on personal improvement and reducing interpersonal
competition. The exercises are laid out ahead of time so they become closed, predictable, and
rhythmical, and participants repeat the sequence of exercises until they complete the workout.
The practice requirements may differ between individuals, but individuals may modify exercises
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 6 if incapable of completing them (e.g., use of bands attached to a bar while performing pull ups),
and if performed at a self-selected pace, it is possible the exercise bout is of moderate intensity.
Typical time-based CrossFit workouts are a minimum of 20 minutes in duration, and individuals
are encouraged to exercise three consecutive days, with a single rest day between the three-day
cycles. This standard implies individuals exercise five to six days each week. If all of these
requirements are met, then it would be logical, following the taxonomy, that individuals would
experience desirable mood alterations.
Hypotheses
Current research has focused on the mood changes associated with an acute bout of
exercise. CrossFit, though increasing in popularity for exercisers, has yet to be a focus of
psychological research. The ability to discover how CrossFit impacts affective states of
experienced and novice participants would be beneficial to exercise scientists and practitioners.
The purpose of the study was to examine whether regular participation in a high intensity
CrossFit workout had an influence on acute affect and mood changes, while controlling for
participant weight status and activity level. That is, exclusion criteria removed any potential
participants (a) with a BMI greater than or equal to 30.0; (b) who had been participating in
exercise for less than six months; and (c) who reported exercising less than two times per week
on average. It was hypothesized that experienced CrossFit individuals, when compared to novice
CrossFit individuals, would report (a) greater affect states, measured by the Physical Activity
Affect Scale and Feeling Scale, during and 30, 60, and 120 minutes after exercise; (b) lower
ratings of perceived exertion; and (c) higher levels of state enjoyment, but equal trait enjoyment,
measured by the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 7 CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
A Tentative Taxonomy for Enhancing the Psychological Benefits of Exercise
Mood, as defined by Lane and Terry (2000), “is a set of feelings, ephemeral in nature,
varying in intensity and duration, and usually involving more than one emotion” (p. 16).
Alternatively, affect provides a wider sense of all valenced responses experienced by an
individual, and offers a general insight into the way a person is feeling (Ekkekakis & Petruzzello,
2000). Though the two terms have been used synonymously in the past, it is pivotal to
distinguish between the two, and recognize exercise has the ability to benefit both (Ekkekakis &
Petruzzello, 2000). Notably, these desirable changes occur following a variety of activities, and
are different for each individual. Two forms of exercise may appear completely different in such
a way that similarities between the two are hidden. However, even if unclear, there are
characteristics that exercises share that may lead to mood and affective benefits.
Berger and Tobar (2011) have developed a taxonomy attempting to identify the
characteristics of exercise that maximize psychological benefits (see Figure 1). The premise of
the model is if an individual engages in a personally enjoyable activity the likelihood of having
desirable mood changes will increase compared to performing exercise the individual does not
enjoy. This ability of one to enjoy activity is a subjective measure, and requires the recognition
of individual differences and preferences. However, this taxonomy contains two essential
components, referred to as mode and practice requirements, which should be considered when
developing exercise programs.
Mode requirements. The mode requirements of exercise are defined by the type of
activity that is being performed. One can analyze and find many differences between any two
modes of exercise. For example, there are many exercisers who enjoy running, but there are
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 8 some individuals who do not. This weight bearing activity might cause pain in joints or simple
displeasure, which may influence mood alteration. These individuals may achieve greater
psychological benefits with a non-weight bearing activity, such as cycling or swimming.
Although there are many different modes of exercise, Berger and Tobar (2011) list four
important characteristics that may be correlated with mood benefits: (a) abdominal and
rhythmical breathing, (b) relative absence of interpersonal competition, (c) closed or predictable
activities, and (d) repetitive and rhythmical movements. Berger and Motl (2000) suggest some of
the requirements have not been studied extensively (e.g., repetitive and rhythmical movements),
but through the analysis of activities that have produced mood benefits (e.g., swimming, running,
bicycling) it is logical that these movements do not require much thought, and allow the
exerciser to simply move.
EXERCISE CONSIDERATIONS
SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING AND MEANING
Figure 1. Exercise taxonomy for maximizing the psychological benefits of exercise. Adapted from “Exercise and Quality of Life,” by B. G. Berger, & D. A. Tobar, 2011, The New Sport and Exercise Psychology Companion, p. 494.
MODE REQUIREMENTS
• Abdominal, rhythmical breathing, • Absence of interpersonal competition,
and • Closed, predictable, rhythmical, and
repetitive movements.
PRACTICE REQUIREMENTS
• Moderate exercise intensity, • 20 to 30 minutes in duration, and • At least 3 times a week
ENJOYABLE ACTIVITY
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 9 Practice/training requirements. Practice and training requirements refer to the quality
and quantity of exercise in which an individual engages. The practice and training requirements
describe aspects of exercise that influence the manner in which individuals engage in activity.
Berger and Tobar (2011) describe three main concepts for achieving optimal mood benefits:
frequency, intensity, and duration. According to the frequency portion of the model, individuals
should exercise a minimum of three times a week, and make it an integral part of their schedule.
Though moderate intensity exercise may not increase fitness and athleticism as much as high
intensity training, it regularly has been found to optimize desirable mood changes. Finally,
though desirable mood changes can be seen following short-duration exercise (Barr-Anderson,
AuYoung, Whitt-Glover, Glenn, & Yancey, 2011), one should participate in physical activity for
20 to 30 continuous minutes for optimal psychological benefits.
Berger and Tobar (2011) suggest that it is within the practice and training requirements
that individual differences may play a role. One of the main areas that individual differences are
seen is within the area of exercise intensity. Individuals who perceive major time constraints may
elect to engage in high-intensity exercise for a shorter period to burn the same amount of calories
that moderate exercise would burn over a longer duration. These perceived time constraints may
also influence the number of days each week the individual can find time to exercise.
In summary, the tentative taxonomy is a categorization of characteristics that may
enhance the likelihood of an individual experiencing mood benefits. These characteristics
include mode requirements of abdominal breathing, absence of interpersonal competition,
predictable activity, and repetitive movements. The second set of requirements is training
considerations, and includes frequency (minimum of three times per week), intensity (moderate
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 10 intensity), and duration (20 to 30 minutes). By enhancing the enjoyment of an activity, it may be
possible to increase psychological benefits from exercise.
Hypothesized Mechanisms for Mood Enhancement Through Exercise
It is unclear what is the exact mechanism through which exercise enhances mood. Some
plausible mechanisms have a physiological basis, while others are more psychological in nature.
It is difficult to fully support any one hypothesis, and it is likely that a combination of factors
may help to explain this relationship.
Physiological mechanisms. There are many physiological hypotheses that may explain
why people feel better after exercise. These include the endorphin, serotonin, norepinephrine,
and thermogenic hypotheses (see reviews in Morgan, 1997). Through the measurement of β-
endorphins in blood plasma, Scheef et al. (2012) speculate there may be opioidergic mechanisms
that occur in the brain following exercise, though the blood-brain barrier makes it difficult to
confirm this process. That is, there may be chemical binding on sites in the brain that results in
psychological changes, however measurements of these chemicals in the blood cannot always be
an accurate depiction of what is happening in the brain due to the blood being filtered to prevent
toxins from entering the brain. Though it is problematic to assume brain and plasma β-endorphin
levels are identical, blood measurements have been used in nonpsychotic depression studies
(Kubryak et al., 2012), and their findings are supported by the concept of endorphin release from
exercise, where an increase in endorphins in the blood was seen as individuals reported increases
in mood (see Hoffman, 1997 for a review).
Serotonin is a neurotransmitter that may regulate mood by creating positive feelings, and
regardless of the availability within the blood one cannot imply that it is binding to receptors in
the brain (Wipfli, Landers, Nagoshi, Ringenbach, 2011). In their study, Wipfli et al. (2011)
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 11 found that serum serotonin levels significantly decreased in the blood following a 30-minute
bout of exercise on a bicycle ergometer at 70% heart rate max, possibly due to transportation to
and absorption by the brain. As the authors explain, this means that exercise may cause similar
decreases in serum serotonin as ingesting selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and thus,
serotonin partially moderates the link between exercise and depression symptoms. That is, more
serotonin is made available for the brain after ingesting selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors,
and exercise may produce similar mechanisms as this medication. This research supports the
serotonin hypothesis, and is consistent with other findings in the field (see Chaouloff, 1997 for a
review).
The norepinephrine hypothesis proposes that it is the production of norepinephrine in the
body that results in psychological benefits following exercise. The norepinephrine hypothesis is
grounded in research on depressed and anxious patients, who were found to have reduced levels
of norepinephrine, similar to what has been observed in individuals with chronic stress (see
Dishman, 1997; Goddard et al., 2010; for reviews). Thus, exercise may increase norepinephrine
levels resulting in reduced levels of anxiety, which could explain why physical activity is often
cited for its ability to ease stress (Berger et al., 2007).
The final physiological consideration is the thermogenic hypothesis. It has been
hypothesized that the increase in core body temperature that is observed with physical activity
may be associated with the mood benefits of exercise. Koltyn (1997) reviewed literature on the
thermogenic hypothesis, including a series of studies observing mood following a session in a
sauna or warm shower that support the thermogenic hypothesis. It is theorized a similar increase
in body temperature and the temperature of specific brain structures (e.g., the brain stem) occurs
with physical activity, and through this mechanism anxiety and depression may be reduced.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 12 Psychological mechanisms. Similar to the physiological mechanisms that may play a
role in mood benefits following a bout of exercise, the psychological mechanisms that may
influence mood state have not been extensively studied. The hypothesized psychological
mechanisms are thought to be a result of either distraction, self-efficacy increases, or social
effects of the exercise environment. According to the Berger and Tobar (2011) taxonomy of
enjoyable exercise, having a predictable, rhythmic activity, may assist one in “tuning out” their
environment, and psychologically engaging in their activity. Exercise allows for one’s focus to
turn inward and, in normal populations, simply perform exercise without the interference of the
outside world (Netz & Lidor, 2003). Exercise may distract the mind from psychological issues,
such as depression (Craft, 2005).
Through physical activity, individuals may gain a better understanding of their body, and
increase their self-efficacy, or the confidence one has in their ability to perform a specific task
(i.e., self-efficacy or mastery hypothesis). Petruzzello, Landers, Hatfield, Kubitz, and Salazar
(1991) observed that increases in fitness and skills are related to feelings of accomplishment and
are associated with control and self-confidence. Additionally, in a review, Stathopoulou, Powers,
Berry, Smits, and Otto (2006) noted that women who exercise, compared to women non-
exercisers, have higher levels of coping self-efficacy, or the ability to remain optimistic about
one’s resources when dealing with barriers to success (Schwarzer & Renner, 2000), a trait which
was inversely related to depression. Though causality cannot be claimed, it is possible that
individuals who exercise may have more belief in their abilities, thus are more confident, and
feel better in daily life compared to individuals who are inactive.
Finally, social effects may interact with mood, especially in exercise settings where other
exercisers are present. For example, Turner, Rejeski, and Brawley (1997) noted that women in a
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 13 ballet class reported higher exercise-related mood benefits and self-efficacy when they received
instruction, feedback, and support compared to a control group that received vague, general,
neutral feedback. Alternatively, Focht and Hausenblas (2004) observed that women with high
social physique anxiety reported higher levels of state anxiety, compared to their peers who
reported lower social physique anxiety, in an environment that presented itself as a high
physique-evaluative atmosphere (i.e., the environment was believed to criticize physical
appearance). The differences in these two studies emphasize how social groups may impact
mood in either direction.
In summary, there are multiple hypotheses that might explain why people report feeling
better after exercise, and receive positive mood and affective benefits. These hypotheses include
both physiological, which can be difficult to measure because of the blood-brain barrier and
other constraints, and psychological responses, which can be difficult to isolate in studies.
Though it is difficult to conclude one hypothesis explains the process more than another, it may
be best to accept that it is an interaction of these hypotheses that causes state mood changes in
exercisers.
Measures for Assessing Subjective Well-being
When subjective well-being is measured, it is pivotal to define the construct of interest
within a study. As previously mentioned, mood is most often considered a set of feelings which
involve various emotions (Lane & Terry, 2000), while affect is a broader view of all mood and
emotional responses within an individual (Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 2000). Various measures
have been developed to assess mood and affect within research studies. Originally, many of the
methods employed in the field of exercise psychology were adopted from general psychology
(Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 2000).
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 14 The Profile of Mood States (POMS; McNair, Lorr, & Droppleman, 1992) has been one of
the most extensively utilized measures in physical activity and exercise research (Berger & Motl,
2000; Petruzzello et al., 1991). The POMS is a 65-item scale that measures specific mood states
(McNair et al., 1992). Together the items assess six distinct subscales: tension-anxiety,
depression-dejection, anger-hostility, vigor-activity, fatigue-inertia, and confusion-bewilderment.
Although the POMS is a valid, sensitive instrument that can detect disturbances in mood, only a
single subscale assess a positive mood state, vigor, and the verbosity of the scale may be
intrusive in repeated-measure designs (Berger & Motl, 2000).
Shorter than the POMS, the 40-item STAI was prevalent in early research as an increase
in self-report measures in general psychology became popular (Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 2000),
and has been a popular tool to measure anxiety (Petruzzello et al., 1991). The STAI is used to
assess both state and trait anxiety, with 20 items scored on a 4-point Likert scale used to assesses
both subscales (Spielberger et al., 1983). Researchers investigating acute bouts of exercise
typically utilize the state portion of the scale, as trait anxiety levels are considered to be
persistent through short periods of time (e.g., an acute bout of exercise). However, the STAI is
only able to give insight into participants’ levels of anxiety, and does not provide any other
measures of affect or mood.
Alternative to measuring specific mood states, such as anxiety or vigor, the Positive
Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) provides insight
into two general feeling states: positive affect and negative affect. Both subscales consist of 10
items that are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. Though the PANAS does not measure specific
moods, it is capable of providing researchers with the general level of affect that individuals are
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 15 feeling at a particular moment in time, but some of the items have been questioned for a lack of
applicability to exercise, due to a lack of somatic-oriented items (McAuley & Courneya, 1994).
Though prominent in exercise psychology research, the adoption of these measures from
general psychology may have been a result of convenience as opposed to measures created from
conceptually driven theories (Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 2000). That is, past researchers
investigating acute bouts of exercise have relied on instruments that were not specific to
exercise. As Ekkekakis and Petruzzello (2000) suggest, this led to an era of frustration for
researchers as they attempted to use measures that were designed for general psychological use,
and resulted in the development of exercise-specific assessments, though the theoretical
foundation of such scales has been questioned.
To measure differences in feelings of pleasure and displeasure experienced during
exercise, Hardy and Rejeski (1989) developed the single-item Feeling Scale (FS). The scale is
presented on a, 11-point continuum from -5 to +5, with negative responses indicating
unpleasurable feelings, and positive responses suggesting pleasurable feelings, and 0
corresponding with “neutral.” The conciseness of the scale allows for quick administration at
multiple time points during and after exercise and provides a global sense of affect, but is unable
to elicit responses to specific mood states.
Alternatively, the EFI was created to measure specific feeling states experienced by
exercisers. Intended to assess positive engagement, revitalization, tranquility, and physical
exhaustion, the EFI contains 12 items, each on a 5-point Likert scale, with 3 items addressing
each subscale. Although the scale has been shown to be a valid and reliable method of assessing
feeling states experienced during exercise (Gauvin & Rejeski, 1993), the EFI has been criticized
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 16 for a lack of theoretical foundation and compatibility with affective models (Ekkekakis &
Petruzzello, 2001b).
Similarly, McAuley and Courneya (1994) created the Subjective Exercise Experiences
Scale (SEES) to measure individuals’ global affective responses to exercise. The development of
the scale resulted in a 7-point Likert scale for 12 items dispersed evenly amongst 3 subscales:
positive well-being, psychological distress, and fatigue. Preliminary research (McAuley &
Courneya, 1994) suggested the validity and reliability of the scale, but others (Ekkekakis &
Petruzzello, 2000; Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 2001a) have questioned the theoretical support for
the SEES.
The Physical Activity Affect Scale (PAAS; Lox, Jackson, Tuholski, Wasley, & Treasure,
2000) was created as an amalgamation between the EFI and the SEES, and improved the two
scales by reducing the repetitive nature of some constructs within and between the scales. As an
exercise-specific scale, the PAAS is a 12-item scale measuring four components: positive affect,
negative affect, fatigue, and tranquility. Each subscale consists of three adjectives scored on a 5-
point Likert scale. The components of the scale allow for the measurement of general affect (i.e.,
positive and negative affect), but also give insight into two specific states (i.e., fatigue and
tranquility). Though not as heavily applied in the research as some other scales, the PAAS has
shown validity and reliability (Kwan & Bryan, 2010; Lox et al., 2000).
In summary, multiple methods of measuring mood and affect exist. Though many contain
similar elements, comparisons between studies utilizing different methods cannot always be
done. However, researchers may gain unique insights with each measure to understand what
participants feel when engaging in exercise. Consequently, it is important to recognize whether
these measures are assessing affect, mood, or other constructs.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 17 Exercise and Subjective Well-being
Aerobic exercise. Exercise has been known to qualitatively make people feel better, by
reducing negative affect and increasing well-being, even if no quantitative changes (i.e.,
statistically significant differences) were observed (Berger & Owen, 1998; Morgan, 1968,
1977b). Morgan, Roberts, and Feinerman (1971) performed a pair of studies examining exercise-
induced changes in anxiety and depression in individuals who scored within average ranges for
anxiety and/or depression. The researchers analyzed the mood differences associated with two
different modes of exercise, a motorized treadmill and a cycle ergometer. Originally, choosing
the two modes of exercise was done for convenience, but reported depression scores, measured
by the Depression Adjective Check List (DACL; Lubin, 1965), were significantly higher after
exercise on the cycle ergometer compared to scores following being on the treadmill when
participants exercised at HR of 150 (d = 0.53) and 160 bpm (d = 1.18). The authors suggested the
results were simply a discovery of chance, but as Berger et al. (2007) argue, mode of exercise is
important when selecting exercises for mood benefits. Though cycling consists all of the mode
characteristics of mood enhancing activities (e.g., rhythmic breathing, repetitive movements,
little interpersonal competition, and predictable), these individuals may have preferred the
treadmill to the ergometer (Berger, 1996; Berger & Motl, 2000; Berger et al, 2007).
Morgan et al. (1971) also examined differences in depression and anxiety following quiet
rest and treadmill walking, which did not yield as strong of results. The DACL and the Institute
for Personality and Ability Testing (IPAT; Scheier & Cattell, 1960) Anxiety Battery were
completed immediately following walking at 3.5 mph on the treadmill at different grades, or
lying in a bed for 17 minutes. Analysis of the data revealed that light exercise did not produce
significant reductions in anxiety. The researchers, however, recognized the chosen
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 18 questionnaires typically were administered to psychiatric populations, and the use of these scales
in a healthy sample might not be sensitive enough to notice meaningful changes in this
population. The use of the IPAT later was criticized for being a measurement of trait anxiety and
not state anxiety (Morgan, 1977a; Martens, 1974). Furthermore, the scales do not account for the
participants reporting that they “felt better” following exercise. That is, the scales highlighted
reductions of negative affect as opposed to increases of positive affect.
