The Study
A comparison of low volume 'high-intensity-training' and high volume traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance, body composition, and subjective assessments of training
This study compared two ways of lifting weights and found that one way (HIT) made people stronger in some exercises better than the other. But it didn't prove it's the only reason — maybe the people in the HIT group just tried harder. So we can say HIT probably helps more, but we can't say for sure it's the only thing that made the difference.
Analysis score
Maximum 90 for a randomized controlled trial.
Where the score came from
Two groups lifted weights differently: one did just one tough set per exercise, the other did three easier sets. Both got stronger, but the one with fewer sets got even stronger in some lifts.
Where does this study sit?
Reviews of RCTs (Meta-analyses)
Max 100Randomized Trials
Max 90Reviews of Cohort Studies
Max 85Cohort Studies
Max 72Reviews of Case-Control Studies
Max 63Case-Control Studies
Max 58Cross-Sectional & Case Series
Max 50Expert Opinion
Max 560 / 100
Quality score
Participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups, minimizing bias. The gold standard for testing whether an intervention causes an effect.
Key takeaways
Summary
Based on the study abstract and findings.
- 1Yes — HIT gave better strength gains in key lifts with half the workout time, without making people feel worse or less motivated.
- 2HIT group did 1 set + drop sets; 3ST did 3 sets.
- 3HIT improved strength more in 3 out of 9 exercises.
- 4Neither group changed body fat or muscle mass significantly, but HIT had slightly better trends.
Score breakdown, methodology, conflicts of interest, evidence analysis & raw study data
Publication
Journal
Biology of Sport
Year
2016
Authors
Jürgen Giessing, Björn Eichmann, James Steele, J. Fisher
Related Content
Claims (7)
For people who train casually, lifting lighter weights more times and lifting heavier weights fewer times produce similar muscle growth if the total work done is the same, but the heavier-weight approach might lead to slightly stronger performance.
There is no reliable physical evidence to confirm that low-volume, high-intensity training produces better muscle growth than other training methods, despite what some people claim anecdotally.
Working muscles to complete fatigue using drop sets might lead to better strength gains than stopping before full fatigue, even if you do fewer total repetitions, suggesting that how hard you push may matter more than how much you do.
Both high-intensity and high-volume weight training programs can significantly increase strength and muscle performance in healthy young adults after 10 weeks of training, even though the workouts are structured differently.
In healthy young adults, a workout routine using short, intense sets with drop sets twice a week leads to greater gains in strength and muscle performance across several exercises than a traditional high-volume routine, even though the total amount of work is lower.
In healthy young adults, low-volume high-intensity training and high-volume traditional resistance training lead to similar levels of perceived satisfaction, muscle soreness, and motivation to keep training.
Not medical advice. For informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making health decisions.