D.V. Bondarev - Ph.D. (Ped.), Associate Professor, Department of Exercise Science, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Univeristy (Kaliningrad). E-mail: DBondarev@kantiana.ru К.А. Bochaver - Ph.D. (Psych.), Senior Research Scientist, Moscow Center of Advanced Sport Technologies. E-mail: konstantin.bochaver@gmail.com V.N. Bondarev - Ph.D. (Eng.)., Associate Professor, Director of Information Technologies and Automatic Control Institute, Sevastopol State University. E-mail: bondarev@sevsu.ru

For optimal performance during exercise and sport, exercisers need to make constant decisions regarding investing their energy resources. This process is also known as pacing. Pacing during sport performance is thought to be regulated by a "central controller" that analyses various internal physiological variables, external cues, and by incorporating experience regulates exercise intensity [2, 3]. Classical theories in psychology explain behavior in terms of information processing framework (e.g., Schmidt & Lee, 1988). That is sequential processes of sensory information forming representation of the world, building knowledge, making decisions, and finally acting. However, this classical understanding recently appears under critics. The growing body of neurophysiological data accumulates evidence that the brain-s functional organization might not be necessary reflect separately categories like perception, cognition and motor action (e.g., Cisek P, Kalaska, 2010). Moreover, traditional "black box" approach to link perception and action does not provide any explanation how perception and action regulate pacing. Pacing can be seen as natural interactive behavior where multiple actions are afforded simultaneously in a dynamic situation. Functional architecture of that behavior is in parallel collects evidence for selecting between competitive actions elicited by environment and action-s demands (the affordance competition hypothesis; Cisek 2007). From this perspective, perception action coupling in pacing results as sensorimotor loop of continuous stream of sensory information, experience and anticipation of likely task demands[1]. This loop specifies affordances, the perceived possibilities for action in the environment.

 

1. Ulmer H.V. Concept of an extracellular regulation of muscular metabolic rate during heavy exercise in humans by psychophysiological feedback // Experientia. 1996. № 52(5). P. 416-20.
2. Noakes T.D. Time to move beyond a brainless exercise physiology: the evidence for complex regulation of human exercise performance // Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism. 2011. V. 36. № 1. P. 23-35.
3. Bondarev D., Pelmenev V. Making experience matter: Effort regulation depends on experience // 8th Conference of Baltic Society of Sport Sciences. Sport Science for Sport Practice and Teacher-s Training: Abstracts/Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences. Vilnius: Lietuvos edukologijos universiteto leidykla. 2015. R. 84.