Later, Bahrke and Morgan (1978) performed a study to compare mood states in exercise
and meditation groups to simply resting quietly, all for 20 minutes. Among a number of
physiologic measurements, the researchers recorded STAI scores before and after the three
conditions to see how each differed. After exercising at 70% of their predicted heart rate
maximum, participants saw anxiolytic effects similar to those created by meditating and resting
in a recliner. In other words, exercise was associated with a significant reduction in anxiety, but
these declines could not be attributed solely to exercise due to the meditation and quiet rest
conditions resulting in similar anxiolytic trends. These findings resulted in the conclusion that
taking a break in one’s day can be beneficial for mood, and exercise is one way to do so, as it
gives individuals time away from their problems to focus on other things.
Raglin and Morgan (1987) later attempted to differentiate rest and exercise conditions
with the belief that physical activity may be more beneficial for mood than relaxing. In their
study, participants engaged in both rest and exercise sessions where they were able to participate
at a self-selected pace in their choice of activity (e.g., jogging, racquetball, basketball,
swimming, or cycle ergometer). The rest period was completed in a sound chamber for 40
minutes, during which participants were allowed to read an anthology of Thoreau texts.
Alternatively, the exercise session included 40 minutes of the participant’s activity of choice at a
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 19 self-selected intensity to increase ecological validity. State anxiety scores, measured by the
STAI, were obtained before, immediately after, and 20, 60, 120, and 180 minutes after activity.
Additionally, participants were allowed to shower prior to the 20-minute assessment when they
were in the experimental group.
An ANOVA revealed that state anxiety decreased significantly 20 minutes after exercise,
returned to baseline, then became significantly reduced at the 180-minute assessment in the
exercise group, which was significantly different than what was observed in the rest trial (Raglin
& Morgan, 1987). This indicated the possibility for exercise to not only have an immediate
impact on state anxiety, but to also influence the measure in a delayed manner. Unfortunately
effect sizes were not reported, and neither were F-statistics, making calculations of effect sizes
ex post facto impossible. Though the thermogenic hypothesis suggests individuals would benefit
from desirable mood changes following a warm shower, participants did not report any
additional significant reductions in state anxiety after showering, demonstrating declines in
anxiety following exercise are separate from the thermogenic hypothesis. That is, after being
allowed to shower, the participants’ anxiety levels were not reported to be significantly lower
than the scores obtained after exercise, suggesting the delayed reduction in anxiety was due to
the treatment and was not compromised by the ability to shower.
To further compare the anxiety-reducing effects of relaxation and exercise on mood, Roth
(1989) recruited 40 active and 40 inactive college students, with an even number of males and
females, to take a challenging cognitive task. Participants completed a baseline measure of mood
with the POMS which assessed how they were feeling at that particular moment, and then took a
cognitive test. Following the test, the participants were randomly assigned to either the exercise
or waiting condition. During the experimental condition, the participants exercised on an
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 20 ergometer at a pace of 50 revolutions per minute. Males began 600 kilopond meters per minute
(kpm/min) and females began at 300 kpm/min. Heart rate was monitored and maintained at 115
and 135 bpm. Following the completion of the experimental condition, these participants were
escorted to the waiting area, where they were allowed to cool down for 20 minutes. The protocol
for this waiting period was identical to that of the control group, and the POMS was
administered 15 minutes into the cool down period. Following this period, the participants
engaged in another cognitive task, and those in the control group performed 6-8 minutes on the
cycle ergometer, so their aerobic capacity could be assessed. Both of these tasks were performed
to answer additional hypotheses, and did not impact the mood measurements.
No significant differences were seen between the sexes or activity levels (Roth, 1989).
However, the MANOVA did reveal a main effect for group (exercise v. control) on mood. A
follow-up univariate ANCOVA revealed those who exercised were significantly lower in the
tension (d = 1.75) and confusion (d = 1.66) subscales of the POMS compared to their control
group counterparts. Also comparing active and inactive participants, an additional ANCOVA
revealed an interaction on the vigor portion of the POMS, where the beneficial effects of exercise
on the subscale were more pronounced for active participants. This interpretation must be made
with caution, as the researchers note, due to no interaction effects being identified within the
original MANOVA.
Taking a deeper look into the exercise setting, Maraki et al. (2005) studied mood changes
following exercise at different times of day. The sample of 12 healthy female participants
engaged in four trials, two exercise conditions and two control conditions. The exercise and
control conditions were designed to take place on the same days of the week, at the same time in
either the morning or evening. Participants completed the PANAS before and after each of the
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 21 conditions. The exercise trials consisted of a 10-minute warm-up, 20 minutes of aerobic exercise,
20-minutes of weight training, and a 10-minute cool-down, while the control condition consisted
of 60 minutes of quiet rest. Both the exercise and control morning conditions significantly
increased positive affect from baseline to post-trial, but the exercise condition produced a greater
increase in positive affect than the morning control trial. This morning exercise trial also
increased positive affect and decreased negative affect significantly more than the evening trial.
These results suggest the morning may be the best time to exercise; however, it is important to
recognize individuals have different schedules, and positive changes were observed in both
exercise conditions. The study reinforces exercise, at any time of day, as a moderator for
desirable affective changes.
Currently, it appears clear that cardiovascular activity can result in affective changes. In
an analysis of the literature, Reed and Ones (2006) found most exercise appears to result in
improvements of affect from pre- to post-exercise measurements (d = 0.47). However, the most
favorable results occur after exercise durations between 20 and 35 minutes, producing moderate
effect sizes (ds = 0.46 – 0.57). Finally, improvements in affect seem to be the most meaningful
when assessments are given immediately after exercise (d = 0.61), with improvements becoming
less meaningful when more time has elapsed between the end of exercise and the assessment.
That is, improvements in affect appear to be the strongest when exercise ends, and dissipates as
individuals continue other activities of daily life. However, the ripple effect can result
significantly greater mood and affective states which may be experienced up to four hours after
exercise when compared to baseline, and this elevated subjective well-being can impact how an
individual interacts with others and interprets daily events (Berger et al., 2007),
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 22 Anaerobic exercise. Anaerobic exercise is mode and duration dependent. Typically
exercises short in duration (e.g., sprinting, weightlifting, etc.) are labeled as anaerobic. This
mode of exercise, by definition, occurs when the body goes through metabolic processes without
oxygen. In other words, the body movements are performed for a short enough duration where
the muscles rely on ATP-PCR and anaerobic glycolytic systems to produce ATP, as opposed to
aerobic systems, such as the electron-transport chain and the Kreb’s Cycle (Brown, Miller, &
Eason, 2006). Historically, the main focus of research has been to identify how aerobic exercise
impacts the mood of participants. This emphasis failed to analyze what impact an acute bout of
resistance training may have on affect. Thus, there has been a paucity of research on resistance
training’s impact on mood and affective states, yet it remains to be a popular form of exercise.
Based on the Berger and Tobar (2011) taxonomy, resistance training has many of the
characteristics of enjoyable activity. As they suggest, exercise that is enjoyable would be
associated with more desirable mood benefits than less enjoyable activities. Thus, it may be
possible to have an enjoyable resistance training session, which may be correlated with an
improvement in affect.
Raglin, Turner, and Eksten (1993) recruited 26 collegiate athletes to examine the
difference between aerobic and anaerobic activity on state anxiety. These participants had been
engaged in 6-8 weeks of a training program, which was not altered during the experimental
conditions. Participants exercised for 30 minutes in both conditions, either riding a stationary
cycle ergometer at 70-80% of the participant’s predicted maximum heart rate or weightlifting at
70-80% of the participant’s one-repetition maximum (1RM). Each participant exercised in both
conditions, and the order of the conditions was randomized.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 23 Throughout the cycle ergometer trial, the participants pedaled at a rate of 80-90 RPM,
and the resistance of the ergometer was manipulated to maintain a steady pace and heart rate
(Raglin et al., 1993). During the resistance training condition, participants completed three sets
of six to ten repetitions of six or seven exercises, with a one to two minute rest between each
exercise. The researchers used a variant of Borg’s RPE scale, which provided verbal anchors
ranging from one (very, very easy) to seven (very, very hard), which was measured immediately
after each activity. The state portion of the STAI was completed before exercise, as well as
immediately, 20 minutes, and 60 minutes after exercise. Participants were allowed to leave the
research area after completing the 20-minute STAI assessment, but remained in the same
building to return for the final assessment. A between-groups ANOVA indicated an interaction
of condition by trial for state anxiety. An additional repeated measures ANOVA revealed
significant trial effects for both leg ergometry, and weight training. These results suggested that,
when compared to baseline scores, anxiety significantly increased immediately following weight
training but eventually returned to baseline at the 20 and 60-minute assessments (i.e., there were
no psychological benefits in the variables measured following weight training). Conversely,
cycle ergometry significantly reduced anxiety from the baseline measures, but only at 60 minutes
after the exercise (d = 0.49), as there were no significant differences at the 0- and 20-minute
assessments. Regarding the aerobic condition, the results are consistent with other research that
has observed decreased anxiety after exercise (Petrezzello et al., 1991), albeit, these significant
reductions occurred at a more delayed assessment point.
Arent, Alderman, Short, and Landers (2007) designed a study to examine affective
responses following resistance training only and the impact the environment could have on
affective responses. Their 23 regular-exercising male undergraduate participants completed three
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 24 testing conditions. The first condition was devised to calculate and determine participants’ 1RM
for various lifts. Participants then were randomized into two groups, one that would be allowed
to leave the facility after exercise, and the other which would have to stay. All participants
served as their own control, a condition that consisted of viewing a resistance-training techniques
video. Participation in the exercise and control conditions was counterbalanced to control for any
influence one trial might have on the other.
Participants completed the Activation-Deactivation Adjective Checklist (AD-ACL;
Thayer, 1989) and short-form of the state portion of the STAI before and at 5, 15, 30, 60, 90, and
120 minutes after each condition (Arent et al., 2007). Results revealed no evidence for
differences between the groups for measurements in the AD-ACL or STAI, but a main effect for
condition. That is, there were no significant differences in state anxiety between those who left
the facility and those that stayed, but there was a difference between the exercise and control
trials. Though state anxiety significantly increased immediately after exercise (ES = 0.50), at the
30-minute post-exercise mark it had returned to baseline. In fact, continued decreases after the
30-minute mark approached significance, and showed small effect sizes at 60, 90, and 120
minutes (ESs = -0.36, -0.29, and -0.28, respectively). An interaction of time and condition was
found, where those who exercise significantly reduced tension compared to baseline, with
moderate effect sizes at 60 minutes (ES = -0.60), 90 minutes (ES = -0.56), and 120 minutes (ES =
-0.46) while those in the control group experienced no significant changes in tension. Finally,
though insignificant, moderate effect sizes indicated participants in the exercise group may have
been feeling more calm at 5 (ES = 0.59) and 15 (ES = 0.62) minutes after exercise.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 25 Summary of Exercise and Subjective Well-being
The connection between exercise and acute mood changes is clear. When individuals
exercise, they show desirable changes in mood for an extended period of time following aerobic
activity, but some detriments may be seen after resistance training (e.g., increased state anxiety).
However, some researchers have found delayed reductions in anxiety, which may also occur in
other measures of mood. These short-term mood changes that occur after exercise can result in a
more positive appraisal of other daily events than if one did not exercise, and increase QoL. This
influence of mood alteration on unrelated daily events is known as the “ripple effect” (Berger et
al., 2007), and accentuates the need for prolonged measurements in mood following exercise.
Intensity and Subjective Well-being
Aerobic exercise. Following the Berger and Tobar (2011) taxonomy for enhancing the
psychological benefits of exercise, the selection of an appropriate intensity is an important
consideration for ensuring mood benefits. Typical measures of intensity include maximum heart
rate, heart rate reserve, maximum (VO2max), and peak aerobic capacity (VO2peak). Intensity can
be determined by working at a certain percentage of these measures (e.g., 70% VO2max).
Morgan et al. (1971) performed one of the original studies on intensity and mood. In two
investigations, Morgan and colleagues had participants exercise at specific target heart rates and
obtained depression and anxiety scores from participants post-exercise with the DACL and IPAT
anxiety battery. The researchers based their protocol on exercise inducing a blood lactate
response, at heart rates of 150, 160, 170, and 180 bpm. As metabolic demands increase the body
cannot take in the amount of oxygen needed to prevent pyruvate from converting to lactate,
causing an excess of lactate, which has been associated with increased anxiety symptoms (Pitts
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 26 & McClure, 1967). In addition, the researchers also looked at mode of exercise and compared the
aforementioned heart rates between treadmill and cycle ergometer groups.
The participants started by walking on the treadmill for one minute, at which time the
treadmill grade was increased by one percent. The researchers continued to increase the treadmill
grade until the participant’s heart rate reached the pre-determined level (e.g., 150, 160 bpm, etc.).
Participants then continued on the treadmill until they had completed a full mile. The protocol
was similar for those on the cycle ergometer, who began cycling at 50 rotations per minute
(rpm), with a resistance of 300 kpm/min, increasing this resistance by 300 kpm/min every 5
minutes until the predetermined heart rate was achieved. When the data were analyzed, there
were no significant differences in depression or anxiety between these groups as measured by the
DACL and IPAT, respectively.
However, there are some methodological limitations to the Morgan et al. (1971) study,
which primarily originate from the novelty of the field at the time. First, the researchers failed to
measure blood lactate levels, which may not have been at the level that was expected.
Furthermore, later studies discredited the Pitts and McClure (1967) hypothesis of blood lactate,
reducing the validity of the theoretical foundation of the study (see Grosz & Farmer, 1972 for a
review). Secondly, the researchers make no indication as to how long participants engaged in
physical activity once they reached the desired heart rate, and stated only that the participants
traveled for a total distance of one mile. Unfortunately, failing to control for length of exercise
time could have confounded the reported mood changes. Finally, because methods that estimate
maximum aerobic capacity have been found to have errors of up to 20% (Zwiren, Freedson,
Ward, Wilke, & Rippe, 1991), using heart rate may have resulted in participants exercising at
unintended intensities.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 27 In the second Morgan et al. (1971) study, participants engaged in a walking test in which
both anxiety and depression were measured with the IPAT Anxiety Battery and DACL,
respectively. These participants were assigned to one of three groups: a control group, a one-mile
walk at zero percent incline, and a one-mile walk at a five percent incline. Both walking trials
were performed at a speed of 3.5 mph, resulting in a total exercise time of 17 minutes. This
duration was also applied to the control condition. The researchers did not find significant
differences in affect between the two exercise groups.
The second Morgan et al. (1971) study had flaws, possibly due to the paucity of research
on intensity’s impact on mood. Primarily, using heart rate as the primary determinant of intensity
increases complexity. Exercise-induced heart rate adaptations can vary widely among
individuals, and though correlated with ratings of perceived exertion (RPE; Borg, 1982) and
VO2, it is not the only factor impacting intensity. Second, as mentioned earlier, some
measurements have been criticized for their inability to reflect subtle changes in mood states.
Later, Berger and Owen (1998) aimed to control the heart rate condition by having
participants exercise at 50%, 65%, and 80% of their age predicted heart rate max (HRmax) to
observe the interaction of intensity and mood. The researchers relied on the POMS to measure
mood changes between pre- and post-exercise, and recruited 41 males and 50 females from a
large university, who were given four weeks to develop cardiovascular endurance. Participants
completed the POMS before and after exercise during the sixth, ninth, and twelfth weeks of the
semester, which allowed for a cross-over, counterbalanced design, where all participants
performed exercise at all three intensities.
Originally, Berger and Owen (1998) hoped to examine the difference in mood alterations
elicited by low, moderate, and high intensities. However, because the participants monitored
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 28 their own heart rate every quarter-mile, actual heart rate averages became 55%, 75%, and 79%,
respectively. This became an issue when the average heart rates were different than planned, as
75% and 79% HRmax are very similar, and the authors acknowledge these as both being within
the moderate intensity range. POMS subscales differed significantly from pre- to post-exercise
measurements in the desirable directions with the smallest changes occurring in anger (d ≤ .22)
and all others resulting in moderate changes (ds ≥ 0.23). Though the exercise was unable to elicit
the desired heart rates, the findings of significantly improved mood states were consistent with
other research (Ekkekakis et al., 2011).
In an attempt to add to what had been found with mood following exercise, Dunn and
McAuley (2000) examined the association between post-exercise mood states and measurements
observed during exercise. The researchers recruited 42 college aged, low-active females to
answer this question. The participants completed peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) tests to
determine intensity in the two experimental trials. After participants’ VO2peak was determined,
the participants were scheduled for two randomly assigned, experimental trials; one which would
be ran at 60% VO2peak, and the other at 80% VO2peak. During both of these conditions,
researchers monitored participants’ heart rate and RPE to provide two additional measures of
intensity.
Dunn and McAuley (2000) used two self-efficacy scales to gauge efficacy for the
walking and jogging groups. These scales were completed on a 0 to 100 percentage hierarchy,
where participants ranked how likely it was they would be able to complete a walk or jog at a
specific intensity, for a specified amount of time. The researchers also used two exercise feeling
surveys to evaluate mood: the SEES and the EFI. When performing moderate and high intensity
workouts, participants engaged in 20 minutes of exercise at 60 or 80% of VO2peak, respectively.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 29 Intensity levels were monitored by heart rate and verbal estimates of RPE. Before and after each
session, participants completed the self-efficacy and affect scales. Additional affective measures
were taken at the midpoint of exercise and 20 minutes post-exercise.
Dunn and McAuley’s (2000) results showed significantly different patterns of change
among the subscales for the two intensities. Moderate-intensity exercise produced a significant
increase in positive well-being during exercise to 20 minutes post-exercise (d = 0.27). In the
vigorous condition positive well-being was significantly lower at baseline (d = 0.54), during
exercise (d = 0.60), and immediately post-exercise (d = 0.28) when compared to 20 minutes
post-exercise. Psychological distress was significantly reduced at the 20-minute mark compared
to baseline in the moderate intensity condition (d = 0.57), but was only significantly reduced in
the vigorous intensity when comparing the 20-minute post-exercise measure to immediately
post-exercise (d = 0.34). Finally, moderate intensity exercise resulted in significant reductions in
fatigue during (d = 0.50), immediately after (d = 0.38), and 20-minutes post-exercise (d = 0.51)
when compared to baseline, while fatigue was only significantly reduced in the vigorous group
from immediately post-exercise to 20-minutes post-exercise. This significant increase in positive
well-being and decreases in psychological distress and fatigue has been supported by some
researchers (e.g., Blanchard, Rodgers, Courneya, & Spence, 2002; Blanchard et al., 2001), but
refuted by others (e.g., Ekkekakis et al., 2011). This discrepancy may be due to scales used, or
other methodological considerations (e.g., populations observed, timing of scale administration),
or it may be the result of recruitment procedures that led to the observation of participants with
different preferred exercise modes and intensities (Lane, Jackson, & Terry, 2005; Miller,
Bartholomew, & Springer, 2005).
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 30 Because Dunn and McAuley (2000) measured VO2peak, exercise intensities were more
likely to be performed at the prescribed level. However, the mean RPE values that were collected
suggested that the participants perceived both exercise bouts as being of a lighter intensity than
what was prescribed, with ratings of 12.67 and 9.17 for the vigorous and moderate conditions,
respectively. These lower than expected reported ratings might be contributed to VO2peak being
slightly different from maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max). Alternatively, but unlikely, this
group may have responded differently to RPE as a result of an unknown characteristic of the
sample or study. Additionally, the validity of the EFI (e.g., Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 2001a) and
the SEES (e.g., Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 2001b) has been criticized, weakening the results.
