Exercise snacking: squat study tests shorter strength sessions

What did the exercise snacking study find?

Splitting weighted squats into brief sessions across the day produced strength and muscular-endurance improvements comparable to one continuous session in a small study led by scientists at Tongji University in China. Participants also reported enjoying the shorter sessions more.

The findings, published in the Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness and reported by ScienceAlert on 29 October 2026, offer a useful scheduling question for hybrid athletes: does all your planned strength work need to happen in one uninterrupted block?

Researchers randomly assigned 45 male students aged 18–25 to fragmented resistance training, continuous resistance training or a control group without supervised training. All already lifted weights regularly.

Across eight weeks, the two training groups squatted three times a week. The fragmented group completed three separate one-minute bouts, each containing 20 weighted squats. The continuous group performed 60 weighted squats in one session.

Both approaches used a Smith machine under expert supervision, with each participant’s load progressively increased. This was a comparison of how training was distributed, not evidence that doing fewer repetitions delivers the same result.

How strong is the evidence?

Strength and endurance were assessed before and after the programme. The endurance test required participants to complete as many squats as possible using 40 per cent of their maximum squat weight. Before testing, they were asked to avoid alcohol and strenuous exercise for at least 24 hours and get sufficient sleep.

Both training groups improved muscular strength, isometric squat force and relative muscular endurance compared with the control group. Continuous training produced larger gains in strength and endurance, but the differences between training approaches were not statistically significant.

That distinction matters. The results did not demonstrate that continuous training was superior, but they do not prove the approaches are interchangeable for every athlete. The sample was small, restricted to young men and followed for only eight weeks. Longer studies with more diverse participants are needed.

• Match the question to the evidence: the trial compared 60 weighted squats performed continuously with the same number spread across three bouts.
• Respect the set-up: supervised Smith-machine squats do not establish identical results for bodyweight squats, free-weight variations or other exercises.
• Scale for control, not speed: as a general coaching precaution, reduce the load if you cannot maintain controlled repetitions. Do not force 20 repetitions into a minute at the expense of technique.
• Stop rather than chase the target if pain, dizziness or loss of movement control occurs. These are general safety precautions, not outcomes tested by this study.

What does this mean for HYROX and hybrid athletes?

The practical implication is flexibility, not a shortcut. For athletes considering how to organise resistance work, the study suggests that shorter bouts deserve consideration when one continuous session is difficult to accommodate. It does not show that fragmented squats replace complete HYROX preparation or improve race performance.

Enjoyment is worth noting separately. Participants preferred the fragmented approach, and the researchers suggested that shorter sessions could feel less burdensome and fit daily schedules more easily. However, greater enjoyment during this trial is not proof of better long-term adherence.

The measured takeaway is that distributing the same squat work across the day produced comparable adaptations within this specific eight-week programme. Keep that finding separate from broader claims about endurance or hybrid racing. This report is based on Carly Cassella’s coverage for ScienceAlert.