Externally controlled, numbers-based pacing can outperform pure feel-based self-regulation partly by changing where athletes direct their attention during the effort
Interpretation
Brick et al.'s RCT found externally controlled pacing produced a 2% lower mean heart rate than self-controlled pacing at an identical pace, with externally-paced runners reporting more cognitive/efficiency-focused attentional strategies rather than internal sensory monitoring. This suggests part of numbers-based pacing's benefit is attentional, not purely about avoiding poor real-time decisions.
Practical implication
When advocating power/pace-based pacing over feel, cite the attentional-focus mechanism directly — it's a more specific and better-supported claim than a generic 'numbers remove human error' framing.
Sources
1 source, independently verified.
MSSE 48(5):879-886. Externally-controlled pacing produced a 2% lower mean heart rate than self-controlled pacing for identical pace, with runners in the externally-paced condition reporting more cognitive/efficiency-focused attentional strategies — numbers-based pacing appears to work partly by changing where attention goes, not just by removing decision fatigue.