In a similar fashion, Cox et al. (2004) compared state anxiety in participants after
moderate- run and high-intensity runs. However, unlike the previous investigation that studied
low-active women, Cox and colleagues observed how 24 active women responded to the two
different intensities. The 12 younger (M = 18.6 yrs) and 12 older (M = 40.2 yrs) women engaged
in either moderate or intense exercise at 60% or 80% VO2max, respectively. As stated by the
researchers, the rationale in choosing the intensities involved the assumption most participants
would be below lactate threshold at 60% VO2max, and near or above this level at 80% VO2max.
However, the researchers acknowledged they did not draw blood lactate, so this may not have
been true for some participants.
State anxiety, as measured by the STAI, was assessed over time and Cox et al. (2004)
hypothesized that the high intensity group would see anxiolytic effects similar to the moderate
intensity group. After obtaining the participants’ VO2max scores, researchers scheduled the first
of the three experimental sessions approximately one week later. During these sessions,
participants completed the STAI and either rested (i.e., the control condition), or participated in a
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 31 treadmill running test at either 60% or 80% of their VO2max. Both bouts of exercise were
performed for 33 minutes, with the first 2 minutes used as a warm up, followed by 8 minutes
during which the speed was gradually increased until the participant reached their randomly
assigned intensity. Once this intensity was achieved, the participant ran for 20 minutes, followed
by a 3-minute cool-down. Participants were then asked to relax in a quiet room and were allowed
to read National Geographic Explorer and Better Homes and Gardens between administrations
of the STAI.
Approximately five minutes after completing the session, while in the quiet room, the
participants completed the STAI, and again at thirty, sixty, and ninety minutes after exercise
(Cox et al., 2004). Results indicated scores for the two exercise groups significantly changed
over time (η2 = .48), and there was a significant interaction between intensity and time (η2 = .19).
That is, the 60% VO2max condition resulted in significantly lower STAI scores 5 minutes after
exercise (η2 = .34), but no significant changes occurred in state anxiety in the subsequent
assessments, while the 80% VO2max condition resulted in the greatest significant reduction in
STAI scores 90 minutes post-exercise (η2 = .56). Essentially, the researchers found that STAI
scores significantly declined in both the 60% and 80% VO2max conditions, but not in the control
group, where participants relaxed in a chair placed on the treadmill for 33 minutes before moving
to the quiet room. However, they did see a delayed anxiolytic effect in the 80% VO2max, in that
no evidence supported reductions in anxiety 5 minutes after exercise, but significant decreases
were observed at the 30-minute assessment. The 80% VO2max group continued to benefit from
this delayed effect through the 90-minute post-exercise assessment, when state anxiety was
significantly reduced to its lowest point. Alternatively, reported anxiety scores were the lowest
30 minutes after exercise in the control and 60% VO2max groups. The small to moderate effect
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 32 size (d = 0.33) between the two groups 90 minutes post-exercise indicate slightly meaningful
differences in anxiety between moderate- and high-intensity exercise.
The results reported by Cox et al. (2004) are different than what the literature would
suggest. Moderate intensity exercise typically has been associated with optimal benefits for
psychological benefits, but in this study it was found that intense exercise resulted in a
significant reduction in anxiety, though not immediate, but over time (η2 = .45). However,
participants’ preferred exercise intensity was not measured, and all participants regularly
engaged in physical activity, both of which may have contributed to the results. This finding
suggests moderate exercise is most beneficial for acquiring immediate changes in mood;
however, intense exercise could result in delayed, but prolonged, mood changes of a greater
magnitude.
Following up on their 2004 study, Cox, Thomas, Hinton, and Donahue (2006) observed
how different intensities influence both positive and negative affect as measured by the SEES
over time. Similar to their previous study (Cox et al., 2004), VO2max was measured in a sample
of 12 younger (M = 18.6 yrs) and 12 older women (M = 40.2 yrs) who ran at either 60% or 80%
of their VO2max. Each participant engaged in both exercise intensities, as well as a control
condition, where each condition lasted for 33 minutes and was performed in a counterbalanced
fashion. Higher intensity exercise was associated with a significant and larger effect on positive
affect, both immediately and over time, compared to moderate intensity exercise. However, there
were no significant differences between the groups for the two other subscales of the SEES:
perceived fatigue and psychological distress. These results are a contradiction to recommended
guidelines that promote moderate exercise over high intensity exercise for increasing positive
affect.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 33 However, Cox et al. (2006) acknowledged that certain measures of the SEES could not be
correlated with other mood inventories. For example, it would be intuitive that psychological
distress as measured by the SEES would be comparable to state anxiety as measured by the
STAI, but there was no relationship between the two measures. Without similarities between
measures, it becomes difficult to compare results between studies. One would expect a delayed
decrease in psychological distress in this study, but when compared to the control group, neither
exercise group achieved this benefit. That is, the results suggest that psychological distress and
anxiety are separate constructs.
Ekkekakis and Lind (2006) recruited 25 women who had been sedentary for the past
year, and were just beginning an exercise program. Based on body mass index (BMI), the
investigators split participants into overweight (n = 16; BMI = 31 kg/m2) and normal-weight (n =
9; BMI = 22 kg/m2) groups. The participants first came in for a session where peak oxygen
uptake and peak heart rate were determined using an incremental treadmill test. In the second
session the women were allowed to choose what speed on the treadmill felt comfortable for
them, and manipulate the speed every 5 minutes during the 20-minute long session. That is,
participants were able to self-select a running pace for the entire session, and change it as they
saw fit. The imposed-intensity condition was then performed at a speed 10% higher than the self-
selected pace. That is, researchers manipulated the speed of the treadmill at the respective time
points (i.e., 0, 5, 10, and 15 minutes into activity), which resulted in participants running at a
speed 10% higher than the self-selected pace at equivalent time points. The participants reported
RPE and pleasure-displeasure, measured by the FS, during both 20-minute exercise sessions.
Ekkekakis and Lind (2006) found that the women did not differ significantly on the FS in
the self-selected session, though the overweight women were working closer to their peak
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 34 capacity and reported higher RPEs during the self-selected condition. The results were different
for the imposed-intensity session. The overweight women reported a significant decrease on the
FS (i.e., increased displeasure) from baseline at 10 minutes (d = 0.69), 15 minutes (d = 0.80), and
20 minutes (d = 0.90), whereas the normal-weight women responded with scores statistically
similar to what they reported during the self-selected pace. Alternatively, other research has
shown sedentary individuals of a normal weight may also experience displeasure after imposed
intensities (Lind, Ekkekakis, & Vazou, 2008).
Though Ekkekakis and Lind (2006) did not measure pleasure-displeasure immediately
post-exercise, previous studies have shown positive affect may increase while negative affect
decreases following exercise (e.g., Dunn & McAuley, 2000). Adding to the complexity of the
issue, others have shown conflicting results, where some constructs of feeling do not change
following exercise (e.g., Revitalization; Treasure & Newbery, 1998), but this may be due to
differences in method. Only taking measures during exercise gives some insight as to what the
participants might have been feeling while participating in the activity; however, measuring the
pleasure-displeasure the overweight women were feeling five minutes post-exercise would have
been of value.
To further analyze the preferred (i.e., self-selected) intensity, and its difference between
high- and low-intensity exercise, Schneider et al. (2009) recruited 24 regular exercisers (female n
= 9, male n = 15). The researchers had participants exercise at 50-55%, 80-85% VO2peak, and a
preferred intensity within 2 weeks of determining VO2peak. Participants exercised for a duration
that was normal for them, and the inter-participant exercise duration ranged from 21 to 60
minutes, with intra-individual durations remaining constant for the three trials. Participants
reported mood before, immediately after, and 15 minutes post-exercise using the Feelfinder
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 35 portion of the MoodMeter developed by Verfassung (as cited in Schneider, 2009). The
Feelfinder scores participants’ overall perceived psychological strain, which is further divided
into four subscales of calmness, positive mood, recovery, and relaxation. After working at a high
intensity, participants reported a significantly lower perceived psychological strain immediately
following exercise, which was different from both pre- and 15-minutes post-exercise
assessments. This bout also resulted in significantly greater levels of calmness 15 minutes post-
exercise. The preferred intensity bout resulted in a significant decrease in participants’ sense of
recovery immediately following exercise, while the low intensity bout resulted in no significant
changes. These varying responses following bouts of different intensities shows a possible value
of high-intensity exercise for mood states, and may indicate that individuals choose to exercise at
lower exertion levels over intensities that could lead to psychological benefits. The chosen
intensities may be selected due to subjective interpretations of immediate physiological
responses (e.g., muscle soreness, heart rate) rather than expectations of delayed psychological
benefits.
Anaerobic exercise. Arent, Landers, Matt, and Etnier (2005) attempted to answer the
question of anaerobic intensity’s impact on anxiety and activation in a sample of active, male (n
= 15) and female (n = 16) undergraduates. All participants participated in three strength training
sessions and one control condition after pre-determining 10 repetition maximums (10-RM). The
participants engaged in three sets of ten reps, with 90 seconds of rest between sets, for bench
press, lat pulldown, shoulder press, seated row, triceps extension, and biceps curl at low (40%
10-RM), moderate (70% 10-RM), and high (100% 10-RM) intensities. The researchers used the
STAI, AD-ACL, and PANAS to measure state anxiety, energy-tiredness/tension-calmness, and
positive/negative affect, respectively. Participants completed these measures immediately before
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 36 and 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes following exercise. Using a trapezoidal method and adjusting
for baseline values, Arent and colleagues discovered significantly lower reported anxiety after
the moderate intensity session compared to all other sessions. Moderate intensity produced the
only significant increase in positive affect, while participants reported a significant increase in
negative affect following the high intensity bout. Moderate intensity produced the only
significant increase in calmness, and was the only session that did not significantly increase
tiredness and decrease energy. These findings are consistent with some of the research on
aerobic training (Ekkekakis et al., 2011) and highlight the ability of moderate-intensity weight
training as a method of affect and mood regulation, provided adequate rest periods are taken to
ensure recovery between sets of resistance training.
However, different weight training protocols call for various rest periods between sets,
and it could be possible that varying rest period durations could influence affective changes
following weight training. Bibeau, Moore, Mitchell, Vargas-Tonsing, and Bartholomew (2010)
monitored how resistance training of different intensities and various rest period durations
concomitantly moderates changes anxiety and affect. College-aged men (n = 58) and women (n
= 46) were divided into one control group who received no intervention and four experimental
groups, who all engaged in chest press, seated row, leg press, and hamstring curl exercises. The
four experimental groups were developed based on intensity and length of rest periods (e.g., low-
long, low-short, high-long, and high-short). Groups working at high intensities performed 3 sets
of 6-7 reps at 80-85% of their 1RM, while the low intensity groups performed 3 sets of 10-11
reps at 50-55% 1RM. Rest periods lasted for 30 and 90 seconds for the short and long rest
groups, respectively. State anxiety, measured by the STAI, and the PANAS, used to gauge
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 37 positive and negative affect, were completed before exercise, and at five, twenty, and forty
minutes after.
ANCOVAs revealed no significant interactions for gender and affect, allowing the
researchers to collapse the data, and analyze positive and negative affect changes for the entire
sample (Bibeau et al., 2010). Positive affect showed a main effect for group (η2 = .11), and the
low intensity, long rest group reported significantly greater positive affect than the control group.
A main effect was also shown for time (η2 = .06) with participants reporting greater positive
affect 5 minutes after exercise compared to both 20 and 40 minutes after exercise. A significant
main effect for time (η2 = .08) indicated state anxiety was greatest 5 minutes following exercise,
which was significantly higher than reported measures at 20 and 40 minutes following exercise.
The high-short group was the only group that reported significantly higher anxiety scores than
the control group, and there were no significant findings regarding negative affect, indicating
that high-intensity training does not always result in increases of negative affect. Positive affect
was significantly higher in all groups compared to the control group and confirmed high intensity
weight training can still influence positive affect while having short resting periods. Finally, low
intensity and long rest produced the highest levels of positive affect only at 5 minutes after
exercise. Though previous research has found low intensity resistance training resulted in
decreases in positive affect (see Arent et al., 2007), the researchers noted this may be due to
Arent and colleagues selecting aerobically trained individuals who found resistance training
uninteresting.
Summary of Intensity and Subjective Well-being
Results of studies within the realm of exercise intensity and mood support that an optimal
level of intensity produces the greatest enhancements in mood. Yet researchers have been unable
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 38 to agree on what intensity should be prescribed, as there are other forces that influence mood.
The inability to determine a specific intensity appears to exist in both aerobic and anaerobic
modes, but that does not take away from the fact that all exercise intensities can result in varying
levels of desirable mood alterations. However, exercise intensity does have an impact on acute
mood changes, with moderate intensity exercise resulting in immediate mood and affective
benefits (Dunn & McAuley, 2000), and high intensity typically being associated with delayed
improvements, as reported by Arent et al. (2007). In some cases, the delayed benefits may occur
at a stronger magnitude of change than moderate intensity, as seen by Cox et al. (2004). In
regards to resistance training, high intensity is associated with increased positive affect, but not
at the same magnitude as low intensity weight lifting with longer rest periods. These studies
provide strong evidence why overweight and/or sedentary individuals who make commitments
to become more active may elect not to continue exercise programs. Individuals with a high
perceived ability who enroll in a class where intensity is selected for them, as opposed to
gradually increasing intensity, may experience a divergence between their true performance
capabilities and their expected ability. This could lead to frustration for the exerciser and result in
lower intrinsic motivation, and a decision to drop out of the class (Markland, 1999). For
example, a former high school athlete who has not been physically active through college may
attempt exercise at the same intensity and strength level they were doing in high school. This
individual may get discouraged and eventually quit after discovering he or she is not as fit, or are
not able to exercise at the levels at which one was accustomed.
Individual Differences and Subjective Well-being
Adding to the complexity of the exercise-affect relationship, individual differences may
play a role in the experiences exercisers have during and after physical activity (Ekkekakis et al.,
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 39 2011). For example, McGowen, Miller, and Henschen (1990) recruited 107 karateka (i.e.,
individuals who practice the art of karate) and asked them to complete the POMS prior to a state
tournament and a regional competition. Segregating the participants by belt colors (a ranking
system devised in the karate system, based on expertise in the art) resulted in groups of highly
experienced, experienced, moderately experienced, and novice. Prior to the state tournament,
novices scored significantly lower in fatigue than the highly experienced (d = .73). Prior to the
regional tournament, novices again scored significantly lower on fatigue compared to the
moderately experienced (d = 0.71), experienced (d = 0.77), and highly experienced (d = 1.07).
The differences in mood states between the different levels of experience, albeit prior to activity,
may indicate these groups may experience different changes in mood and affect during and after
activity. Additionally, the evaluative and competitive nature of the setting may have confounded
the results, depending on participants’ perception of the environment (Focht & Hausenblas,
2004).
Treasure and Newbery (1998) proposed there might be an additional factor to consider
when looking at intensity: self-efficacy. Framing their study in Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive
theory, the investigators aimed to discover if differences in self-efficacy could predict mood
changes following moderate and high intensity exercise. The researchers recruited 42 female and
18 male sedentary undergraduate students. Not participating in regular exercise for the preceding
6 months would allow for the minimization of previous experience impacting self-efficacy, and
provide more clear results. The researchers randomly assigned the participants to three different
conditions: moderate-intensity exercise at 45-50% age-predicted Heart Rate Reserve (HRR);
high-intensity exercise at 70-75% HRR; and the non-exercise control group. Each exercise
condition lasted 15 minutes and participants completed the EFI 30 seconds before the exercise
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 40 ended and 15 minutes post-exercise. Participants in the control group completed the EFI at the
same time points, and did not take any self-efficacy measures. To assess self-efficacy in the
exercise groups, 5 minutes into and 15 minutes after the exercise, participants indicated how
confident they were in their ability to perform the randomly assigned intensity on a scale
anchored at 0 (no confidence at all) and 100 (completely confident) for a certain amount of time
(e.g., 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes).
Internal consistencies Cronbach’s α scores ranged between .79 and .91 for the subscales
of the EFI, and were .96 and .93 for in-task and post-exercise measurements of self-efficacy,
respectively (Treasure & Newberry, 1998). Moderate exercisers significantly increased their
positive engagement, revitalization, and tranquility, while the high intensity group saw
significant increases in positive engagement, physical exhaustion, and a decrease in tranquility. It
also was determined that high self-efficacy acts as a buffer to feelings of physical exhaustion in
high intensity exercise, accounting for 15% of the variance in the measure. Though there were no
significant findings at post-exercise between the two exercise conditions in the subscales of
positive engagement, revitalization, and tranquility, the researchers failed to implement an
exercise duration that typically is used to see psychological benefits (Berger & Motl, 2000).
Considering the exercise condition lasted 15 minutes as opposed to the generally accepted 20- to
40-minute duration, it is possible 5 additional minutes of exercise may have been associated
different mood alterations.
Self-efficacy, however, can be established via several mechanisms, including experience
in a task (Feltz, Short, & Sullivan, 2007). Focht and Koltyn (1999) examined the experience and
mood relationship by recruiting 42 experienced and 42 inexperienced weight lifters. The
experienced group had been participating in weight training for 3.19 years compared to the 0.12
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 41 years for the inexperienced group. These exercisers were randomly assigned to one of three
conditions: (a) 50% 1RM acute resistance exercise; (b) 80% 1RM acute resistance exercise; or
(c) a control condition, after completing a 1RM. Participants completed the POMS and STAI
prior to exercise, and again 20, 60, 120, and 180 minutes after exercise.
Results from the Focht and Koltyn (1999) study indicated that there was no statistical
differences between the two experience levels, however, there were changes over time.
Significant reductions in state anxiety were observed in the 50% 1RM from baseline to 180
minutes post-exercise (ES = 0.70), but not in the 80% 1RM or control groups (ES = 0.57).
Participants also reported significant reductions in depression 180 minutes post-exercise
compared to baseline in the 50% 1RM group (ES = 0.57), but again, not in the 80% 1RM group
(ES = 0.45). These results were similar to the findings for anger and confusion in the 50% 1RM
group, with ESs at 180 minutes of 0.48 and 0.62, respectively. Though these results indicated a
moderate intensity resulted in more desirable changes in mood and state anxiety than a high
intensity, there appeared to be improvements in the high intensity group. Though not statistically
significant, moderate to large ESs for anger (ES = 0.45) and confusion (ES = 0.46) were seen in
the 80% 1RM group. Furthermore, the fact that there were no significant differences between the
inexperienced and experienced group following exercise, no assessment of initial fitness level
was obtained. It may have also been beneficial to observe mood and anxiety during exercise, as
there may be distinctions between exercisers while they are participating in an activity.
