Improvement Of Sensori-motor And Cognitive Function In Children Following Acute Physical Exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accumulating research suggests that physical activity of moderate intensity (heart rate of about 110–130 beats per minute) and duration (20 to 40 minutes) ameliorates cognitive functions in adults. However, little to nothing is known about the effects of physical activity on cognitive functioning during development. PURPOSE: To provide a systematic and controlled investigation of the effects of acute bouts of physical activity on brain function during development. METHODS: We assessed sensori-motor and cognitive functions using simple and choice reaction-time tasks, respectively, in groups of 7- and 10-year-old children (n=36 children per age group). Immediately prior to the testing of sensori-motor and cognitive functions, half of the children in each group completed an aerobic activity of sub-maximal intensity (approximately 130 beats per minute, or 60% of maximum heart rate) for a duration of 30 minutes, whilst the other half watched television. RESULTS: Compared to a group of children who were physically inactive, the children who completed the aerobic activity were significantly faster to respond during a simple visual detection task (F1,68=10.60, p<0.002) and a cognitive decision-making task (F1,68=80.56, p<0.001). Further, we find an even better outcome for the cognitive compared to the sensori-motor task, indicating that exercise ameliorates cognitive processes as well as non-cognitive sensory and motor functions. Finally, the younger group profited even more from the acute bout of physical activity than the older group (F1, 68=335.86, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results provide evidence that physiological changes that originate from outside the brain can induce functional brain plasticity that varies with age and brain function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".