The effect of feedback on resistance training performance and adaptations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Weakley, Jonathon, Cowley, Nicholas, Schoenfield, Brad J, Read, Dale B, Timmins, Ryan G, Garcia-Ramos, Amador and McGuckian, Thomas B (2023) The effect of feedback on resistance training performance and adaptations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 53 (9). pp. 1789-1803. ISSN 0112-1642

Preview

Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Augmented feedback is often used during resistance training to enhance acute physical performance and has shown promise as a method of improving chronic physical adaptation. However, there are inconsistencies in the scientific literature regarding the magnitude of the acute and chronic responses to feedback and the optimal method with which it is provided. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to (1) establish the evidence for the effects of feedback on acute resistance training performance and chronic training adaptations; (2) quantify the effects of feedback on acute kinematic outcomes and changes in physical adaptations; and (3) assess the effects of moderating factors on the influence of feedback during resistance training. Methods Twenty studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. This review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Four databases were searched, and studies were included if they were peer-reviewed investigations, written in English, and involved the provision of feedback during or following dynamic resistance exercise. Furthermore, studies must have evaluated either acute training performance or chronic physical adaptations. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Downs and Black assessment tool. Multilevel meta-analyses were performed to quantify the effects of feedback on acute and chronic training outcomes. Results Feedback enhanced acute kinetic and kinematic outputs, muscular endurance, motivation, competitiveness, and perceived effort, while greater improvements in speed, strength, jump performance, and technical competency were reported when feedback was provided chronically. Furthermore, greater frequencies of feedback (e.g., following every repetition) were found to be most beneficial for enhancing acute performance. Results demonstrated that feedback improves acute barbell velocities by approximately 8.4% (g = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.36, 0.90]). Moderator analysis revealed that both verbal (g = 0.47, 95%CI [0.22, 0.71]) and visual feedback (g = 1.11, 95%CI [0.61, 1.61]) were superior to no feedback, but visual feedback was superior to verbal feedback. For chronic outcomes, jump performance may be positively influenced (g = 0.39, 95%CI [-0.20, 0.99]) and short sprint performance is likely enhanced (g = 0.47, 95%CI [0.10, 0.84]) to a greater extent when feedback is provided throughout a training cycle. Conclusions Feedback during resistance training can lead to enhanced acute performance within a training session and greater chronic adaptations. Studies included in our analysis demonstrated a positive influence of feedback, with all outcomes showing superior results than when no feedback is provided. For practitioners, it is recommended that high-frequency, visual feedback is consistently provided to individuals when they complete resistance training, and this may be particularly useful during periods of low motivation or when greater competitiveness is beneficial. Alternatively, researchers must be aware of the ergogenic effects of feedback on acute and chronic responses and ensure that feedback is standardised when investigating resistance training.