One main difference that occurs among exercisers is their current level of fitness. It
would be hypothesized that, at the same workload, those who are more fit would experience
greater mood benefits than those who are less fit (Lochbaum, Karoly, & Landers, 2004). To test
this hypothesis, Lochbaum et al. (2004) recruited 28 aerobically active and 25 inactive
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 42 participants. The researchers had participants complete a health history questionnaire, after
which they were divided into groups based on activity level and exercised to determine their
VO2max. VO2max was statistically different between groups, with the active and inactive means
being 49.92 and 39.90 ml/kg/min, respectively. Participants then were scheduled to return
another day, when they completed the AD-ACL before exercising in the experimental
conditions. Once this measurement was taken, the participants exercised at two different
intensities, either 55% of VO2max, or 70% VO2max for 30 minutes, and took the AD-ACL three
times during exercise: at the 5th, 15th, and 20th minutes. Finally, participants took the AD-ACL
three more times, immediately after completing exercise, as well as ten and twenty minutes post-
exercise. Throughout the course of the study, active participants consistently scored significantly
higher in positive affect than those who were considered inactive during the course of exercise.
All participants scored significantly higher in positive affect after exercise compared to what
they experienced during exercise.
Though one main purpose of the Lochbaum et al. (2004) study was to view differences in
affect between high and low intensities during exercise, the 70% VO2max condition was unable
elicit heart rates which would be considered high intensity, though this condition was
significantly different than the 55% VO2max group in an exercise manipulation check (164.64 ±
15.14 bpm and 143.80 ± 15.41 bpm, respectively). This incongruity highlights the issue of
defining exercise intensity, a methodological issue that is currently being discussed. That is,
there are currently multiple methods of defining intensity, from estimations of predicted HRmax
to exercising at specific percentages of VO2max (ACSM, 2011). As the ACSM noted, each
method has benefits and drawbacks, citing the ease of obtaining the measure and the accuracy of
the measure as considerations for researchers.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 43 Cox et al. (2006), as discussed above, also incorporated age and iron status as a predictor
and co-variable, respectively. Iron status was controlled for due the association between iron
deficiency and lowered aerobic performance (DellaValle, 2013), and the possibility of this
association impacting mood states of female exercisers. Though no statistical differences were
originally observed between the age groups, when iron status was controlled for there were
interactions between age and intensity, as well as between age, intensity, and time (η2 = .17).
Younger women compared to older women experienced significantly higher psychological
distress in the high-intensity condition in general as well as over time. Another significant
interaction effect was seen between age, intensity, and time for well-being (η2 = .10). Older
women reported significant increases in well-being over time, while the younger women
reported consistent levels of well-being. Older women also reported greater increases in well-
being from baseline to post-exercise compared to the younger women, when exercising at 80%
VO2max, while the younger women reported greater increases in well-being compared to the older
women from baseline to post-exercise when exercising in the 60% VO2max condition.
Considering that age may have an impact on mood changes in intense exercise, Hoffman
and Hoffman (2008) studied a middle-aged adult population. The researchers created three
groups: nonexercisers (n = 16), regular moderate exercisers (n = 16), and ultramarathon runners
(n = 16) to see if there was a dose response relationship between activity levels and mood. After
completing the POMS before exercise, the participants were allowed to adjust the speed on a
treadmill until they reached an RPE of 9 for 5 minutes and then they increased their speed until
their RPE was at 13. This speed was maintained for 20 minutes, at which point it was reduced
until the participant reported an RPE of 9. The participants completed the final five minutes of
the exercise trial at this speed, then rested for five minutes and repeated the POMS.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 44 Interpretation of the Hoffman and Hoffman (2008) results was complicated, primarily
because the POMS includes six subscales: tension, depression, anger, vigor, fatigue, and
confusion. Nonexercisers reported a decrease in depression and anger, which may be attributed
to this group reporting higher baseline scores in these subscales. The most robust differences
were seen in the subscales of vigor and fatigue, which is a typical response following exercise.
Vigor significantly increased the most in the ultramarathon group, and slightly increased for the
exercisers, while there was no change in this measurement for nonexercisers. The subscale of
fatigue followed a similar pattern, where the greatest decrease was seen in the ultramarathon
runners, modest decreases observed in the moderate group, and the nonexercisers reported no
changes. Confusion was significantly reduced for both the ultramarathon runners and moderate
exercisers, and all groups, regardless of activity level, saw similar significant decreases in
reported amounts of tension. There were no significant differences between genders. Finally, all
groups benefitted from lower mean total mood disturbance after exercise, with scores reduced in
the ultramarathoners by 21 points, moderate exercisers by 16, and nonexercisers by 9.
The results of the Hoffman and Hoffman (2008) study may partially explain why half the
people who start an exercise program drop out, and at the same time why those who have made
exercise a major component of their life continue to by physically active. Nonexercisers who do
not receive strong, positive mood changes immediately may not be motivated to continue with
exercise though in doing so they would eventually receive these benefits. Exercisers who have
remained active throughout their life are reinforced for their behavior by continuing exercise. For
example, an individual who consistently exercises throughout college is more likely to remain
active in their lifetime compared to one who is inactive in college (Berger et al., 2007). However,
there are some concerns with the use of the POMS; namely there is only one measure of positive
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 45 mood, vigor. Hoffman and Hoffman (2008) mention that there was only a small increase in vigor
in the nonexercisers, when this subscale usually results in the most substantial changes. Though
the POMS has repeatedly been tested, it focuses primarily on negative mood measures, and other
positive changes may have been occurring, which were not measured by the POMS. The results,
however small, are supported by other studies of active and inactive participants (Dunn &
McAuley, 2000; Lochbaum et al., 2004).
Summary of Individual Differences and Subjective Well-being
Though researchers strive to discover the most generalizable interventions, it is important
to investigate individual differences that influence mood changes through exercise. These factors
can play a major role in how clinicians prescribe exercise to clients, as it is obvious not everyone
will respond the same way to exercise. The research suggests that those who are more active,
closer to a normal body weight, have higher self-efficacy, and regular iron levels might see
greater mood benefits and be protected from mood detriments of high intensity exercise
compared to those with less desirable levels of these measures. By monitoring activity level and
body weight, an exercise scientist can construct a program to ensure positive mood changes, thus
increasing the likelihood for exercise adherence.
Exercise Enjoyment and Subjective Well-being
When considering individual differences within the realm of mood changes following
exercise, it is import to discuss exercise enjoyment. Knowing that individuals have different
preferred exercise intensities (Schneider et al., 2009) and modes (Lane et al., 2005; Miller et al.,
2005), it stands to reason these preferences are based on the fact the exercise is enjoyable to that
individual. Exercise enjoyment is also an integral part of the Berger and Tobar (2011) taxonomy
for enhancing the psychological benefits of exercise, and typically is measured by the physical
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 46 activity enjoyment scale (PACES; Kendzierski & DeCarlo, 1991), with higher scores indicating
greater levels of enjoyment.
To examine the moderating effect of enjoyment on exercise and mood, Motl, Berger, and
Leuschen (2000) recruited 95 male volunteers. Participants were enrolled in either a rock-
climbing class or a health education class that included a lecture and video on rock-climbing.
Prior to the session, participants completed the POMS as a baseline measure. After completing
either the class or rock-climbing session, researchers administered the POMS and PACES. The
results of the study indicated the rock-climbing condition resulted in greater improvements in
mood than the health education class and tension, depression, and vigor were significantly
moderated by enjoyment. That is, these findings suggest the enjoyment of an activity can
influence the extent to which an individual experiences mood alterations following the activity.
Raedeke (2007) attempted to clarify the relationship between enjoyment and affective
responses following exercise. In his initial study, 105 female students from a group fitness class
were recruited. Participants completed the short version of the POMS prior to 5-10 minute warm
up, then completed 30 minutes of aerobic activity, and proceeded to a 5-10 minute cool down.
Participants then completed post-exercise PACES and POMS scales approximately five minutes
after the cool down. Though there were significant changes with moderate to large effects in
tension (ES = -0.38), depression (ES = -0.51) and fatigue (ES = -0.55), analyses revealed that
enjoyment was related to changes in vigor, which was impacted the greatest by exercise from
pre- to post-test (ES = 0.69). These findings are similar to other research on mood and exercise,
however the addition of enjoyment measures indicated that enjoyment helps explain some of the
variation in mood alterations following activity and the findings for enjoyment and vigor are
supported by previous findings (Motl et al., 2000).
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 47 In his second study, Raedeke (2007) transitioned from specific mood states to the more
general states of affect. Twenty-seven females in a corporate fitness program completed a
modified AD-ACL that included items of stress and arousal. Similar to the first study,
participants completed this modified AD-ACL and PACES prior to an exercise class, and again
following exercise. The results of the study revealed a large change in affect (ESs: energy = 0.89;
calmness = 0.69; tension = -1.03; and tiredness = -0.79) from pre- to post-test. Negative affect
decreased while positive affect increased. More importantly, enjoyment was correlated with an
elevated sense of energy after exercise, similar to the trend of enjoyment being associated with
positive affect.
Using an experimental design, Raedeke, Focht, and Scales (2009) studied females with
high social physique anxiety in which the 99 participants were randomly assigned to either a
health- or appearance-oriented aerobics class. The same instructor who wore loose fitting
clothing and made references to the health benefits of exercise in the health-oriented class taught
the appearance-oriented class, but instead wore tight fitting clothing, and emphasized
appearance-related issues. The two environments were selected due to the nature of high social
physique anxiety leading to more enjoyment in the health-focused class compared to the
appearance-oriented class. Prior to the class, participants completed three affect measures: FS,
EFI, and the Felt Arousal Scale (FAS; Svebak & Murgatroyd, 1985). These measures were
completed a second time along with a shortened state version of the PACES. The results revealed
support for enjoyment moderating affective changes as (a) participating in the health-oriented
class was associated with greater levels of enjoyment than the appearance-oriented class, (b) the
health-oriented class resulted in greater improvements in affect when controlling for baseline
scores compared to the appearance-oriented class, and (c) enjoyment was significantly correlated
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 48 when affective scores where standardized for the group. However, enjoyment appeared only to
impact responses on the FS and the subscale of revitalization and exhaustion on the EFI.
It is evident that enjoyment plays a partially moderating role in affect, and its inclusion in
the Berger and Tobar (2011) taxonomy for enhancing the psychological benefits of exercise
highlights the importance of the characteristic in influencing how individuals feel after
exercising. These results from research observing enjoyable activities are similar to studies
examining preferred exercise intensities and modes, thus enjoyment must be considered when
designing programs for individuals. However, it is still unclear whether exercise enjoyment is
innate or can increase through continued participation in an activity. That is, more research must
be completed to determine if exercise enjoyment is enhanced when individuals continue to
engage in an activity, even if the activity was not originally enjoyed.
Summary of Literature Review
Though typically fluctuating, moods can impact how we behave in our daily lives (Berger
et al., 2007), and having a more positive mood may enhance QoL. Exercise is one intervention
that can increase mood, be cost efficient, and result in additional physiological benefits.
However, there are many factors that may influence the effect of exercise on mood and affect,
including mode and practice considerations, individual differences, and levels of enjoyment.
Though moderate intensity exercise is typically the most beneficial for enhancing mood state,
individual responses to intense exercise, both aerobic and anaerobic in nature, can vary
depending on individual differences, experience, and enjoyment. These alterations in mood,
either detrimental or beneficial, will directly impact an individual’s choice to continue with an
exercise program, as well as their QoL (Berger et al., 2007; Berger & Tobar, 2011). In order to
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 49 further understand individual differences, the experience one has with certain exercise modes
must be taken into account.
CrossFit is a form of exercise that is growing in popularity, with this growth indicating
that individuals enjoy the activity. Many of the CrossFit workouts fit the criteria in the Berger
and Tobar (2011) taxonomy to enhance the psychological benefits of exercise. Anecdotally,
CrossFit is reported to induce abdominal breathing, encourage personal bests without
emphasizing interpersonal competition, and includes exercises that are rhythmical and repetitive.
It is a self-paced activity that usually lasts 20-30 minutes, and participants are encouraged to
workout approximately 5 days per week. The current study adds to the current literature by
examining an exercise protocol that includes both aerobic and resistance training, and attempts to
discover the influence of CrossFit experience on affect during and after exercise.
Additionally, changes in subjective well-being during and after CrossFit exercise has yet
to be examined in the literature, and for these purposes the PAAS was employed in the current
study to observe any general changes in affect, while still being capable of providing some
insight into some specific mood states. Furthermore, the brevity of the scale in comparison to
other scales (e.g., the 65-item POMS) allowed for less intrusive administration at various time
points. Furthermore, due to the small number of studies that have employed the PAAS, the FS
was included as an additional measure to observe the correlation between the two scales.
It is hypothesized that: (a) the experienced CrossFit participants, when compared to the
novices, will report fewer decrements in affect and pleasure, measured by the PAAS and FS,
respectively, during exercise; (b) the experienced CrossFit participants, when compared to the
novices, will report greater improvements in affect and pleasure after exercise; (c) the FS and
PAAS subscales will be correlated at all time points; (d) experienced CrossFit participants will
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 50 report lower RPE scores, measured by the Borg 6-20 scale, compared to the novice group at all
time points; (e) the experienced CrossFit participants, compared to the novice participants, will
report higher levels of state exercise enjoyment, measured by the PACES; and (f) both groups
will report similar levels of trait exercise enjoyment, measured by the PACES.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 51 CHAPTER III: METHOD
Participants
Participants (N = 29) were recruited from a community center Western Nebraska, where
individuals could choose from a number of activity options, including individually guided
exercise and instructor-led CrossFit classes. An a priori power analysis indicated a minimum of
22 participants would be needed to achieve a desired power of .80 at α = .05, with a moderate
effect size for the 2 x 6 repeated measures design. Participants were divided into novice (6 men;
7 women) and experienced (8 men; 8 women) groups, based on prior experience with the
CrossFit exercise routine. Those with less than or equal to one month of CrossFit experience
(including no experience) were considered novice, while experienced individuals were
participants who had used CrossFit as their primary form of exercise for the six months prior to
the study. Any individuals who reported participating in CrossFit between one and six months
were excluded, as were those who had participated in CrossFit for an extended period of time in
the past, but were not currently participating in CrossFit exercise. All participants were required
to have been exercising consistently (defined as 2-3 times/week, for a minimum of 20
minutes/session) for the past 6 months, and were considered low risk, based on the American
College of Sports Medicine’s (ACSM, 2010) Risk Stratification.
Participant characteristics are shown in Table 1. Ages ranged between 18 and 54 years
and were comparable between the groups. Weight and BMI did not differ between groups, and
both groups had been exercising for a similar number of months prior to the study. However, the
experienced CrossFit group reported exercising more days each week than the novice group.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 52 Table 1 Participant Characteristics
Variable Experienced (n = 16)
Novice (n = 13) t-statistic p-value d
Age (years) 32.1 ± 10.9 34.2 ± 12.7 0.462 0.648 0.17 Days/week Exercise 5.6 ± 0.7 4.9 ± 0.8 2.308 0.029 0.86
Months exercisinga 53.5 ± 28.4 44.3 ± 28.6 0.692 0.498 0.32 BMI (kg/m2) 24.36 ± 2.54 25.54 ± 2.96 1.154 0.259 0.43
Note. Values listed as M ± 1 s, df = 27. a Data presented are from 19 participants who responded to the “how long have you been exercising” item with a numerical value, df = 17. Instruments
Demographic data sheet. A demographic questionnaire gathered information on
participants’ age, sex, height, and weight. Participants also were requested to list their usual
exercise mode, current exercise patterns, the number of months they had been exercising
consistently, and months of experience with CrossFit, if applicable. This sheet was coded with a
number that tied each participant to his or her completed informed consent document.
This document included the ACSM Risk Stratification (2010), which prompted
individuals to respond to various health-related items. In order to assess their cardiovascular
disease risk, participants provided a history of blood relatives’ heart disease, sudden death,
coronary revascularization, and other exercise-related health issues. Another portion of the
questionnaire requested a personal health history, where participants provided insight to their
current health behaviors, including tobacco use, sedentary lifestyle, blood pressure, cholesterol,
levels of blood lipoproteins, and diabetes. Participants also were asked if they had ever had heart
attacks, angina, depression, or any surgeries to ensure the safety of the individual. See Appendix
A for the full document.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 53 Exertion. The Rating of Perceived Exertion scale (RPE; Borg, 1982) is a subjective
measure of effort used to assess physical strain. The scale ranges in values from 6 (very, very
light) to 20 (very, very hard). RPE is considered a gestalt measure, as participants provide a
value that represents how they feel overall, allowing muscle fatigue, heart rate, and respiratory
rate to all influence a response. Due to the ecological nature of the study, heart rate was the only
measure of physiological intensity in this study, and was observed using telemetered heart rate
monitors (Polar Inc., Port Washington, New York, USA) placed around participants’ torsos.
Participants’ HRmax was calculated using the age-prediction equation (HRmax = 220 – age), and
%HRmax was determined by dividing HR by HRmax.
Since heart rate is one of many variables considered in perception, Borg developed the
scale to be associated with heart rate. Thus, the scale was developed to coincide with heart rates,
such that an individual’s reported value is multiplied by ten to estimate heart rate (e.g., 6 on the
RPE scale corresponds to a heart rate of 60 bpm, 7 with 70 bpm, etc.). Furthermore, RPE has a
positive, linear relationship with exercise intensity (Borg, 1982). In a meta-analysis, Chen, Fan,
and Moe (2002) reported a correlation between heart rate and RPE for adults of r = .64 ± .016,
and observed that 25 of 31 (81%) studies reported coefficients of correlation of r ≥ .50 for RPE
and VO2max. The scale has been found to be reliable in monitoring and evaluating exercise
tolerance in healthy adults and other populations (see Faulkner & Eston, 2008 for a review), and
its use within resistance training research has been validated (Lagally & Amorose, 2007). See
Appendix B for the full scale.
Affect. The Physical Activity Affect Scale (PAAS; Lox et al., 2000) is a 12-item
inventory that is divided into four subscales of positive affect, negative affect, fatigue, and
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 54 tranquility. The items are ranked on a 5-point scale anchored at 0 (Do not feel) and 4 (Feel very
strongly), and the scales are used to measure feelings in that moment.
Though it has not been used extensively in research, the scale lends insight into two
positive states (positive affect, tranquility) and two negative states (negative affect, fatigue),
making it an evenly balanced scale. It was designed for use in exercising populations and has
been found to be reliable in other studies (Kwan & Bryan, 2010; Lox et al., 2000).
Original research on the PAAS demonstrated Cronbach alpha coefficients of .94, .86, .91,
and .84 for the subscales of positive affect, negative affect, fatigue, and tranquility, respectively
(Lox et al., 2000). These findings are consistent with current research using the PAAS to
measure intra- and post-exercise affect, and yields subscale α’s ≥ .84 (e.g., Kwan & Bryan,
2010). The full scale can be viewed in Appendix C.
Exercise enjoyment. The Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES; Kendzierski &
DeCarlo, 1991) contains 18 bipolar items that reflect how individuals feel about activity. These
items, such as “I feel bored/I feel interested” and “I dislike it/I like it” are placed on opposite
ends of a continuum ranging from 1 to 7, and participants subjectively select which feeling is
more associated with the activity. The scale can be presented in either the state or trait form,
depending on the instructions given to the participant (e.g., “rate the activity you just did” or
“how you feel about physical activity in general, most of the time”).
Certain items of the scale are reversed (e.g., “I enjoy it/I hate it”) and are scored as such,
and overall scores are calculated by summing the scores of all the items, with higher scores
indicating greater levels of enjoyment. The PACES has effectively measured enjoyment in
various samples (e.g., Garn, Baker, Beasley, & Solmon, 2012; Kendzierski & DeCarlo, 1991)
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 55 and languages (e.g., Jekauc, Voelkle, Wagner, Mewes, & Woll, 2013; Scarpa & Nart, 2012). See
Appendices D and E for the full scales.
