Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The primary objective of this study is to evaluate whether adaptive, AI-delivered personalized self-efficacy-based AI coaching based on real-time physiological and performance feedback enhance indoor cycling power output during a 20-minute time trial compared to static affirmations and exercise-only control conditions.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control Group | No Intervention | No affirmations delivered. Participants receive only time notifications at 5, 10, 15, and 19 minutes for pacing awareness. Same equipment worn to control for potential monitoring effects. | |
| Group 1: Self-efficacy-based AI coaching | Experimental | The Thompson Sampling contextual bandit algorithm, trained on Session 1 data, monitors performance continuously and evaluates every 5 seconds whether to deliver an affirmation. |
|
| Group 2: Static AI Affirmations | Active Comparator | Generic motivational messages delivered at fixed intervals (minutes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18) regardless of performance state. Messages follow the same complexity gradient based on elapsed time rather than individual response. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1: Self-efficacy-based AI coaching | Behavioral | The Thompson Sampling contextual bandit algorithm, trained on Session 1 data, monitors performance continuously and evaluates every 5 seconds whether to deliver an affirmation. The policy is trained to maximize a multi-objective "efficacy-preserving performance" function that rewards:
The decision process considers:
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Mean cycling power output during 20-minute time trial | Average cycling power output over the full 20-minute time trial. The outcome compares mean power between intervention arms (adaptive AI coaching vs. static affirmations vs. exercise-only control). Power is captured continuously via the cycling ergometer and summarized as the mean watts for each participant's trial. | Day 2 |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Age 18-40 years
Exclusion Criteria:
Cardiovascular, metabolic, or respiratory conditions
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anna Queiroz, Ph.D. | Contact | 305-284-3752 | aqueiroz@miami.edu | |
| Meshak Cole, B.S. | Contact | 305-284-3752 | mwc94@miami.edu |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Anna Queiroz, Ph.D. | University of Miami | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Miami | Coral Gables | Florida | 33146 | United States |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D009043 | Motor Activity |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001519 | Behavior |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Group 2: Static AI Affirmations | Behavioral | Generic motivational messages delivered at fixed intervals (minutes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18) regardless of performance state. Messages follow the same complexity gradient based on elapsed time rather than individual response:
|
|