Circuit Training vs Traditional Lifting: PhD Study Reveals Shocking Results When Women Lift the Same Weight With Different Rest

Dr. Sohie Carpenter has spent over a decade training women, but her most revealing project might be the eight weeks she spent in the lab comparing two of the most popular training styles in fitness.

The Stanford-educated researcher recently published groundbreaking findings that challenge conventional wisdom about circuit training versus traditional strength training.

Her work addresses a question that plagues nearly every woman who steps into a gym: Can I get the same results in less time?

In a recent appearance on the Barbell Medicine podcast, Carpenter revealed what happens when you actually control for the variables that usually make circuit training less effective.

The Study That Changes Everything About Circuit Training

Carpenter’s research, published in the European Journal of Sport Science, took trained women and split them into two groups for eight weeks of training, three times per week.

One group performed high-intensity circuit training. The other did traditional strength training with three-minute rest periods between sets.

Here’s the critical detail: both groups used the same exercises, same relative loads, and pushed to similar proximity to failure.

We didn’t really have a lot of research at the time to say based on these two popular modalities if you want to have these results this is the modality you should employ.

The exercise selection was strategically designed. The first circuit included leg press, flat dumbbell bench press, and trap bar deadlift—alternating between upper and lower body with minimal muscle overlap.

This wasn’t your typical circuit class where people grab light weights and stay far from failure.

What Actually Happened: The Results

Both groups experienced similar strength gains across all six exercises tested.

Both groups gained similar amounts of muscle mass.

The circuit training group finished their sessions in approximately 50-55 minutes, including warm-up. Traditional training took closer to 70-75 minutes.

That’s 20-25 minutes saved per session—time that adds up significantly over weeks and months.

Based on the findings, I really think that your personal preferences and your time constraints as well as maybe like logistics of your gym setup should be the biggest factors to determine what type of training is best suited for you.

Why This Research Matters More Than You Think

Carpenter’s survey research revealed something fascinating about women and resistance training.

Women who don’t lift and women who lift regularly understand the benefits equally well. That’s not the problem.

The difference comes down to perceived barriers—with time and effort topping the list, followed by social anxiety about gym environments.

A lot of people think that in their heads. They’re like, oh, I don’t have a full hour or whatever to dedicate. I’m not even going to bother trying.

Circuit training, when done properly, removes the time barrier without sacrificing results.

The Critical Caveat Everyone Misses

Carpenter emphasized that exercise selection and order matter enormously for circuit training success.

Doing bent-over rows followed immediately by band-assisted chin-ups? That’s a recipe for compromised performance and reduced training stimulus.

Smart programming alternates muscle groups to preserve training load and volume across all exercises.

The Supervision Factor Nobody Talks About

Carpenter personally supervised nearly every training session in her study—a detail that dramatically impacts the findings’ validity.

Almost every single participant even though they claimed to be trained, they all were surprised at how much further away from failure they were lifting in the beginning versus how much more I had them push.

Many participants didn’t know what true proximity to failure felt like. They thought they were pushing hard, but were actually four or five reps shy of failure on every set.

This raises critical questions about unsupervised training programs and group fitness classes.

Without qualified coaching, how many people participating in circuit-style classes are actually achieving sufficient training stimulus?

Practical Applications: What This Means for Your Training

Carpenter’s research offers several actionable takeaways for anyone designing training programs:

• Time efficiency matters: If adherence improves because sessions are shorter, the “inferior” program becomes superior in practice
• Exercise order is crucial: Alternate muscle groups in circuits to maintain performance across exercises
• Proximity to failure can’t be compromised: Light weights with excessive reps away from failure won’t produce comparable results
• Program design flexibility exists: You can combine traditional and circuit training within the same session

You can maybe start off like the first two or three exercises traditional strength training style and then you end your workout with a circuit.

The Equipment Limitation Problem

Carpenter addressed critics who pointed out that most gym-goers can’t monopolize three pieces of equipment simultaneously.

Her solution? Think in movement patterns rather than specific exercises.

A squat pattern, press pattern, hinge pattern, and row pattern can be executed with dumbbells alone, requiring minimal space and equipment.

Unilateral variations like reverse lunges, step-ups, and single-arm rows further expand options while maintaining training effectiveness.