Feeling. The Feeling Scale (FS; Hardy & Rejeski, 1989) is an 11-point bipolar scale that
recognizes individuals may experience fluctuations in feeling throughout the course of exercise.
The single-item scale ranges from -5 to +5 and contains verbal anchors at each odd integer as
well as at 0. Negative scores are associated with “bad” feelings, and positive scores are related to
“good” feelings (e.g., -5 = very bad, -3 = bad, -1 = fairly bad, 0 = neutral, +1 = fairly good, +3 =
good, and +5 = very good).
Hardy and Rejeski (1989) have provided justification for the use of the FS in exercise
studies. In three studies, the FS was found to be highly correlated with heart rate (r = -.70),
ventilation (r = -.65), respiratory rate (r = -.62), VO2 (r = -.69), and RPE when working at 90%
of maximum aerobic power (r = -.55). Interestingly, the FS also showed moderate to large
correlations with recall of in-task affect at 30% (.40) and 90% (.55) of maximum aerobic
capacity. See Appendix F for the full scale.
Procedure
The investigator received approval from the Bowling Green State University Human
Subjects Review Board, the facility director, and CrossFit trainers of the participating
community center before recruiting exercisers. Participants were recruited via flyers and personal
recruitment (see Appendices G and H) at a community center in Western Nebraska. Exercisers
who were interested emailed the primary investigator, who explained the procedure to the
potential participant, and scheduled a day and time to complete the informed consent (see
Appendix I) and demographic data sheet. Personal recruitment took place within the facility by
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 56 the researcher attending a CrossFit class, and explaining the protocol and providing his contact
information prior to the personal trainer beginning the workout.
In the initial meeting, potential participants first had the informed consent document
explained to them, and signed the document after all questions were answered. All participants
then completed the demographic data sheet and ACSM (2010) Risk Stratification Health
Questionnaire to determine eligibility. Once deemed eligible, participants scheduled a day and
time to participate within one week of signing the informed consent, which included some
individuals participating immediately following the completion of these forms.
Those who were scheduled on a later date were asked to arrive to the community center
15 minutes prior to exercise. Participants were asked to arrive to the community center ready to
exercise, and after checking in with the researcher completed the FS, PAAS, and trait portion of
the PACES. Participants were instructed to complete the FS and the PAAS based on how they
were feeling at that moment, and to complete the PACES in regards to how they felt about
physical activity in general, most of the time. Feeling and affect collected at this time created a
baseline measure, and the recording of trait enjoyment provided an opportunity for the researcher
to determine if there was a difference in exercise enjoyment between the two groups. The
researcher then guided the participants to the fitness room where the exercise trial was
performed.
Prior to the beginning of exercise, participants were presented with the RPE scale printed
on an 8.5 x 11 inch sheet of printer paper and directed to rate their level of exertion as honestly
as possible and to encompass all factors they are experiencing in the moment when they are
prompted to respond to the scale. The participants then individually competed the 20-minute
CrossFit Workout of the Day, “Cindy.” Due to the exercise being completed in a public area,
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 57 participants exercised with approximately 5-10 other individuals in the vicinity; however, these
independent exercisers did not interfere with the study and never had interactions with the
participants. Cindy, as outlined by the CrossFit blog, is considered an “as many rounds as
possible” (AMRAP) exercise within the CrossFit community, with one round consisting of 5
pull-ups, 10 pushups, and 15 squats, where the goal is to complete as many rounds as
individually possible. In other words, participants were allowed to self-select their pace and take
breaks when needed, but were told the number of rounds they completed would be recorded.
This particular workout was chosen because of its length, repetitive movements, and
ability to induce abdominal breathing, without the inclusion of cardiovascular-based exercises
(e.g., running, rowing, etc.). These characteristics mean the protocol fulfills all mode
requirements of the Berger and Tobar (2011) taxonomy for enhancing psychological benefits.
CrossFit trainers were present during the exercise session to monitor exercise form, but
did not provide encouragement to the participants, and water and towels were available at
request. Five minutes into exercise participants were asked to verbally estimate RPE and FS and
HR was recorded. Ten minutes into exercise, participants provided verbal responses to RPE, FS,
and RPE, and HR was recorded. The final measures taken during exercise included HR and
verbal FS and RPE measures, taken 15 minutes into exercise. Following the exercise bout, a final
HR assessment was taken, and the participants were offered water and towels if needed, then
completed the FS, PAAS, and state portion of the PACES within 5 minutes post-exercise. They
were then allowed to recover, or shower and dress for the remainder of their day, and were asked
to complete the PAAS and FS at 30 minutes after exercise, before being allowed to leave the
facility.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 58 At this point, the participants were informed they would be telephoned 30 and 90 minutes
after leaving the facility (i.e., 60 and 120 minutes post-exercise) to complete the remaining
portions of the study. At 60 minutes post-exercise, participants were asked to verbally respond to
the 12 items of the PAAS as well as the FS. During the second call (i.e., 120 minutes post-
exercise), an open-ended question was asked to learn if participants had experienced any
significant events that could have confounded any affective and feeling state responses (e.g.,
unexpected raise, car accident, etc.) that possibly altered their mood (see Appendix J for this
script). The survey protocol was adapted from similar schedules performed in previous
investigations (Arent et al., 2007; Cox et al., 2006; Lochbaum et al., 2004). No participants
reported experiencing any significant events; however, two male novices were excluded from the
study due to missing one of the two follow-up calls. Table 2 outlines the assessment protocol.
All collected documents and the demographic data sheets were kept protected in a locked
filing cabinet at the home of the primary investigator. Upon completion of the study, these files
were transported to a locked filing cabinet in the locked Sport and Exercise Psychology
Laboratory in the North Eppler Complex on the Bowling Green State University Campus.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 59 Table 2
Testing Protocol
Assessment Location Timing Scale Method Pre-exercise
Conference Room 5 minutes before exercise
PACES-T
Paper 1 PAAS
FS During Exercise
Weight Room
5 minutes into exercise
Verbal RPE
2 FS
HR
3 Weight Room 10 minutes into exercise
PAAS
Verbal RPE FS HR
4 Weight Room 15 minutes into exercise
RPE
Verbal FS HR
Post-exercise
Conference
Room
Within 5 minutes after
exercise
HR
Paper PAAS
5 PACES-S
FS
6 Conference Room 30 minutes after exercise
Paper PAAS
FS
7 External 60 minutes after exercise PAAS Phone FS
8 External 120 minutes after exercise PAAS
Phone FS
Analysis
The purpose of the study was to discover differences in the dependent variables of affect
(positive affect, negative affect, tranquility, and fatigue), RPE, and enjoyment (trait and state)
based on the independent variable of experience (novice and experienced). Statistical Package
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 60 for the Social Sciences (IMB SPSS Statistics, Chicago, IL, USA) version 19.0 was used to run a
two-way (2 x 6) doubly multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with repeated measures
on the impact of CrossFit experience on affect, feeling, and enjoyment. To test the hypothesis
that the experienced group would report higher affect at all time points, the dependent variables
included the PAAS scales (positive affect, negative affect, tranquility, and fatigue). The between-
subjects effect was CrossFit experience (novice and experienced), and the within-subjects effect
was time (pre-, during, and post-exercise at 0, 30, 60, and 120 minutes after exercise). Any
significant main or interaction effects were followed-up with univariate or repeated measures
analyses of variance (ANOVAs), and follow-up Bonferroni corrections applied to planned
contrasts. Correlations were run to examine the relationship between FS and PAAS. A repeated-
measures design was used to analyze any differences between groups in RPE over time. To
further analyze exercise intensity, independent t-tests were used to analyze differences in mean
HR and %HRmax between the groups. Independent t-tests were utilized to test the hypothesis that
those with experience in CrossFit would report higher state (but equal levels of trait) exercise
enjoyment. All preliminary analyses were performed with α = .05, set a priori. Post-hoc analyses
on the PAAS and FS were performed with Bonferroni corrections (α = .006 and α = .004,
respectively)
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 61 CHAPTER IV: RESULTS
The following results will include F- and t-statistics, with main and interaction effects
being reported, as well as means ± 1 s for follow-up tests.
Affective States
To analyze differences in the subscales of the PAAS between experience levels and
assessment times, a 2 (group) x 6 (time) doubly MANOVA with repeated measures was utilized.
The MANOVA revealed a within-subjects effect for time (p = .008, η2 = .936), and no
interaction effect for time by group (p = .783), using Wilks’ Lamda corrections for both analyses.
Follow-up ANOVAs revealed a main effect for time on all PAAS subscales. Lastly, no between-
subject effects were apparent (p = .483), and full analyses can be seen in Table 3. The following
planned contrasts are reported with Bonferroni corrections (α ≤ .006)
The main effect for time was significant for PA (p = 0.019; η2 = .105). The planned
contrasts with corrected alpha levels did not indicate statistically significant differences between
time points for PA (see Table 4). However, Figure 2 illustrates that the means for PA tended to
be higher post-exercise compared to pre-exercise (d’s = 0.41-0.46).
Figure 2. Main effect of time on positive affect during and after CrossFit exercise.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Pre During 0 Post 30 Post 60 Post 120 Post
Posi%v
e Aff
ect (PA
AS)
Time
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 62 A significant main effect for time was also observed for NA (p = .001; η2 = .172), as
illustrated in Figure 3. Participants reported a significant increase from baseline to ten minutes
into activity (0.1 ± 0.3 vs 0.6 ± 0.7; t28 = -3.153; p = .004), and post-hoc effect sizes demonstrate
moderate increases in the measure (d = 0.63). No differences were observed at any other
assessment points, indicated in Table 5.
Figure 3. Main effect of time on negative affect during and after CrossFit exercise. * indicates significantly higher value compared to baseline, p < .001.
The main effect for time was significant for fatigue (p < .001; η2 = .237), displayed in
Figure 4. Post-hoc planned contrasts identified the variable to be significantly higher compared
to baseline at two time points: during activity (0.9 ± 0.7 vs 1.9 ± 0.9; t28 = -5.185; p < .001; d =
1.27) and immediately after exercise (0.9 ± 0.7 vs 2.0 ± 1.1; t28 = -4.314; p < .001; d = 1.15). All
other contrasts can be viewed in Table 6.
*
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Pre During 0 Post 30 Post 60 Post 120 Post
Nega%
ve Affe
ct (P
AAS)
Time
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 63
Figure 4. Main effect of time on fatigue during and after CrossFit exercise. * indicates significantly higher value than baseline, p < .001.
The final subscale of tranquility also showed a significant main effect for time (p = .001;
η2 = .380). Follow-up planned contrasts indicated significantly higher values compared to
baseline were reported at 60 minutes (2.6 ± 1.0 vs 3.2 ± 0.8; t28 = -4.514; p < .001; d = 0.77) and
120 minutes (2.6 ± 1.0 vs 3.2 ± 0.8; t28 = -4.960; p < .001; d = 0.76) post-exercise. Additionally,
tranquility was significantly higher 30 minutes post-exercise compared to immediately after
exercise (3.0 ± 1.0 vs 2.4 ± 1.1; t28 = 5.360; p < .001; d = 0.64), with all other contrasts compared
in Table 7.
* *
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Pre During 0 Post 30 Post 60 Post 120 Post
Fa%g
ue (P
AAS)
Time
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 64
Figure 5. Main effect of time on tranquility during and after CrossFit exercise. * indicates significantly higher value than 0 post, p < .001. ** indicates value significantly higher than baseline p < .001. Feeling
For the FS, a repeated-measures ANOVA examined differences between the experience
levels and assessment times. Due to violations of sphericity following Mauchly’s test (p < .001),
Greenhouse-Geisser corrections were used in the analyses. There was a main effect for time,
(F3.524, 95.151 = 21.179, p < .001, η2 = .440), which is highlighted in Figure 6, but no interaction
(F3.524, 95.151 = 1.421, p < .237) or between-subject effects (F1, 27 = .021, p < .885). Post-hoc
planned contrasts with Bonferroni corrections (α = .004) indicated reported scores were
significantly higher at baseline than at 5 minutes (3.6 ± 1.2 vs 2.4 ± 1.6; t28 = 4.172; p < .001), 10
minutes (3.6 ± 1.2 vs 1.9 ± 1.7; t28 = 5.255; p < .001), and 15 minutes (3.6 ± 1.2 vs 1.5 ± 1.9; t28
= 5.605; p < .001) into exercise. There was also a significant increase in the FS from 15 minutes
to immediately after exercise (1.5 ± 1.9 vs 3.6 ± 1.5; t28 = -5.431; p < .001). All planned contrasts
can be viewed in Table 8.
* ** **
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Pre During 0 Post 30 Post 60 Post 120 Post
Tran
quility (P
AAS)
Time
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 65
Figure 6. Changes in pleasure during and after CrossFit exercise. * indicates value significantly lower than baseline, p < .001 ** indicates value significantly higher than 15 minutes into activity, p < .001
Exertion
A repeated measures ANOVA was used to analyze differences in RPE between
experience levels and assessment points, and revealed there was a significant main effect for
time on RPE, F1.515, 40.917 = 20.926; p < .001; η2 = .437, but no interaction effect between CrossFit
experience and time on RPE, F1.515, 40.917 = 0.488; p = .566, with Greenhouse-Geisser corrections.
A Bonferroni post-hoc planned contrast indicated RPE reported at 5 minutes was significantly
lower than at 10 minutes (p < .001; d = -0.44) and 15 minutes (p < .001; d = 1.02), while
reported RPE at 10 minutes was significantly lower than RPE reported at 15 minutes (p = .003; d
= 0.53), as reported in Figure 7. It was also noted the novice group did not differ from the
experienced group in regards to HR (144.2 ± 12.1 vs 149.8 ± 10.9; t27 = -1.306; p = .202) or
%HRmax (77.9 ± 7.6% vs 79.8 ± 4.4%; t27 = -0.859; p = .398). A significant (p = .012), albeit,
small (r2 = .071) correlation existed between HR and RPE. Finally, the experienced group
**
* * *
-‐5
-‐4
-‐3
-‐2
-‐1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Pre 5 During 10 During 15 During 0 Post 30 Post 60 Post 120 Post
Feeling Scale
Time
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 66 completed more rounds than the novice group (18.6 ± 2.6 vs 15.6 ± 4.2; t27 = 2.338; p = .027; d =
0.82).
Figure 7. Increase in RPE during CrossFit exercise. Time points with the same notations (a, b, or c) are significantly different from each other. a, b: p < .001; c: p = .003 State and Trait Exercise Enjoyment
Independent t-tests were used to analyze differences in state exercise enjoyment between
the two experience levels. Results from the independent t-tests showed that the experienced
group had significantly greater levels of state enjoyment, as measured by the PACES (111.31 ±
9.03 vs 99.08 ± 16.18; t27 = 2.576; p = .016). Similarly, differences between the groups in
regards to trait exercise enjoyment were examined using an independent t-test. The results of the
analysis indicated the novice and experience groups did not significantly differ in reported trait
exercise enjoyment (112.25 ± 11.31 vs 103.23 ± 20.67; t27 = -1.495; p = .146). Post-hoc effect
sizes indicated the difference in state enjoyment between CrossFitters and Non-CrossFitters was
large (d = 0.96), suggesting meaningful differences between groups, as seen in Figure 8.
a,b a,c b,c
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
5 minutes 10 minutes 15 minutes
RPE
Time
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 67
Figure 8. State enjoyment of CrossFit exercise by group. * indicates significantly higher enjoyment than non-CrossFit group, p = .016
Correlations of Affect and Feeling
Correlation coefficients were calculated to examine the relationship between the FS and
each subscale of the PAAS at each time point. PA was positively correlated with the FS at
baseline (p = .001), during exercise (p < .001), immediately after exercise (p = .001), 60 minutes
post-exercise (p <.001), and 120 minutes post-exercise (p <.001). NA was negatively correlated
with the FS at 120 minutes post-exercise (p = .005). The subscale of fatigue was negatively
correlated with the FS at baseline (p = .014), during exercise (p = .006), 30 minutes post-exercise
(p = .003), 60 minutes post exercise (p = .005), and 120 minutes post-exercise (p = .009).
Finally, tranquility was positively correlated with the FS during exercise (p = .001), immediately
after exercise (p = .023), 60 minutes post-exercise (p <.001), and 120 minutes post-exercise (p =
.005). The full correlation matrix can be viewed in Table 9.
*
18
38
58
78
98
118
Novice Experienced
State En
joym
ent (PA
CES)
Group
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 68 CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION
The primary purpose of the study was to examine affective changes over time during and
after a bout of CrossFit exercise, and to determine if experience with the exercise protocol
resulted in different patterns of affect change. The results of the study indicated that novice and
experienced participants did not differ in patterns of affective change during and after the
CrossFit exercise. However, the sample reported increases in fatigue and negative affect that
dissipated quickly after activity, and tranquility showed a delayed increase 60 minutes after
exercise. The secondary purposes were to determine if there were any differences in exercise
enjoyment between those new to CrossFit and those who use it as their primary source of
exercise. Results suggested that novice and experienced CrossFit participants did not differ
significantly in reported trait exercise enjoyment, but the experienced group enjoyed the bout of
CrossFit exercise more than the novices. Finally, exercise intensity was examined in order to
obtain psychological and physiological data either supporting or refuting CrossFit as high
intensity exercise. It was determined that the novice and experienced groups reported did not
report significant differences in RPE or mean %HRmax.
Affective States
The primary hypothesis in this study was that the experienced CrossFit group would
experience more desirable affective states (i.e., higher positive affect and/or lower negative
affect) during and after exercise when compared to those who lacked experience in CrossFit.
Similar to Focht and Koltyn (1999) who found individuals with varying experience in weight
lifting did not respond differently in mood states following exercise, there was no evidence that
experience influenced affective changes following CrossFit exercise. That is, the two groups did
not experience significantly different patterns of affective change during and after exercise, thus
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 69 the specific patterns of affective change experienced by each group were not examined. Contrary
to the first hypothesis, the insignificant differences in these groups may have been the result of
their shared characteristics. While previous investigations (Dunn & McAuley, 2000; Hoffman &
Hoffman, 2008; Lochbaum et al., 2004) have concluded that trained individuals experience
greater positive states, it is plausible that these results were due to the activity levels of the
groups (i.e., trained vs untrained participants). It may be that activity-specific experience does
not regulate changes in mood and affect; rather general activity status may influence affective
states during and following an acute bout of exercise.
Though there were no differences between the two groups, participants reported
significant changes in affect over time. The two negative states measured by the Physical
Activity Affect Scale (PAAS), negative affect and fatigue, followed similar trends. It was clear
that halfway into the CrossFit activity participants were experiencing a significant increase in
these negative feelings, as both increased from the baseline measure. At the end of activity,
negative affect returned to baseline levels while fatigue remained elevated until 30 minutes post-
exercise. Studies employing high-intensity exercise protocols have shown participants report
elevations in various perceptual measures of fatigue during and after activity (Schneider et al.,
2009; Treasure & Newberry, 1998), as well as increases in negative feeling states during the
exercise bout (Arent et al., 2005; Blanchard et al., 2002; Oliveira, Slama, Deslandes, Furtado, &
Santos, 2013). Though these individuals may not feel good while performing at a high intensity,
they may continue to partake in the activity if they enjoy it and recognize it as a method of goal
attainment.
