Abstract
This cross-sectional study examined self-reported weekly training volume and perceived training distress in Norwegian student athletes according to gender, type of sport, school program, and school year. The Norwegian version of the Multicomponent Training Distress Scale (MTDS-N) was completed by 608 student athletes (M age = 17.29 ± .94). Univariate and multivariate techniques were used in data analyses. Results revealed significant differences in weekly training volume between sport types. No significant differences in weekly training volume were found for gender, school year, or school program. However, a multivariate effect was found for gender, with females perceiving higher levels of training distress than males. A multivariate interaction effect between school year and training volume was also observed. We recommend that practitioners use a conceptual framework to periodize training and monitor training distress in student athletes, particularly in females, to preserve physiological and psychological well-being and ensure a progressive training overload leading to positive performance development.
Highlights
The quality of the training is influenced by the training prescription, which should be in line with the desired outcome, and is defined in terms of training volume, intensity, and frequency [2]
No significant differences in weekly training volume were found between soccer and other team- and ball sports
We aimed to investigate whether weekly training volume, gender, type of sport, school program, or school year influence responses to the dimensions in the Norwegian Multicomponent Training Distress Scale (MTDS-N) and whether there are any interaction effects between these variables
Summary
Becoming a world-class athlete requires systematic, quality training over time [1]. Data on elite female and male athletes from different sports indicate that athletes with an average of 10.5 training years have five training sessions and 16 hours of training per week with ~2.5 hours per training session and approximately 18 competitions a year [1]. The quality of the training is influenced by the training prescription, which should be in line with the desired outcome (i.e., goal/s), and is defined in terms of training volume, intensity, and frequency [2]. Research shows that these three components collectively referred to as training load, influence training adaptation and prevent or cause overtraining, illness, and injury [3]. The optimal training outcomes depend on an adequate balance between training load components and non-training loads (i.e., stressors) and recovery [4, 5]. Ongoing monitoring and modification of these elements are crucial in developing an optimal training prescription that can lead to high-standard performance and minimize undesired training outcomes [6–9]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