Training Her Mom: Real-World Application

Beyond laboratory research, Carpenter has spent years training her 64-year-old mother—experience that illuminates how theoretical findings translate to practice.

Her mother represents a common demographic: someone who will exercise with accountability and social support, but not independently.

She’s not the type to go out and do a workout by herself. But if she has the accountability, she will show up.

Carpenter started with 20-minute sessions—deliberately short to reduce perceived barriers and build momentum.

Six exercises, two sets each, strategically supersetted between upper and lower body movements.

The Progression Strategy That Works

Sessions now last 50 minutes. Volume increased gradually as fitness and confidence improved.

Carpenter uses multiple progression strategies beyond simply adding weight:

• Lowering incline on push-ups to increase relative load
• Reducing box height on squats to improve range of motion
• Progressing from assisted to freestanding movements to challenge stability
• Adding repetitions within established rep ranges

She convinces herself that everything’s too heavy for her even when she’s more than capable. This is a warm-up set. And she’d be like, this is way too heavy. And I’m like, you did this last week as a warm-up.

The psychological component proved as important as program design.

Overcoming The Biggest Obstacle: Learned Fragility

Carpenter identified a critical barrier affecting older populations: false narratives about capability.

Her mother grew up in an era when women didn’t lift weights. Cultural conditioning created artificial limitations.

There is a lot of learned false narrative about how much you should or shouldn’t lift, how much you should or shouldn’t do or what we’re capable of.

The solution? Video documentation showing actual performance contradicting perceived limitations.

Carpenter films sets to demonstrate that movements feel challenging but look controlled and safe.

This evidence-based approach helps override decades of conditioning about fragility and appropriate loads for older women.

The Social Proof Effect

Despite protesting before every challenging set, Carpenter’s mother sends training videos to friends, proudly displaying her accomplishments.

Real-world benefits provide additional motivation. Improved golf swing power, increased independence, and functional capacity improvements create positive feedback loops.

These tangible outcomes matter more than abstract health benefits for sustaining long-term adherence.

Getting Loved Ones Started: Expert Advice

Carpenter’s approach to introducing family members to resistance training contradicts common strategies.

Don’t lecture about benefits. People already know exercise is beneficial. That knowledge doesn’t create behavior change.

We found actually that both groups had similar levels of perceived benefits to lifting. So even if you don’t lift, you understand the health benefits.

Instead, identify and systematically remove barriers:

• Time constraints? Start with 15-minute sessions
• Social anxiety? Train at home with minimal equipment
• Lack of knowledge? Provide demonstration and supervision
• Fear of judgment? Create private training environments

Carpenter keeps an “open invitation” approach rather than pressuring participation.

When her aunt visited and watched training sessions from the garage doorway, she eventually became curious enough to try a 10-minute workout.

Modeling behavior consistently proves more effective than preaching benefits.

The Environment Matters More Than You Think

Carpenter allows her parents to control music selection—even if that means NPR or opera during training sessions.

Her mother wanders into the garden between sets to check on plants.

These accommodations seem trivial but dramatically impact adherence and enjoyment.

As long as you’re doing your sets, I don’t care what you do in between.

The Research Process: What It Actually Takes

Carpenter’s journey from research question to published paper spanned years and revealed the massive gulf between having an idea and executing valid research.

Study design and ethics approval alone consumed a year. Data collection, analysis, thesis writing, and publication added several more.

You think you’re like oh I have this one question I’m going to dive right in. No, it took like 3 4 years before I was even able to start data collection.

The experience created newfound respect for researchers and understanding of study limitations.

Logistical constraints that seem like design flaws often represent practical necessities for participant retention and data validity.

The paper was accepted for publication the same morning Carpenter successfully defended her PhD thesis—a convergence of years of work into a single momentous day.

The Bottom Line on Training Efficiency

Carpenter’s research definitively answers a question women have asked for years: Can I get comparable results with less time investment?

Yes—if you maintain training intensity, use appropriate loads, and program exercise order intelligently.

Circuit training isn’t inferior to traditional strength training when these variables are controlled.

The choice between methodologies should be driven by personal preference, time availability, and logistical constraints—not assumptions about effectiveness.

For busy individuals, properly designed circuit training offers a legitimate path to strength and muscle gains without requiring 70-minute gym sessions.

The research validates what many suspected but couldn’t prove: the best training program is the one you’ll actually do consistently.