Additionally, previous research (Arent et al., 2007; Cox et al., 2004; Dunn & McAuley,
2000; Raglin & Morgan, 1987; Raglin et al., 1993) has indicated participants report delayed
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 70 improvements in negative states (e.g., anxiety, tension, psychological distress). That is,
improvements from baseline are not observed immediately, but are experienced 20 minutes or
later after activity. The absence of delayed improvements in NA in the current study is likely due
to the floor effect, as mean scores were very low at baseline. This floor effect may have
concealed any desirable changes in NA following activity, though the quick return to baseline is
encouraging, as it indicates participants were not experiencing prolonged increases in NA.
Alternatively, positive affect showed no significant increases during or after activity, and
but moderate effect sizes suggested slightly meaningful differences. This improvement in affect
following exercise supports previous the observations of both high-intensity resistance (Bibeau
et al., 2010; Focht & Koltyn, 1999) and cardiovascular (Cox et al., 2006; Dunn & McAuley,
2000). This sustained improvement in PA may help explain the increasing popularity of CrossFit
exercise. As Bibeau et al. (2010) suggested, it might not be the absolute score reported that
predicts future intentions for exercise, rather the relative mood or affective improvement from
baseline. That is, participants who report low levels of PA at baseline then experience large
increases in PA during and after activity will be more likely to continue with an exercise
program than an individual who reports high levels of PA at baseline with little, if any, change in
PA following exercise.
Additional desirable changes occurred within the subscale of tranquility. There were no
major changes in tranquility until 30 minutes after activity, at which point it was above levels
reported immediately post-exercise. This finding is similar to the results for fatigue. As
participants recovered from the CrossFit exercise, a decrease in fatigue levels coincided with
increases in tranquil states, which were higher 30 minutes after exercise than at baseline. That is,
this improvement in tranquility appears to follow a delayed trend, similar to what has been
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 71 observed with decreases in negative states following high-intensity exercise (Arent et al., 2007;
Cox et al., 2004; Dunn & McAuley, 2000; Raglin & Morgan, 1987; Raglin et al., 1993).
In addition to the PAAS, the participants provided responses to the Feeling Scale (FS) to
corroborate any changes in affect. The scale is a single-item, bipolar scale, and is considered a
more overall measure of how individuals are feeling without requiring insight into specific mood
states. Due to the brevity of the scale, it is less intrusive to request participants’ responses during
exercise, allowing for scores to be collected at additional time points. On the pleasure-
displeasure continuum, participants began to report decreases in pleasure 5 minutes into activity;
a trend that continued through the 15-minute mark. However, pleasure returned to baseline
immediately following exercise, and remained stable for the remainder of the study, but no
additional or delayed benefits were observed.
In regards to its relationship with the PAAS, the FS was most strongly correlated with the
subscales of PA and tranquility, though NA and fatigue were correlated with the FS at various
assessment points. The transformation in the FS supports the observed changes in the PAAS.
That is, in a general sense, participants reported feeling more NA and fatigue (i.e., states of
displeasure) during exercise, and reported a delayed increase in PA and tranquility (i.e.,
pleasurable states). This finding is reinforced by previous research, which examined detriments
in affect within single bouts of high-intensity resistance (Arent et al., 2005) and aerobic training
(Blanchard et al., 2002; Oliveira et al., 2013). In these studies (Blanchard et al., 2002; Oliveira et
al., 2013), those where affective measurements during exercise were obtained, an increase in
negative affect was reported during exercise, with little changes in positive affect. Each of these
studies (Arent et al., 2005; Blanchard et al., 2002; Oliveira et al., 2013) examined affect
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 72 following exercise, and reported negative affect returning to baseline, while there was a delayed
increase in positive affect.
It is interesting to note, however, that in this sample reported changes in affect also are
consistent with previous studies observing prescribed versus self-selected intensities (Ekkekakis
& Lind, 2006), where participants responded more desirably when allowed to self-select exercise
intensity. The nature of the current study allowed participants to self-select the exercise intensity,
and resulted in an average of 79% HRmax indicative of high intensity exercise, albeit, on the low
end of the range suggested by the ACSM (2011), which will be discussed in the next section.
The findings of this study support CrossFit as a high-intensity training protocol, but with
participants self-selecting intensity that still corresponds with high levels of state enjoyment.
Thus, the current growth of this exercise protocol and community is not surprising, and this may
lead to increased adherence to the program provided participants continue to have the ability to
self-select intensity (Williams, 2008) and enjoy the activity (Kuroda, Sato, Ishizaka, Yamakado,
& Yamaguchi, 2012).
Exertion
The fact that the experienced and inexperienced groups did not report different ratings of
perceived exertion is not surprising after noting that HR and %HRmax were similar between these
groups. Additionally, though the individuals in the inexperienced CrossFit group were new to
this mode of exercise, both groups were experienced exercisers, and could have interpreted the
signals from their body in a similar manner.
Again, while the groups did not differ in perceived exertion, there was a reported increase
in exertion over time. This is typical for both resistance and aerobic training (Sweet, Foster,
McGuigan, & Brice, 2004), as exercise typically becomes more difficult and demands more from
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 73 the body as duration increases. In fact, though RPE was only reported at three points during
activity, it appeared to be increasing in a linear fashion. Within the first five minutes into
activity, reported mean RPE was approximately 14, or between “somewhat hard” and “hard,”
suggesting participants were engaged in a high-intensity, or vigorous, activity (ACSM, 2011),
and by the end of activity the mean was elevated just above 16, which lies between the anchors
“hard” and “very hard” (Borg, 1982). Furthermore, participants exercised at 79% of their age-
predicted HRmax, which supports the high-intensity nature of CrossFit, though this mean is on
low end of the ranges determined for vigorous activity by the ACSM (2011). These two variables
indicated that the participants were exercising at a high-intensity, though these results should be
interpreted with caution as the means of the intensity variables indicate some participants were
exercising below this level, while others were exercising above it.
Although participants in both groups were exercising at the same relative intensity, the
groups did not perform the same amount of absolute work. On average, the experienced group
completed three more rounds during the session than the novice group. This may indicate a
tolerance, both physically and psychologically, for higher rates of work for the experienced
group while experiencing similar levels of exertion due to a specificity of training effect, where
novice participants had to utilize a greater percentage of their total performance capacity to
maintain a high intensity (Ekkekakis & Lind, 2006), which in turn may have limited the amount
of work they could do over time.
State and Trait Exercise Enjoyment
Individuals with experience in CrossFit reported more state enjoyment from the activity
when compared to the novice group. Following the pleasure principle (Freud, trans. 1920/1962),
which has been applied to exercise by Ekkekakis et al. (2011), the individuals in the experienced
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 74 group have continued with an activity they know they enjoy, which would lead to them reporting
higher enjoyment scores. Originally, the pleasure principle was used to described the tendency of
individuals to behave in a manner that would be psychologically pleasurable, or to engage in
unpleasant behaviors if it was believed the behavior would lead to greater pleasure in the future
(Freud, trans. 1920/1962). The experienced CrossFitters in the current study may gravitate
towards CrossFit exercise because they either find it pleasurable in the moment, or they
recognize the possible increases in fitness or body image will be enjoyable in the future.
One possible explanation for this difference in state exercise enjoyment is that the novice
group may have experienced lower state exercise enjoyment after not fully anticipating the actual
work of CrossFit and its transient effect on lowering affect. After being informed they would be
asked to perform a group of exercises they felt comfortable with, they may have expected the
exercise bout to be “easier” than it was. However, both groups still enjoyed the exercise, as
PACES scores were relatively high. In the present study, novice participants reported an average
score on the PACES of 5.5, and past research by Garn et al. (2012) found that average responses
on a shortened version of the PACES between 4.0 and 4.5 increased the participants’ future
intentions to engage in physical activity. Considering both groups exercised at a high intensity,
and had high state enjoyment, both groups could have preferred moderate- to high-intensity
exercise.
There was no evidence indicating the groups differed in levels of trait exercise
enjoyment, which supported the hypothesis. This is likely due to the groups establishing similar
exercise routines prior to participating in the study. Participants, on average, reported exercising
for about four years before the study took place, meaning many had made exercise an important
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 75 part of their life. Considering the individuals made a conscious effort to engage in habitual
physical activity implies they find some level of enjoyment in exercise.
Limitations
One limitation of the present study was the recruitment of participants from a community
center in Western Nebraska. Since the sample was primarily Caucasian, the generalizability of
the findings to a broader population of all exercisers is restricted. Furthermore, participation was
limited to individuals who had already made a monetary commitment to the facility, which may
indicate a difference between this sample and others who elect to participate in activities in other
environments (e.g., at home, in the outdoors). While a strength of this study was that the sample
included women and men of a wide age range, future studies should strive to include a more
ethnically and culturally diverse sample.
Another limitation of the current investigation was that participants performed the
exercise in a community center, and the environment was not as controlled as it would be in a
laboratory. As Focht and Hausenblas (2004) concluded, participants with high social physique
anxiety do not achieve the same psychological benefits following exercise as individuals with
low social physique anxiety in an environment that presents itself as physique-evaluative.
Participants in the present study did not complete measures of social physique anxiety, and the
community center environment may present itself as a physique-evaluative climate. Similarly,
Petruzzello et al. (1999) and Stathopoulou et al. (2006) have indicated that self-confidence and
self-efficacy may influence subjective well-being in an exercise task, and neither construct was
controlled for in the current study.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 76 Future Research
Although the current study found that an acute bout of CrossFit exercise is associated
with desirable affective changes in exercisers, the results might not be generalizable to other
populations. The study included participants who were members of a local community center,
and the average participant had been exercising for about four years. Of course, not all
individuals will be habitual exercisers prior to trying CrossFit. It is certainly possible that non-
exercisers who intend to engage in regular physical activity and become more fit will select
CrossFit due to the allure of quick results. As previous research has indicated, low-active
individuals (Dunn & McAuley, 2000) benefit greater from moderate intensity exercise than high
intensities, and obese (Ekkekakis & Lind, 2006) and inactive (Hoffman & Hoffman, 2008)
individuals do not respond as well to high- or prescribed-intensities as their normal-weight,
active counterparts. Therefore, it would be beneficial to observe the mood and affective
responses of inactive individuals participating in CrossFit exercise.
The CrossFit workout Cindy was the only exercise participants completed in this
investigation, and more research needs to be done to determine if distinctive CrossFit workouts
result in different mood and affect changes. Bearing in mind that each workout focuses on
different aspects of fitness (e.g., strength, cardiovascular endurance, speed, etc.), each workout
could lead to different changes in mood and affect. Additionally, if individuals continue to find
value in CrossFit, and non-exercisers are encouraged to explore the program as a means to
fitness, it seems more research needs to be done regarding the program as a whole. For example,
current media outlets have criticized CrossFit for resulting in more injuries than regular exercise
(Gregory, 2014), but preliminary research supports the protocol’s benefits for physical changes
(Smith, Sommer, Starkoff, & Devor, 2013). More systematic research is needed to help resolve
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 77 this conflicting information, and determine the true risk of the protocol and compare it to the
benefits.
Additionally, it may be valuable to assess affect with other measures, or look into more
specific mood states in the future. This may allow for more sensitivity when examining the
feelings individuals are experiencing following activity, and could give insight into any
differences between participants. It could also be beneficial to have participants engage in
CrossFit, resistance training, and aerobic training of similar workloads, and observe the
differences in affective changes over time amongst these different modes of exercise.
Conclusion
Though CrossFit has been criticized for its physiological impact, such as poor form and
injury (Gregory, 2014), this is a risk with all forms of exercise. Furthermore, CrossFit, when
performed correctly, can lead to both physiological (Smith et al., 2013) and psychological
benefits. However, previous literature has yet to examine subjective well-being and enjoyment of
high-intensity CrossFit exercise. Similar to past research on weightlifting (Focht & Koltyn,
1999), and contrary to the primary hypothesis, experience with a specific method of exercise did
not moderate affect during and following participation; however, the current study added to the
literature by examining a novel exercise protocol containing aspects of resistance and
cardiovascular training, and included groups who had been exercising for similar amounts of
time prior to participation. Results suggested that CrossFit might lead to delayed benefits in
feelings of tranquility, and though feelings of fatigue and negative affect increased during
activity, these feelings subside after exercise. Heart rates and RPE confirmed that this CrossFit
workout is indeed a method of high-intensity training. Though past research has indicated high-
intensity training may lead to more detriments than benefits, individuals in this study reported
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 78 desirable changes in tranquility when compared to baseline, and only transient increases in
negative affect and fatigue, meaning CrossFit may be beneficial for regular exercisers seeking an
alternative exercise that increases fitness and results in positive psychological changes,
especially if it is a mode that an individual enjoys.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 79 REFERENCES
American College of Sports Medicine. (2010). Guidelines for exercise testing and prescription.
Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
American College of Sports Medicine. (2011). Quantity and quality of exercise for developing
and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently
health adults: Guidance for prescribing exercise. Medicine & Science in Sports &
Exercise, 43, 1334-1359.
Annesi, J. J., & Unruh, J. L. (2007). Effects of the COACH APPROACH intervention on drop-
out rates among adults initiating exercise programs at nine YMCAs over three years.
Perceptual & Motor Skills, 104, 459-466.
Arent, S. M., Alderman, B. L., Short, E. J., & Landers, D. M. (2007). The impact of the testing
environment on affective changes following acute resistance exercise. Journal of Applied
Sport Psychology, 19, 364-378.
Arent, S. M., Landers, D. M., Matt, K. S., & Etnier, J. L. (2005). Dose-response and mechanistic
issues in the resistance training and affect relationship. Journal of Sport & Exercise
Psychology, 27, 92-110.
Bahrke, M. S., & Morgan, W. P. (1978). Anxiety reduction following exercise and meditation.
Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2, 323-334.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Barr-Anderson, D. J., AuYoung, M., Whitt-Glover, M. C., Glenn, B. A., & Yancey, A. K.
(2011). Integration of short bouts of physical activity into organizational routine: A
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 80 systematic review of the literature. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 40, 76-
93.
Berger, B. G. (1983/1984). Stress reduction through exercise: The mind-body connection. Motor
Skills: Theory into Practice, 7, 31-46.
Berger, B. G. (1994). Coping with stress: The effectiveness of exercise and other techniques.
Quest, 46, 100-119.
Berger, B. G. (1996). Psychological benefits of an active lifestyle: What we know and what we
need to know. Quest, 48, 330-353.
Berger, B. G. (2004). Subjective well-being in obese individuals: The multiple roles of exercise.
Quest, 56, 50-76.
Berger, B. G., & Motl, R. (2000). Exercise and mood: A selective review and synthesis of
research employing the profile of mood states. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 12,
69-92.
Berger, B. G., & Owen, D. R. (1988). Stress reduction and mood enhancement in four exercise
modes: Swimming, body conditioning, Hatha yoga, and fencing. Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport, 59, 148-159.
Berger, B. G., & Owen, D. R. (1998). Relation of low and moderate intensity exercise with acute
mood change in college joggers. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 87, 611-621.
Berger, B. G., Pargman, D., & Weinberg, R. S. (2007). Foundations of exercise psychology (2nd
ed.). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Berger, B. G., & Tobar, D. A. (2007). Physical activity and quality of life: Key considerations. In
G. Tenebaum, & R. C. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed.) (pp. 598-
620). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 81 Berger, B. G., & Tobar, D. A. (2011). Exercise and quality of life. In T. Morris, & P. Terry
(Eds.), The new sport and exercise psychology companion (pp. 483-505). Morgantown,
WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Bibeau, W. S., Moore, J. B., Mitchell, N. G., Vargas-Tonsing, T., & Bartholomew, J. B. (2010).
Effects of acute resistance training of different intensities and rest periods on anxiety and
affect. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24, 2184-2191.
Blanchard, C. M., Rodgers, W. M., Courneya, K. S., & Spence, J. C. (2002). Moderators of the
Exercise/Feeling-state relationship: The influence of self-efficacy, baseline, and in-task
feeling states at moderate- and high-intensity exercise. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 32, 1379-1395.
Blanchard, C. M., Rodgers, W. M., Spence, J. C., & Courneya, K. S. (2001). Feeling state
responses to acute exercise of high and low intensity. Journal of Science and Medicine in
Sport, 4, 30-38.
Borg, G. A. V. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 14, 377-381.
Brown, S. P., Miller, W. C., & Eason, J. M. (2006). Energy sources and production. In S. P.
Brown, W. C. Miller, & J. M Eason (Eds.), Exercise physiology: Basis of human
movement in health and disease (pp. 49-74). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams and
Wilkins.
Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute. (1996). Progress in prevention. Bulletin no. 4.
Retrieved from http://www.cflri.ca/media/node/110/files/pip04.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Overcoming barriers to physical activity.
Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/everyone/getactive/barriers.html
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 82 Chen, M., Fan, X., & Moe, S. (2002). Criterion-related validity of the Borg ratings of perceived
exertion scale in healthy individuals: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20,
873-899.
Chaouloff, F. (1997) The serotonin hypothesis. In W. P. Morgan (Ed). Physical activity and
mental health (pp. 179-198). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Craft, L. L. (2005). Exercise and clinical depression: Examining two psychological mechanisms.
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6(2), 151-171.
CrossFit, Incorporated (2011a). CrossFit level 1 trainer test FAQ. Retrieved from
http://www.crossfit.com/cf-seminars/CertRefs/TrainerCoursesFAQ_20131113.pdf
CrossFit, Incorporated (2011b). Official CrossFit affiliate locator. Retrieved from
map.crossfit.com.
CrossFit, Incorporated (2013a). CrossFit trainer courses. Retrieved from
http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/certs.shtml
CrossFit, Incorporated. (2013b). History. Reebok CrossFit Games. Retrieved from
http://games.crossfit.com/about-the-games/history
CrossFit, Incorporated. (2013c). What is CrossFit? CrossFit Community Beta. Retrieved from
http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/what-is-crossfit.html
CrossFit, Incorporated. (2014). By the numbers: A look at the CrossFit games in 2013. Reebok
CrossFit Games. Retrieved from http://games.crossfit.com/article/numbers-look-
CrossFit-games-2013
Cox, R. H., Thomas, T. R., Hinton, P. S., & Donahue, O. M. (2004). Effects of acute 60 and 80%
VO2max bouts of aerobic exercise on state anxiety of women of different age groups
across time. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75, 165-175.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 83 Cox, R. H., Thomas, T. R., Hinton, P. S., & Donahue, O. M. (2006). Effects of acute bouts of
aerobic exercise of varied intensity on subjective mood experiences in women of
different age groups across time. Journal of Sport Behavior, 29, 40-59.
Daley, A. J., & Huffen, C. (2003). The effects of low and moderate intensity exercise on
subjective experiences in a naturalistic health and fitness club setting. Journal of Health
Psychology, 8, 685-691.
DellaValle, D. M. (2013). Iron supplementation for female athletes: Effects on iron status and
performance outcomes. Current Sports Medicine Reports, 12, 234-239.
Dishman, R. K. (1997). The norepinephrine hypothesis. In W. P. Morgan (Ed). Physical activity
and mental health (pp. 199-212). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Dunn, E. C., & McAuley, E. (2000). Affective responses to exercise bouts of varying intensities.
Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 201-214.
Ekkekakis, P., Backhouse, S. H., Gray, C., & Lind, E. (2008). Walking is popular among adults
but is it pleasant? A framework for clarifying the link between walking and affect as
illustrated in two studies. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9, 246-264.
