## 4 Discussion
TRIMP has been used to characterize exercise load during competitive time trial tasks and has been useful for controlling training load in long-term planning [28,29]. However, to date, it has not been used to observe possible associations with affective responses or the impact between training models. First, our study demonstrates that the self-selected protocol did not underestimate the impact of exercise, validating our initial hypothesis. The prescription in the maximum time trial model; therefore, can be designed and incorporated into training programs for adults already engaged in regular training programs. In addition, there was a significant and positive association between TRIMP and post-exercise sensation scores for the imposed TLim exercise model, suggesting that the greater the external load (100%) and the time achieved, the better the affective responses. This can be explained by the variability between participants and the heterogeneity of performances, demonstrating that those who were most potentially adapted modulated the feelings of fatigue and exhaustion, even when faced with a high imposed load, in a differentiated way in comparison to those with a lower training status. [PERSON] et al. [36] presented positive and similar psychoaffective responses to two protocol models and to high intensity (ratio 1:2: RPE 17 vs. 1:0.5: RPE 16) in trained participants, which suggests that trained participants showed a better modulation of positive responses, regardless of the stimulus configuration [36]. However, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [15] point out significant variability in affective responses to imposed (above the ventilatory threshold) and self-selected workloads, such that sedentary participants transitioned positively to intensities above the ventilatory threshold, with no differences to the group of active women. Logically, the domain in which the exercise was performed was different from that suggested in our study (heavy vs. severe), which would explain the differences in our outcomes. Finally, the circumplex model shows us that despite the high physiological demands of the self-selected time trial exercise model, such activation and feeling responses largely moved throughout the upper right quadrant of the Cartesian plane during the exercise, suggesting that the self-adjustment of intensities throughout the exercise reflected high levels of excitement and reward upon its completion. Differently, the circumplex model for TLim moved under the upper left quadrant of tension, which would explain the results related to anxiety. We know that an exacerbation of the anxiety response is appropriate in the face of threatening conditions and reverberates as physiological changes; however, to a certain extent, it also negatively affects performance results [37]. Although we did not observe a significant association between VO2 Max levels and anxiety scores in our study, refuting our hypothesis, we believe that such outcomes interfered with the participants individually in the TLim protocol, especially with regard to participants with a lower training status, who generally have a lower tolerance to high levels of effort and the ability to deal with threatening conditions. In general terms, physical exercise is related to a reduction in anxiety levels in healthy people and in patients diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorders [38], panic [39], and depressives. This appears to occur at moderate intensities and even during maximum effort tests [40]. Despite this understanding, no study has specifically measured the potential effects of a TLim protocol on anxiety levels, which makes comparisons difficult. In our study, we observed a 23% increase in anxiety scores after TLim, which potentially had a negative impact on performance. Furthermore, it is clear to us, as shown in Figure 4, that participants exhibited significant variability in response to this stimulus model, which further suggests a dependence on intrinsic physiological factors not measured in our study.