Is What You See What You Get? Perceptions of Personal Trainers' Competence, Knowledge, and Preferred Sex of Personal Trainer Relative to Physique.

ABSTRACT: Boerner, PR, Polasek, KM, True, L, Lind, E, and Hendrick, JL. Is what you see what you get? Perceptions of personal trainers' competence, knowledge, and preferred sex of personal trainer relative to physique. J Strength Cond Res 35(7): 1949-1955, 2021-The role that a personal trainer's (PT) physique plays in how potential clients perceive the PT is an understudied, yet potentially powerful, area of inquiry that has important professional implications. The purpose of this study was to investigate how a PT's physique could influence perceptions of his/her (a) PT competence, (b) level of personal training knowledge, and (c) preferred sex of the PT. Subjects (n = 191) were presented with pictures of male and female volunteers labeled as PTs. The pictures emphasized physique and consisted of varying body types (ectomorph, mesomorph, and endomorph) and muscularity (muscular vs. nonmuscular). Subjects examined pictures to answer surveys to rate trainers' competence, knowledge, and preferred sex of PT. Personal trainer physique significantly influenced individuals' perceptions of trainer characteristics. Both mesomorphic and ectomorphic body types were rated as more competent than an endomorphic body type. Muscular PTs were perceived to be significantly more knowledgeable and competent than their nonmuscular peers. Female PTs were perceived as more competent and knowledgeable than male PTs. Findings also suggested many more males preferred to work with a male PT while females lacked consensus. Collectively, PT physique seems to have a profound influence whether they are approached or avoided. These findings may have implications for how PTs market themselves to potential clients.

Cognitive influence of a 5-h ENERGY® shot: Are effects perceived or real?

With the gain in popularity and use of 'functional energy drinks' (FEDs), manufacturers of these beverages have been making greater claims as to their benefits on a number of performance factors including mental alertness, energy, and physical performance. Few experimental studies have been conducted on FEDs, and no study to date has examined their effects over time. This study looked at the effects of consumption of a 5-h ENERGY® shot (5-HES) on various cognitive functions across five hours on 24 college-aged students using a double-blind, cross-over, placebo-based design. Participants completed a series of five computer-based tests before ingesting the beverage (either 5-HES or placebo) and then completed the tests for each of the next five hours (morning to midday). One week later, they repeated the process with the other beverage. While 90% of participants subjectively thought that the 5-HES was effective at one-hour post-ingestion, no evidence was found to support an enhanced effect on recognition, reaction time, short-term and working memory, or attention capacity. In conclusion, the 5-h Energy Shot® did not significantly improve short- or long-term cognitive function for selected computer-based tasks despite a high level of perception that it was working effectively compared to a placebo with college-aged participants.

Hands-free versus hand-held cell phone conversation on a braking response by young drivers.

As some states allow motorists to use hands-free cell phones only while driving, this study was done to examine some braking responses to see if conversing on these two types of cell phones affects quick responding. College-age drivers (n=25) completed reaction time trials in go/no-go situations under three conditions: control (no cell phone or conversation), and conversing on hands-free and hand-held cell phones. Their task involved moving the right foot from one pedal to another as quickly as possible in response to a visual signal in a lab setting. Significantly slower reaction times, movement times, and total response times were found for both cell phone conditions than for the control but no differences between hands-free and hand-held phone conditions. These findings provide additional support that talking on cell phones, regardless if it is hands-free or hand-held, reduces speed of information processing.