Ekkekakis, P. & Lind, E. (2006) Exercise does not feel the same when you are overweight: The
impact of self-selected and imposed intensity on affect and exertion. International
Journal of Obesity, 30, 652-660.
Ekkekakis, P., Parfitt, G., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2011). The pleasure and displeasure people feel
when they exercise at different intensities. Decennial update and progress towards a
tripartite rationale for exercise intensity prescription. Sports Medicine, 41, 641-671.
Ekkekakis, P., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2000). Analysis of the affect measurement conundrum in
exercise psychology. I. Fundamental issues. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 1, 71-88.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 84 Ekkekakis, P., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2001a). Analysis of the affect measurement conundrum in
exercise psychology. III. A conceptual and methodological critique of the subjective
exercise experiences scale. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 2, 205-232.
Ekkekakis, P., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2001b). Affective, but hardly effective: A reply to Gauvin
and Rejeski (2001). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5, 135-152.
Faulkner, J., & Eston, R. G. (2008). Perceived exertion research in the 21st century:
Developments, reflections and questions for the future. Journal of Exercise Science &
Fitness, 6, 1-14.
Feltz, D. L., Short, S., & Sullivan, P J. (2007). Self-efficacy in sport: Research strategies for
working with athletes, teams and coaches. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Focht, B., & Hausenblas, H. (2004). Perceived evaluative threat and state anxiety during exercise
in women with social physique anxiety. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16, 361-
368.
Focht, B. C., & Koltyn, K. F. (1999). Influence of resistance exercise of different intensities on
state anxiety and blood pressure. Psychobiology and Social Sciences, 31, 456-463.
Frued, S. (1920). The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud
(J. Strachey, A. Frued, A. Strachey, & A. Tyson, Trans.), Beyond the pleasure principle
(pp. 7-23) London: The Hogarth Press. (Reprinted from Beyond the Pleasure Principle,
pp. vi – 97, by J. Strachey, Ed., 1962, London: The Hogarth Press).
Garn, A. C., Baker, B. L., Beasley, E. K., & Solmon, M. A. (2012). What are the benefits of a
commercial exergaming platform for college students? Examining physical activity,
enjoyment, and future intentions. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 9, 311-318.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 85 Gauvin, L., & Rejeski, W. J. (1993). The exercise-induced feeling inventory: Development and
initial validation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15, 403-423.
Goddard, A. W., Ball, S. G., Martinez, J., Robinson, M. J., Yang, C. R., Russell, J. M., &
Shekhar, A. (2010). Current perspectives of the roles of the central norepinephrine
system in anxiety and depression. Depression and Anxiety, 27, 339-350.
Gregory, S. (2014, Jan 20). Lift, squat, repeat: Inside the CrossFit cult. Time, 183(2), 40-44.
Grosz, H. J., & Farmer, B. F. (1972). Pitts’ and McClure’s lactate-anxiety study revisited. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 120, 415-418.
Hardy, C. J., & Rejeski, W. J. (1989). Not what, but how one feels: The measurement of affect
during exercise. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 304-317.
Hoffman, P. (1997). The endorphin hypothesis. In W. P. Morgan (Ed). Physical activity and
mental health (pp. 163-177). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Hoffman, M. D., & Hoffman, D. R. (2008). Exercisers achieve greater acute exercise-induced
mood enhancement than nonexercisers. Archives of Physical Medicine and
Rehabilitation, 89, 358-363.
Jekauc, D., Voelkle, M., Wagner, M. O., Mewes, N., & Woll, A. (2013). Reliability, validity,
and measurement invariance of the German version of the physical activity enjoyment
scale. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 38(1), 104-115.
Kaplan, R. M. (1994). The Ziggy theorem: Toward and outcomes-focused health psychology.
Health Psychology, 13, 451-460.
Kendzierski, D., & DeCarlo, K. (1991). Physical-activity enjoyment scale - 2 validation studies.
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 50-64.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 86 Korkiakangas, E. E., Alahuhta, M. A., & Laitinen, J. H. (2009). Barriers to regular exercise
among adults at high risk or diagnosed with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review. Health
Promotion International, 24, 416-427.
Koltyn, K. (1997). The thermogenic hypothesis. In W. P. Morgan (Ed). Physical activity and
mental health (pp. 213-226). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Kubryak, O. V., Umriukhin, A. E., Emeljanova, I. N., Antipova, O. S., Guseva, A. L., Pertsov, S.
S., & Sudakov, S. K. (2012). Increased beta-endorphin level in blood plasma as an
indicator of positive response to depression treatment. Bulletin of Experimental Biology
and Medicine, 153, 758-760.
Kuroda, Y., Sato, Y, Ishizaka, Y., Yamakado, M., & Yamaguchi, N. (2012). Exercise
motivation, self-efficacy, and enjoyment as indicators of adult exercise behavior among
the thranstheoretical model stages. Global Health Promotion, 19, 14-22.
Kwan, B. M., & Bryan, A. (2010). In-task and post-task affective response to exercise:
Translating exercise intentions into behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 15,
115-131.
Lagally, K. M., & Amorose, A. J. (2007). The validity of using prior ratings of perceived
exertion to regulate resistance exercise intensity. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 104, 534-
542.
Lane, A. M., Jackson, A., & Terry, P. C. (2005). Preferred modality influences on exercise-
induced mood changes. Journal of Sport Science & Medicine, 4, 195-200.
Lane, A., & Terry, P. (2000). The nature of mood: Development of a conceptual model with a
focus on depression. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 12, 16-33.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 87 Lind, E., Ekkekakis, P., & Vazou, S. (2008). The affective impact of exercise intensity that
slightly exceeds the preferred level. Journal of Health Psychology, 13, 464-468.
Lochbaum, M. R., Karoly, P., & Landers, D. M. (2004). Affect responses to acute bouts of
aerobic exercise in fit and unfit participants: An examination of Opponent-Process
Theory. Journal of Sport Behavior, 27, 330-348.
Lox, C. L., Jackson, S., Tuholski, S. W., Wasley, D., &Treasure, D. C. (2000). Revisiting the
measurement of exercise-induced feeling states: The physical activity affect scale
(PAAS). Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 4, 79-95.
Lubin, B. (1965). Adjective checklists for measurement of depression. Archives of General
Psychiatry, 12, 57-62.
Maraki, M., Tsofliou, F., Pitsiladis, Y. P., Malkova, D., Mutrie, N., & Higgins, S. (2005). Acute
effects of a single exercise class on appetite, energy intake and mood. Is there a time of
day effect? Appetite, 45, 272-278.
Markland, D. (1999). Self-determination moderates the effects of perceived competence on
intrinsic motivation in an exercise setting. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 21,
351-361.
Martens, R. (1974). Arousal and motor performance. In J. H. Wilmore (Ed.), Exercise and sport
sciences reviews (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press.
McAuley, E., & Courneya, K. (1994). The subjective exercise experiences scale (SEES):
Development and preliminary validation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16,
163-177.
McGowen, R., Miller, M., & Henschen, K. (1990). Differences in mood states between belt
ranks in karate tournament competitors. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 71, 147-150.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 88 McNair, D. M., Lorr, M., & Droppleman, L. F. (1992). POMS Profile of Mood States Manual.
San Diego: Education and Industrial Testing Service.
Miller, B., Bartholomew, J., & Springer, B. (2005). Post-exercise affect: The effect of mode
preference. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 263-272.
Montesi, L., Moscatiello, S., Malavolti, M., Marzocchi, R., & Marchesini, G. (2013). Physical
activity for the prevention and treatment of metabolic disorders. Internal and Emergency
Medicine, 8, 655-666.
Morgan, W. P. (1968). Psychological considerations. Journal of Health, Physical Education, and
Recreation, 39, 26-28.
Morgan, W. P. (1977a). Involvement in vigorous physical activity with special reference to
adherence. Proceedings, National College Physical Education Association Minneapolis.
Morgan, W. P. (1977b). Psychological consequences of vigorous physical activity and sport. In
M. G. Scott (Ed.). Academy Papers (pp. 15-35). Iowa City, IA: American Academy of
Physical Education.
Morgan, W. P. (1997). Physical activity & mental health. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Morgan, W. P., Roberts, J. A., & Feinerman, A. D. (1971). Psychologic effect of acute physical
activity. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 52, 422-425.
Motl, R. W., Berger, B. G, & Leuschen, P. S. (2000). The role of enjoyment in the exercise-
mood relationship. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 31, 347-363.
Netz, Y., & Lidor, R. (2003). Mood alterations in mindful versus aerobic exercise modes.
Journal of Psychology, 137(5), 405-419.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 89 Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M. D., Kit, B. K., & Flegal, K. M. (2012, January). Prevalence of obesity
in the United States, 2009-2010. (Issue Brief No. 82). Hyattsville, MD: National Center
for Health Statistics.
Oliveira, B. R. R., Slama, F. A., Deslandes, A.. C., Furtado, E. S., & Santos, T. M. (2013).
Continuous and high-intensity interval training: Which promotes higher pleasure? PLoS
ONE, 8, 1-6.
Ozoliņš, J. (2013). The body and the place of physical activity in education: Some classical
perspectives. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45(9), 892-907.
Pitts, F. N., & McClure, J. N. (1967). Lactate metabolism in anxiety nervosa. New England
Journal of Medicine, 277, 1329-1336.
Petruzzello, S., Landers, D., Hatfield, B., Kubitz, K., & Salazar, W. (1991). A metaanalysis on
the anxiety-reducing effects of acute and chronic exercise - outcomes and mechanisms.
Sports Medicine, 11, 143-182.
Raedeke, T. D. (2007). The relationship between enjoyment and affective responses to exercise
Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 19, 105-115.
Raedeke, T.D., Focht, B. & Scales, D. (2007). Mediators of affective responses to acute exercise
among women with high social physique anxiety. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10,
573-578.
Raglin, J. (1997). Anxiolytic effects of physical activity. In W. P. Morgan (Ed). Physical activity
and mental health (pp. 107-126). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Raglin, J., & Morgan, W. (1987). Influence of exercise and quiet rest on state anxiety and blood-
pressure. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 19, 456-463.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 90 Raglin, J., Turner, P., & Eksten, F. (1993). State anxiety and blood-pressure following 30 min of
leg ergometry or weight training. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 25, 1044-
1048.
Reed, J., & Buck, S. (2009). The effect of regular aerobic exercise on positive-activated affect: A
meta-analysis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 581-594.
Reed, J., & Ones, D. S. (2006). The effect of acute aerobic exercise on positive activated affect:
A meta-analysis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7, 477-514.
Roth, D. L. (1989). Acute emotional and psychophysiological effects of aerobic exercise.
Psychophysiology, 26, 593-602.
Scarpa, S., & Nart, A. (2012). Influences of perceived sport competence on physical activity
enjoyment in early adolescents. Social Behavior & Personality, 40, 203-204.
Scheef, L., Jankowski, J., Daamen, M., Weyer, G., Klingenberg, M., Renner, J., . . . Boecker, H.
(2012). An fMRI study on the acute effects of exercise on pain processing in trained
athletes. Pain, 153, 1702-1714.
Scheier, I. H., & Cattell, R. B. (1960). IPAT 8-Form Anxiety Battery. San Diego, CA:
Educational and Industrial Testing Services.
Schneider, S., Askew, C. D., Diehl, J., Mierau, A., Kleinert, J., Abel, T., . . . Strüder, H. K.
(2009). EEG activity and mood in health orientated runners after different exercise
intensities. Physiology & Behavior, 96, 709-716.
Schuler, G., Adams, V., & Goto, Y. (2013). Role of exercise in the prevention of cardiovascular
disease: Results, mechanisms, and new perspectives. European Heart Journal, 34, 1790-
1799.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 91 Schwarzer, R., & Renner, B. (2000). Social-cognitive predictors of health behavior: Action self-
efficacy and coping self-efficacy. Health Psychology, 19, 487-495.
Schwingshackl, L., Dias, S., Strasser, B., & Hoffmann, G. (2013). Impact of different training
modalities on anthropometric and metabolic characteristics in overweight/obest subjects:
A systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 8, 1-10.
Smith, M. M., Sommer, A. J., Starkoff, B. E., & Devor, S. T. (2013). CrossFit-based high-
intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 27, 3159-3172.
Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, P. R., Vagg, P. R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual
for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
Spitzer, W., Dobson, A., & Hall, J. (1981). Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: A
concise QL-Index for use by physicians. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 34, 585-597.
Stathopoulou, G., Powers, M. B., Berry, A. C., Smits, J. A. J., & Otto, M. W. (2006) Exercise
interventions for mental health: A quantitative and qualitative review. Clinical
Psychology: Science and Practice, 13, 179-193.
Svebak, S., & Murgatroyd, S. (1985). Metamotivational dominance: A multimethod validation of
reversal theory constructs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 107-116.
Sweet, T. W., Foster, C., McGuigan, M. R., & Brice, G. (2004). Quantitation of resistance
training using the session rating of perceived exertion method. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research, 18, 796-802.
Thayer, R. E. (1989). The Biopsychology of Mood and Arousal. New York:
Oxford University Press.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 92 Treasure, D. C., & Newbery, D. M. (1998). Relationship between self-efficacy, exercise
intensity, and feeling states in a sedentary population during and following an acute bout
of exercise. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20, 1-11.
Turner, E. E., Rejeski, W. J., & Brawley, L. R. (1997). Psychological benefits of physical
activity are influenced by the social environment. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 19, 119-130.
Watson, D., Clark, L., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of
positive and negative affect - the PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
Williams, D. M. (2008). Exercise, affect, and adherence: An integrated model and a case for self-
paced exercise. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 30, 471-496.
Williams, D. M., Dunsiger, S., Ciccolo, J. T., Lewis, B. A., Albrecht, A. E., & Marcus, B. H.
(2008). Acute affective response to a moderate-intensity exercise stimulus predicts
physical activity participation 6 and 12 months later. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,
9, 231-245.
Wipfli, B., Landers, D., Nagoshi, C., & Ringenbach, S. (2011). An examination of serotonin and
psychological variables in the relationship between exercise and mental health.
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 21, 474-481.
