In articles on the methodology of studies investigating affective and enjoyment responses to high-intensity interval training, we noted that, occasionally, exercise conditions described as involving “high” intensity exhibited heart rates that were only as high as, or even lower than, heart rates recorded during comparator conditions described as being of “moderate” intensity. Drs. Vollaard, Metcalfe, Kinghorn, Jung, and Little suggest instead that exercise intensity in high-intensity interval-training studies can be defined in terms of percentages of peak workload. Although we maintain that defining exercise intensity in terms of percentages of maximal heart rate is a suboptimal way to quantify the degree of homeostatic perturbations in response to exercise, we are unconvinced that definitions of intensity relying solely on workload are appropriate for studies investigating affective and enjoyment responses to exercise. The reason is that affect is theorized to have evolved to relay information about homeostatic perturbations to consciousness.

在有关调查高强度间歇训练的情感和享受反应的研究方法的文章中，我们注意到，有时，被描述为涉及“高”强度的运动条件所表现出的心率仅与心率一样高，甚至低于心率。在描述为“中等”强度的比较器条件下记录的速率。博士。 Vollaard、Metcalfe、Kinghorn、Jung 和 Little 建议，高强度间歇训练研究中的运动强度可以用峰值工作量的百分比来定义。尽管我们认为用最大心率的百分比来定义运动强度是量化运动反应中稳态扰动程度的次优方法，但我们不相信仅依赖于工作量的强度定义是否适合调查情感和享受的研究对运动的反应。原因是，从理论上讲，情感已经进化到将有关稳态扰动的信息传递给意识。