Effects of a Running Bout in the Heat on Cognitive Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the effect of a running bout under hot conditions on cognitive performance in physically active men. Sixteen participants ran at 60% of maximum aerobic speed for an average time of 52.4 ± 7.6 minutes under hot environmental conditions (35°C, 60% relative humidity). Changes in body mass, lean mass, hematocrit, plasma volume, serum urea, creatinine, and thirst score were assessed to evaluate the state of hydration immediately before and after exercise. Cognitive performance was assessed using the Vienna Test System battery before and after exercise. The running protocol led to a decreased body mass, lean mass, plasma volume and an increased hematocrit, serum urea, creatinine and thirst score (all p < 0.05), implying that there was significant impairment in the state of hydration. After the running bout, complex and peripheral reaction time consistently improved, whereas visual angle was impaired (all p < 0.05). A running bout in the heat improves the speed of response in complex tasks but impairs the field of vision and leads to a deleterious hydration state.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".