The 'training load' construct: Why it is appropriate and scientific.

Impellizzeri, FM; Jeffries, AC; Weisman, A; Coutts, AJ; McCall, A; McLaren, SJ; Kalkhoven, J

The 'training load' construct: Why it is appropriate and scientific.

Impellizzeri, FM Jeffries, AC Weisman, A Coutts, AJ McCall, A

McLaren, SJ Kalkhoven, J

Permalink

Publisher:: ELSEVIER SCI LTD
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: J Sci Med Sport, 2022, 25, (5), pp. 445-448
Issue Date:: 2022-05

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	1-s2.0-S1440244021004692-main.pdf	Published version	821.46 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Impellizzeri, FM
dc.contributor.author	Jeffries, AC
dc.contributor.author	Weisman, A
dc.contributor.author	Coutts, AJ
dc.contributor.author	McCall, A https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3780-8153
dc.contributor.author	McLaren, SJ
dc.contributor.author	Kalkhoven, J https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1720-6879
dc.date.accessioned	2022-08-22T01:16:33Z
dc.date.available	2021-10-25
dc.date.available	2022-08-22T01:16:33Z
dc.date.issued	2022-05
dc.identifier.citation	J Sci Med Sport, 2022, 25, (5), pp. 445-448
dc.identifier.issn	1440-2440
dc.identifier.issn	1878-1861
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/160658
dc.description.abstract	A recent paper called for the abandonment of the term load (and training load) when used outside its mechanical meaning, claiming it is "unscientific" and "breaches scientific principles." In this article, we explain why its use does not breach any scientific principles and we clarify the process of labelling, conceptualising and operationalising a construct. Training load is simply a label attributed to a higher-order construct overarching other interrelated sub-dimensions. This multi-level structure provides a framework (nomological network) to support the research process and also practical applications. Load is a word, and therefore cannot be "unscientific". The "use" or "misuse" of words and terms entirely depends upon definitions that should be based on current understanding. Misuse occurs when a term is decontextualised or interpreted according to a unilateral perspective. The field of mechanics does not have a monopoly on the term load (or other common terms such as work, stress and fatigue), which are legitimately used in many scientific areas and with various meanings. The 'obligation' to rely on terms abiding by the Système International d'Unités (SI) when describing a construct is inappropriate. The SI relates to how we can measure, not describe training load; i.e., SI is relevant to its operational and not its constitutive (descriptive) definition. Discussions regarding shared and standardised descriptions and definitions are more relevant than discussions about discarding terms in sport and exercise science. Researchers (and practitioners) can continue to use the term training load as it does not breach any scientific principles.
dc.format	Print
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	ELSEVIER SCI LTD
dc.relation.ispartof	J Sci Med Sport
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.jsams.2021.10.013
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subject	1106 Human Movement and Sports Sciences, 1116 Medical Physiology, 1117 Public Health and Health Services
dc.subject.classification	Sport Sciences
dc.subject.mesh	Exercise
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Sports
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Exercise
dc.subject.mesh	Sports
dc.title	The 'training load' construct: Why it is appropriate and scientific.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	25
utslib.location.activity	Australia
utslib.for	1106 Human Movement and Sports Sciences
utslib.for	1116 Medical Physiology
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHSP - Health Services and Practice
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHT - Health Technologies
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Centre for Health Technologies (CHT)
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
dc.date.updated	2022-08-22T01:16:31Z
pubs.issue	5
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	25
utslib.citation.issue	5

Abstract:

A recent paper called for the abandonment of the term load (and training load) when used outside its mechanical meaning, claiming it is "unscientific" and "breaches scientific principles." In this article, we explain why its use does not breach any scientific principles and we clarify the process of labelling, conceptualising and operationalising a construct. Training load is simply a label attributed to a higher-order construct overarching other interrelated sub-dimensions. This multi-level structure provides a framework (nomological network) to support the research process and also practical applications. Load is a word, and therefore cannot be "unscientific". The "use" or "misuse" of words and terms entirely depends upon definitions that should be based on current understanding. Misuse occurs when a term is decontextualised or interpreted according to a unilateral perspective. The field of mechanics does not have a monopoly on the term load (or other common terms such as work, stress and fatigue), which are legitimately used in many scientific areas and with various meanings. The 'obligation' to rely on terms abiding by the Système International d'Unités (SI) when describing a construct is inappropriate. The SI relates to how we can measure, not describe training load; i.e., SI is relevant to its operational and not its constitutive (descriptive) definition. Discussions regarding shared and standardised descriptions and definitions are more relevant than discussions about discarding terms in sport and exercise science. Researchers (and practitioners) can continue to use the term training load as it does not breach any scientific principles.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/160658