Altered Psychological Responses to Different Magnitudes of Deception during Cycling

Deceptive manipulations of performance intensity have previously been investigated in cycling time trials (TT) but used different magnitudes, methods, and task durations. This study examines previously used magnitudes of deception during 16.1-km TT and explores yet unexamined psychological responses.

Twelve trained cyclists completed five TT, performing two baseline trials alone, one against a simulated dynamic avatar representing 102% of fastest baseline trial (TT(102%)), one against a 105% avatar (TT(105%)), and one against both avatars (TT(102%,105%)).

Deceptive use of competitors to disguise intensity manipulation enabled accomplishment of performance improvements greater than their perceived maximal (1.3%-1.7%). Despite a similar improvement in performance, during TT(102%,105%), there was significantly lower affect and self-efficacy to continue pace than those during TT(105%) (P < 0.05), significantly lower self-efficacy to compete than that during TT(102%) (P = 0.004), and greater RPE than that during TTFBL (P < 0.001).

Because the interpretation of performance information and perceptions depends on the manner in which it is presented, i.e., "framing effect," it could be suggested that the summative effect of two opponents could have evoked negative perceptions despite eliciting a similar performance. Magnitudes of deception produce similar performance enhancement yet elicit diverse psychological responses mediated by the external competitive environment the participants were performing in.