Effects of Differential Interset Temperature Application on Resistance Exercise Performance and Psychophysiology Responses

Authors

Adam E. Mohan, CUNY Lehman CollegeFollow
Alec Piñero, CUNY Lehman CollegeFollow
Ryan Burke, Rutgers UniversityFollow
Jackson Mandart, George Mason UniversityFollow
Alysson Enes, Federal University of ParanáFollow
Paul A. Swinton, Robert Gordon UniversityFollow
Erik Hummer, Rutgers UniversityFollow
Gerard McMahon, Ulster UniversityFollow
Brad J. Schoenfeld, CUNY Lehman CollegeFollow

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Previous research has explored exposing distal extremities to cold temperatures as a strategy to enhance exercise performance (ExPer). While some studies have found acute ergogenic benefits to indices such as repetitions-to-failure and muscle activity, overall findings remain equivocal. No studies to date have evaluated interset palm cooling (IPC) effects across a full-body (FB) resistance training (RT) protocol. Thus, it remains unclear whether IPC may aid in physiological or performance-oriented outcomes in an ecologically valid context. PURPOSE: This study’s primary purpose was to evaluate the effects of IPC during a FB RT protocol on volume load (VL). The secondary aim was to evaluate the effects on psychophysiological (PsyPhy) markers. METHODS: In a crossover design, participants completed 3 sessions with ≥72 hours between (1 familiarization session consisting of 10-repetition maximum testing and 2 randomized experimental sessions consisting of an identical FB RT protocol). Experimental sessions were either the IPC (2 min. at 10-15°C between RT sets) or the CON (2 min at 22-28°C between RT sets) condition. IPC and CON employed identical application timing and fixed temperature ranges using a water-cooling device (CoolMitt®, Arteria Technology, Inc.). Assessments included exercise performance (VL, REPS, fatigue index, pre-post countermovement jump (CMJ)) and PsyPhy markers (discomfort, session rating of perceived exertion, heart rate, blood lactate, and tympanic temperature). RESULTS: 25 participants (F=12; M=13) completed the study. No statistically significant (p2=0.077 [0.00,0.25]). CONCLUSION: The current study suggests that IPC is unlikely to enhance ExPer or PsyPhy responses in a FB RT protocol and does not have broad utility as a RT ergogenic aid.

Recommended Citation

Mohan, Adam E.; Piñero, Alec; Burke, Ryan; Mandart, Jackson; Enes, Alysson; Swinton, Paul A.; Hummer, Erik; McMahon, Gerard; and Schoenfeld, Brad J. (2025) "Effects of Differential Interset Temperature Application on Resistance Exercise Performance and Psychophysiology Responses," International Journal of Exercise Science: Conference Proceedings: Vol. 15: Iss. 7, Article 26.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijesab/vol15/iss7/26