## 3 Results
### Primary Outcomes  
Significant differences were observed between T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) and T\({}_{1000}\) (\(p\) < 0.001) and V\({}_{\text{Peak}}\) and V\({}_{1000}\) (\(p\) = 0.013). However, there were no significant differences regarding VL\({}_{\text{TLim}}\) and VL\({}_{1000}\) (3181.34 \(\pm\) 872.22 vs. 3570.60 \(\pm\) 323.3; \(p\) = 0.062), suggesting equality in the work performed. Likewise, RPE\({}_{\text{TLim}}\) and RPE\({}_{1000}\) (median = 10.0; CI95% = 9.8-10.0 vs. median = 10.0; CI95% = 9.3-9.9, respectively, for T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) and T\({}_{1000}\)) were analyzed through the non-parametric Mann-Whitney test, in which no significant difference was observed (Mann-Whitney U = 141.50; \(p\) = 0.072). Similarly, for the TRIMP between the T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) and T\({}_{1000}\) sessions, no significant difference was evidenced (Mann-Whitney U = 118.000; \(p\) = 0.068). Figure 2 shows the comparison of the TRIMP between experimental protocols.  
Figure 1: Entry, inclusion, and exclusion criteria for sample participants.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Imposed**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Self-Selected**} \\ \hline  & **VO\({}_{2}\)Max** & **T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\)** & **V\({}_{\text{Feak}}\)** & **T\({}_{\text{1000}}\)** & **V\({}_{\text{1000}}\)** & \\  & **(mL\(\cdot\)kg\({}^{-1}\cdot\)min\({}^{-1}\))** & **(s)** & **(km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\))**  
Regarding the comparison between the types of treatment (T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) vs. T\({}_{1000}\)) for the felt arousal scale pre-exercise (Z = \(-\)0.284; \(p\) = 0.776), during (Z = \(-\)2.111; \(p\) = 0.035), and post-exercise (Z = \(-\)1.732; \(p\) = 0.083), differences were observed only during the experimental procedures. The Friedman test was used for comparison of the time factors, with a significant difference being observed for both T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) and T\({}_{1000}\) (\(p\) = 0.001; \(p\) = 0.001, respectively), both increasing significantly after intervention. Figure 3 shows the differences between groups and moments for the activation scale.  
For the feeling scale, the Wilcoxon test showed significant differences between groups for the pre-exercise (Z = \(-\)2.501; \(p\) = 0.012), during (Z = \(-\)3.739; \(p\) < 0.001), and post-exercise (Z = \(-\)3.532; \(p\) < 0.001) conditions. The Friedman test was used to compare the time factor in the feeling scale, showing differences for both interventions (\(p\) = 0.015; \(p\) < 0.001, respectively, for T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) and T\({}_{1000}\)). For the T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) intervention, there was a significant reduction, while for T\({}_{1000}\), there was a significant increase in affective valence. Figure 4 shows the differences between groups and moments for the feeling scale.  
Figure 3: Differences between groups and moments for felt arousal scale. T\({}_{\text{Lim}}\) = time limit until exhaustion; T\({}_{1000}\) = time taken to cover 1000 m. \({}^{\dagger}\) = Significant difference between sessions (T\({}_{\text{lim}}\) vs. T\({}_{1000}\)). * = Significant intra-session difference, i.e., between moments (pre; during; post) of the same session.  
Figure 2: Comparison of training impulse (TRIMP) between experimental protocols. VL = volume load; RPE = rate of perceived exertion.