World Health Organization. (2013). Obesity and overweight fact sheet. Retrieved April, 2013,
from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/index.html
Zwiren, L. D., Freedson, P. S., Ward, A., Wilken, S., & Rippe, J. M. (1991). Estimation of
VO2max: A comparative analysis of five exercise tests. Research Quarterly for Exercise
and Sport, 62, 73-78.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 93 Table 3 PAAS Subscale ANOVAs results Subscale df df(error) F p η2 Positive Affect 5 135 3.163 0.019 0.105 Negative Affecta 3.532 95.368 5.651 0.001 0.172 Tranquilitya 3.166 85.472 16.568 0.001 0.38 Fatigue 5 135 8.376 <.001 0.237 aGreenhouse-Geisser corrections for violations of sphericity. Table 4 Positive Affect Planned Contrasts Pair t-statistic p-value Cohen's d Baseline vs During 0.344 0.734 0.08 During vs 0m post -2.673 0.012 0.48 0m post vs 30m post -0.092 0.928 0.02 30m post vs 60m post -0.367 0.717 0.04 60m post vs 120m post 0.486 0.631 0.06 Baseline vs 0m post -2.054 0.049 0.41 Baseline vs 30m post -2.508 0.018 0.42 Baseline vs 60m post -2.798 0.009 0.46 Baseline vs 120m post -2.546 0.017 0.41 Table 5 Negative Affect Planned Contrasts Pair t-statistic p-value Cohen’s d Baseline vs During* -3.153 0.004 0.85 During vs 0m post 2.031 0.052 0.52 0m post vs 30m post 1.58 0.125 0.35 30m post vs 60m post 0.348 0.73 0.05 60m post vs 120m post -0.133 0.896 0.03 Baseline vs 0m post -1.745 0.092 0.71 Baseline vs 30m post -0.578 0.568 0.14 Baseline vs 60m post -0.406 0.688 0.1 Baseline vs 120m post -0.486 0.631 0.12 * p = .004.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 94 Table 6 Fatigue Planned Contrasts Pair t-statistic p-value Cohen’s d Baseline vs During* -5.185 < 0.001 1.27 During vs 0m post -0.283 0.78 0.06 0m post vs 30m post 2.562 0.016 0.49 30m post vs 60m post 0.00 1.00 0.00 60m post vs 120m post 1.7 0.10 0.25 Baseline vs 0m post* -4.314 < .001 1.15 Baseline vs 30m post -2.179 0.038 0.61 Baseline vs 60m post -2.284 0.03 0.62 Baseline vs 120m post -1.198 0.241 0.33 * p < .001. Table 7 Tranquility Planned Contrasts Pair t-statistic p-value Cohen's d Baseline vs During 1.847 0.075 0.31 During vs 0m post -1.279 0.212 0.16 0m post vs 30m post* -5.36 < .001 0.64 30m post vs 60m post -1.212 0.2 0.17 60m post vs 120m post 0.183 0.856 0.01 Baseline vs 0m post 0.776 0.44 0.14 Baseline vs 30m post -2.853 0.008 0.55 Baseline vs 60m post* -4.514 < .001 0.77 Baseline vs 120m post* -4.96 < .001 0.76 * p < .001.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 95 Table 8 Feeling Scale Planned Contrasts Pair t-statistic p-value Cohen's d Baseline vs 5m* 4.172 < .001 0.85 5m vs 10m 2.461 0.02 0.3 10m vs 15m 2.491 0.019 0.21 15m vs 0m post* -5.431 < .001 1.21 0m post vs 30m post -2.191 0.037 0.39 30m post vs 60m post 0.596 0.556 0.1 60m post vs 120m post -0.378 0.708 0.07 Baseline vs 10m* 5.255 < .001 1.15 Baseline vs 15m* 5.605 < .001 1.27 Baseline vs 0m post -0.109 0.914 0.03 Baseline vs 30m post -2.196 0.036 0.47 Baseline vs 60m post -1.462 0.155 0.33 Baseline vs 120m post -1.915 0.066 0.42 * p < .001 Table 9 FS and PAAS Correlation Matrix FS Pretest FS During 10 FS 0 Post FS 30 Post FS 60 Post FS 120 Post PA r2
p-value 0.320 0.432 0.102 0.360 0.585 0.468 0.001 <.001 0.092 0.001 <.001 <.001
NA r2
p-value 0.013 0.086 0.003 0.086 0.118 0.254 0.548 0.124 0.780 0.123 0.068 0.005
F r2
p-value 0.203 0.249 0.101 0.278 0.255 0.227 0.014 0.006 0.093 0.003 0.005 0.009
T r2
p-value 0.069 0.353 0.178 0.073 0.448 0.256 1.680 0.001 0.023 0.155 <.001 0.005
Note. r2 and p-values are representative of correlations between FS and the same assessment points for the PAAS subscales as indicated by the time noted in the FS column. FS = Feeling Scale; Pretest = data collected prior to exercise; During 10 = data collected 10 minutes into activity; 0 Post = data collected within 5 minutes of exercise; 30 Post = data collected 30 minutes after exercise; 60 Post = data collected 60 minutes after exercise; 120 post = data collected 120 minutes after exercise; PA = positive affect; NA = negative affect; F = fatigue; T = tranquility.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 96 Table 10
Descriptive Statistics for Affect Stratified by Time
Group Mean Standard Deviation
Sample Size
Pretest PA Novice 2.8974 0.6990 13
Experienced 2.7291 0.6466 16
Total 2.8046 0.6638 29
During 10 PA Novice 2.7179 0.8697 13
Experienced 2.7708 0.7178 16
Total 2.7471 0.7749 29
Posttest 0 PA Novice 2.8974 0.7980 13
Experienced 3.2708 0.6112 16
Total 3.1034 0.7133 29
Posttest 30 PA Novice 2.9487 0.8972 13
Experienced 3.2500 0.7552 16
Total 3.1149 0.7932 29
Posttest 60 PA Novice 3.000 0.7817 13
Experienced 3.2708 0.8879 16
Total 3.1494 0.8384 29
Posttest 120 PA Novice 3.0256 0.7511 13
Experienced 3.1667 0.8944 16
Total 3.1034 0.7873 29
Pretest NA Novice 0.0769 0.2774 13
Experienced 0.1458 0.3436 16
Total 0.1149 0.3121 29
During 10 NA Novice 0.7436 0.8406 13
Experienced 0.3958 0.4255 16
Total 0.5517 0.6563 29
Posttest 0 NA Novice 0.4103 0.5636 13
Experienced 0.2083 0.4194 16
Total 0.2989 0.4907 29
Posttest 30 NA Novice 0.2821 0.6360 13
Experienced 0.0833 0.2582 16
Total 0.1724 0.4682 29
Posttest 60 NA Novice 0.2308 0.4979 13
Experienced 0.0833 0.2582 16
Total 0.1494 0.3841 29
Posttest 120 NA Novice 0.1026 0.2850 13
Experienced 0.2083 0.5426 16
Total 0.1609 0.4420 29
Pretest F Novice 0.5385 0.6460 13
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 97
Experienced 1.1250 0.7290 16
Total 0.8621 0.7428 29
During 10 F Novice 1.7436 0.7596 13
Experienced 2.0417 0.9954 16
Total 1.9080 0.8949 29
Posttest 0 F Novice 2.1282 1.2438 13
Experienced 1.8333 1.0750 16
Total 1.9656 1.1421 29
Posttest 30 F Novice 2.0256 1.0669 13
Experienced 0.9375 0.8185 16
Total 1.4253 1.0724 29
Posttest 60 F Novice 2.0256 1.0581 13
Experienced 0.9375 0.7426 16
Total 1.4253 1.0385 29
Posttest 120 F Novice 1.6410 1.1260 13
Experienced 0.7708 0.8230 16
Total 1.1609 1.0489 29
Pretest T Novice 2.6410 0.8549 13
Experienced 2.3958 1.0696 16
Total 2.5057 0.9703 29
During 10 T Novice 2.2308 1.0661 13
Experienced 2.1250 1.2931 16
Total 2.1724 1.1772 29
Posttest 0 T Novice 2.3589 0.8656 13
Experienced 2.3542 1.3579 16
Total 2.3563 1.1441 29
Posttest 30 T Novice 2.8718 0.9283 13
Experienced 3.1667 0.9963 16
Total 3.0345 0.9609 29
Posttest 60 T Novice 3.0513 0.7679 13
Experienced 3.2917 0.7722 16
Total 3.1839 0.7694 29
Posttest 120 T Novice 3.1538 0.7890 13
Experienced 3.1875 0.7885 16
Total 3.1724 0.7747 29
Pretest FS Novice 3.69 1.109 13
Experienced 3.44 1.209 16
Total 3.55 1.152 29
During 5 FS Novice 2.38 1.267 13
Experienced 2.38 1.821 16
Total 2.38 1.268 29
During 10 FS Novice 2.23 1.301 13
Experienced 1.62 1.628 16
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 98
Total 1.90 1.676 29
During 15 FS Novice 2.00 1.414 13
Experienced 1.13 2.247 16
Total 1.52 1.939 29
Posttest 0 FS Novice 3.54 1.450 13
Experienced 3.63 1.500 16
Total 3.59 1.452 29
Posttest 30 FS Novice 3.77 1.166 13
Experienced 4.38 1.147 16
Total 4.10 1.175 29
Posttest 60 FS Novice 3.62 1.557 13
Experienced 4.25 1.238 16
Total 3.97 1.401 29
Posttest 120 FS Novice 4.08 0.954 13
Experienced 4.06 1.611 16
Total 4.07 1.334 29 Note. Pretest = data collected prior to exercise; PA = positive affect; During 10 = data collected at 10 minutes into exercise; Posttest 0 = data collected within 5 minutes of exercise; Posttest 30 = data collected 30 minutes after exercise; Posttest 60 = data collected 60 minutes after exercise; Posttest 120 = data collected 120 minutes after exercise; NA = negative affect; F = fatigue; T = tranquility; During 5 = data collected at 5 minutes into activity; During 15 = data collected 15 minutes into activity. Table 11 Multivariate Tests for PAAS and Experience Levels
Sources of Variance Wilks' Lambda df dferror F p η2 Between
Group 0.870 4 24 0.894 0.483 0.1300 Within
Time 0.064 20 8 5.812 0.008 0.9360 Time x Group 0.376 20 8 0.376 0.783 0.3575
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 99 Table 12 Univariate Tests for PAAS Subscales Sources of Variance dfnum dferror F p η2 Time
PA 5 135 3.163 0.019 0.105 NAa 3.532 95.368 5.651 0.001 0.172 F 5 135 8.376 <.001 0.237 Ta 3.166 85.472 16.568 0.001 0.38
Note. PA = positive affect; NA = negative affect; F = fatigue; T = tranquility. a Greenhouse-Geisser corrections applied for violations of sphericity.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 100 APPENDIX A: ACSM RISK STRATIFICATION AND HEALTH
QUESTIONNAIRE
All information given is personal and confidential. It will enable us to better understand you and your health and fitness habits. In addition, we will use this information to classify your health status according to the American College of Sport Medicine (ACSM) recommendations for risk stratification (ACSM, 2010). Please let us know if and when you have changed your medication (dose & type), diet, exercise or sleeping habits within the past 24 or 48 hours. It is very important for you to provide us with this information. AGE__________ DATE___________________ MALE____________ FEMALE___________
1. *FAMILY HISTORY
Check each as it applies to a blood relative:
Heart Attack yes______ no______ unsure______
If yes, age at onset____ yrs; relation to you
_____________
Sudden Death yes______ no______ unsure______
If yes, age at onset____ yrs; relation to you
_____________
Coronary Revascularization If yes, age at onset____ yrs; relation to you
_____________
Father’s Age_____ Deceased_____ Age at death_____ (*Before 55 yr. in father or first-degree male relative)
Tuberculosis yes______ no______
unsure______ Stroke yes______ no______
unsure______ Asthma yes______ no______
unsure______ High Blood Pressure yes______ no______
unsure______ Circulatory Disorder yes______ no______
unsure______ Heart Disease yes______ no______
unsure______ Mother’s Age_______ Deceased_____ Age at death_____ (*Before 65 yr. in mother or first-degree female relative)
2. PERSONAL HISTORYCheck each as it applies to you:
* Age (men ≥ 45 yr; women≥ 55 yr) yes______no_____ * Current Cigarette Smoking yes______no_____unsure______ * Sedentary Lifestyle yes______no_____unsure______
Persons not participating in at least 30 min of moderate intensity physical activity on at least 3 days/wk for at least 3 months.
* Obesity – BMI >30 kg·m-2
yes______no_____unsure______ If yes, give value: kg·m-2 Waist circum. > 40” men; 35” women: yes______no_____ * High Blood Pressure yes______no_____unsure______ Systolic Blood Pressure >140mmHg or diastolic >90mmHg If yes, give value: / mmHg.
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 101 * Dyslipidemia yes______no_____unsure______ Total Serum Cholesterol >200 mg·dl-1 ; value: mg·dl-1 LDL-C ≥ 130 mg·dl-1 ; value: mg·dl-1
HDL-C ≤ 40 mg·dl-1 ; value: mg·dl-1 On lipid lowering medication: yes______no_____unsure_____ * PreDiabetes yes______no_____unsure______ If yes, age of onset: years Impaired fasting glucose ≥ 100 mg·dl-1 ; value: mg·dl-1
Impaired glucose tolerance test: yes______no_____
(Note: values confirmed by measures on two separate occasions)
*Negative Risk Factor: yes______no_____unsure______ HDL ≥ 60 mg·dl-1 ; value: mg·dl-1
Have you ever had:
Diabetes yes______ no______ unsure______
Tuberculosis yes______ no______ unsure______ Heart Attack yes______ no______ unsure______ Angina yes______ no______ unsure______ EKG Abnormalities yes______ no______
unsure______ Asthma yes______ no______
unsure______ Emphysema yes______ no______ unsure______ Surgery yes______ no______
unsure______ Stroke yes______ no______ unsure______ Severe Illness yes______ no______ unsure______ Hospitalized yes______ no______ unsure______
Black Outs yes______ no______ unsure______
Gout yes______ no______ unsure______
Nervousness yes______ no______ unsure______
Joint Problems yes______ no______ unsure______
Allergy yes______ no______ unsure______
Convulsions yes______ no______ unsure______
Paralysis yes______ no______ unsure______
Headaches yes______ no______ unsure______
Depression yes______ no______ unsure______
Chest Pain yes______ no______ unsure______
Arm Pain yes______ no______ unsure______
Shortness of Breath yes______ no______ unsure______
Indigestion yes______ no______ unsure______
Ulcers yes______ no______ unsure______
Overweight yes______ no______ unsure______
Hernia yes______ no______ unsure______
Back Pain yes______ no______ unsure______
Leg Cramps yes______ no______ unsure______
Low Blood Pressure yes______ no______ unsure______
Insomnia yes______ no______ unsure______
For Office Use Only: Sum of positive and negative *CVD risk factors* (according to Table 2-3 ACSM (2010)
NOTE: All risk factors are explained verbally to each person completing the questionnaire. Classification according to ACSM (2010) (check one): Low risk; Moderate risk; High risk
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 102
3. EXERCISE HISTORY Do you exercise? Yes________ No________ What activity? __________________________________ How long have you been exercising?______________________________________________________ - How many days do you exercise?____________________ How many minutes per day?_______________________________ Have you participated in CrossFit? Yes____ No____ If yes, has it been consistent (i.e., 2-3 times/week)? Yes____ No____ If yes, for how long?_____________ Months Weeks Days (Circle one)
4. HEALTH HISTORY
Height _______ Weight______ Do you smoke or use tobacco products? Yes______ No______ ______________________________ ________________________________ Signature of tester Date
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 103
APPENDIX B: RATING OF PERCEIVED EXERTION
During exercise, pay close attention to how you feel. This feeling is going to be based on many factors, including stress, effort and fatigue. Don’t let a single factor dictate your rating, but try to encompass everything when I ask you how hard you are working. Try not to underestimate or overestimate, and be as honest as possible. It is your own feeling of effort and exertion that is important, not how it compares to other people. You can equally well use even as odd numbers. Choose the number that best describes your level of exertion. 6. No exertion at all
7. Extremely light
8.
9. Very light
10.
11. Light
12.
13. Somewhat hard
14.
15. Hard (heavy)
16.
17. Very hard
18.
19. Extremely hard
20. Maximal exertion
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 104
APPENDIX C: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AFFECT SCALE
Instructions: Please use the following scale to indicate the extent to which each word below describes how you feel at this moment in time. Record your responses by circling the appropriate number.
Do Not
Feel Feel
Slightly Feel
Moderately Feel
Strongly Feel Very Strongly
1. Upbeat 0 1 2 3 4 2. Calm 0 1 2 3 4 3. Energetic 0 1 2 3 4 4. Tired 0 1 2 3 4 5. Peaceful 0 1 2 3 4 6. Miserable 0 1 2 3 4 7. Worn-out 0 1 2 3 4 8. Relaxed 0 1 2 3 4 9. Fatigued 0 1 2 3 4 10. Discouraged 0 1 2 3 4 11. Enthusiastic 0 1 2 3 4 12. Crummy 0 1 2 3 4
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 105
APPENDIX D: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ENJOYMENT STATE SCALE
Please rate how you feel at the moment about the physical activity you have been doing. Circle your response to each of the following items.
1. I enjoy it 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I hate it
2. I feel bored 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I feel interested
3. I dislike it 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I like it
4. I find it pleasurable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I find it unpleasurable
5. I’m very absorbed in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I’m not at all absorbed this activity in this activity
6. It’s not fun at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s a lot of fun
7. I find it energizing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I find it tiring
8. It makes me depressed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It makes me happy
9. It’s very pleasant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s unpleasant
10. I feel good physically 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I feel bad physically while doing it doing it
11. It’s very invigorating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not at all invigorating
12. I’m very frustrated 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I’m not at all frustrated
13. It’s very gratifying 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not at all gratifying
14. It’s very exhilarating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not at all exhilarating
15. It’s not at all stimulating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s very stimulation
16. It give me a strong 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It does not give me any sense sense of accomplishment of accomplishment
17. It’s very refreshing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not all at refreshing
18. I felt as though I would 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I felt as though there was rather be doing something nothing else I would rather be else doing
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 106
APPENDIX E: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ENJOYMENT TRAIT SCALE
Please rate how you feel about most types of physical activity in general, most of the time. Circle your response to each of the following items.
1. I enjoy it 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I hate it
2. I feel bored 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I feel interested
3. I dislike it 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I like it
4. I find it pleasurable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I find it unpleasurable
5. I’m very absorbed in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I’m not at all absorbed this activity in this activity
6. It’s not fun at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s a lot of fun
7. I find it energizing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I find it tiring
8. It makes me depressed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It makes me happy
9. It’s very pleasant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s unpleasant
10. I feel good physically 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I feel bad physically while doing it doing it
11. It’s very invigorating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not at all invigorating
12. I’m very frustrated 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I’m not at all frustrated
13. It’s very gratifying 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not at all gratifying
14. It’s very exhilarating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not at all exhilarating
15. It’s not at all stimulating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s very stimulation
16. It give me a strong 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It does not give me any sense sense of accomplishment of accomplishment
17. It’s very refreshing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It’s not all at refreshing
18. I felt as though I would 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I felt as though there was rather be doing something nothing else I would rather be else doing
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 107
APPENDIX F: FEELING SCALE
While participating in exercise, it is common to experience changes in mood. Some individuals find exercise pleasurable, whereas others find it to be unpleasant. Additionally, feeling may fluctuate across time. That is, one might feel good and bad a number of times during exercise. Scientists have developed this scale to measure such responses. + 5 Very good +4 +3 Good +2 +1 Fairly Good 0 Neutral -1 Fairly Bad -2 -3 Bad -4 -5 Very Bad
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 108
APPENDIX G: RECRUITMENT FLYER
CROSSFIT STUDY PARTICIPANTS NEEDED
A Masters student from Bowling Green State University is in need of exercisers to serve as volunteers for a research study. Being a member of the study provides you an opportunity to test CrossFit for FREE and see if it is a program you are interested in. If you are already an experienced CrossFitter, your participation will help us better understand CrossFit. The study will take place over the next 2 months, and requires you to come in only one time to the facility. To qualify for the study: 1. You must be a member of the Community Center 2. You must regularly participate in physical activity or exercise at least 2 to 3 times each week
for the past 6 months 3. Your exercise sessions must be a MINIMUM of 20 minutes in length 4. Either:
a. Have no experience (or less than 1 month) with CrossFit or; b. Have been enrolled in a CrossFit class for over 6 months
If you are interested in learning more about this research, please contact:
Reed Kaus
Phone: (208) 407-4760 Email: [email protected]
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 109
APPENDIX H: RECRUITMENT SCRIPT FOR VERBAL COMMUNICATION
Hi everyone! My name is Reed Kaus, and I am a Masters Student at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio. You may have seen some of the flyers around the building, but I wanted to make sure I let you all know that I am doing some research on CrossFit. I need people who have been doing it for less than a month, and people who have done it for longer than six months. If you’re interested in doing this, I’m going to be sticking around and have some of my sign up papers, and the consent form that talks a little more about how the research is going to be done. If you have any questions please ask, and I’ve written my email on the board in case anyone wants it. Does anyone have any questions at this point?
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 110
Graduate Kinesiology Program School of Human Movement, Sport, and Leisure Studies
APPENDIX I: INFORMED CONSENT
Project Title: The CrossFit Experience Primary Investigator: Reed Kaus, Graduate Student, Developmental Kinesiology Advisor: Dr. David A. Tobar, Assistant Professor, School of HMSLS Committee: Dr. Bonnie G. Berger, Professor, School of HMSLS Dr. Vikki Krane, Professor, School of HMSLS I willingly provide my consent to participate in a research study examining personality, mood, and enjoyment experiences of participants with various experience in CrossFit. My involvement in this study includes completing questionnaires measuring the factors listed above at six time points. Four of these will be completed within the hour I am within the facility, and the final two will occur over the phone after I have left the facility. Completion of the questionnaires over the six time points will last 5-10 minutes each, with total participation lasting 2 hours and 30 minutes, with exercise consisting of pull ups, push ups and body weight squats, and lasting for 20 minutes. The researchers have received permission from the trainers and the director of the facility. All data that I provide will be kept in a locked file cabinet to protect the confidentiality of my identity, and only the researchers will see the data I provide. When the study has been completed, the data will be transported to a locked file cabinet in a locked office at Bowling Green State University. It has been explained that any reference to my name or any identifying feature that could be used to identify me will be removed or coded during data analysis and in any publication of results in this study. I have been informed that there is minimal, if any, risk associated with participation in this study, and a goal of this study is to provide information on the enjoyment factors related to CrossFit, and may be used in future studies to analyze CrossFit. I also acknowledge that I will receive no incentives for participating. If I have any questions about this study, I may contact David Tobar, 419-372-6914 or [email protected]. I may also contact the Chair, Bowling Breen State University’s Human Subjects Review Board, 419-372-7716 or [email protected], with questions or concerns about my right as a research participant. My signature below indicates I have been informed:
• I must be over the age of 18 in order to participate in this study • all my information that I provide will be confidential, • my decision to participate in this study is entirely voluntary and will have no impact on
my, relationship to the community center or Bowling Green State University, • I may withdraw consent and terminate participation at any time during the project, • I have been informed of the procedures that will be requested of me, • a copy of this informed consent document will be provided to me, and • upon request, I will receive a summary of the findings of this study.
__________________________________ __________________________________ Name Date Signature Phone Number: ____________________
AFFECT AND ENJOYMENT OF CROSSFIT 111
APPENDIX J: POST-EXERCISE SCRIPT
Hi, _________, this is Reed Kaus from Bowling Green State University, how are you? I was just calling to ask you some questions about how you are feeling, and to answer the same questions the survey did, and just to collect your responses over the phone. Remember that I’m asking you about how you are feeling right now, so don’t let your previous responses influence your answers now. (complete the PAAS and FS) Perfect, thanks for helping me. (If this is the first call) I will call again in an hour to get your responses one more time, and make sure you don’t have any questions for me. Ok, thanks again, bye. (If this is the 2nd call) Awesome. Thank you for that. I was also wondering if you have experienced anything significant or out of the ordinary for a typical day? For instance, have you received any good or bad news? Yes_____ No_____ (If yes) Can you please explain? Thanks again, ________, I really do appreciate it. I hope you have a wonderful day, and hopefully I’ll be seeing you around. If you do have any questions that come up, please feel free to contact me, my advisor, or the BGSU Human Subjects Review Board. Take care, bye.