Controlling our resources: Does cognitive depletion impair physical performance?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strenuous physical exercise and challenging mental tasks require substantial self-control over effort and attention. The strength model proposes that self-control is a limited resource that governs control over behaviours, thoughts, and emotions. Expenditure of resources on an initial self-control task typically leads to a carryover effect of reduced performance on subsequent self-control tasks. Few studies have investigated carryover effects of self-control depletion on effortful exercise. Marcora et al. (2009) showed reductions in endurance cycling performance following 90 minutes of demanding cognitive tasks. However, self-control depletion can be induced within minutes using tasks with high self-control demands. This study investigated the carryover effects of a demanding cognitive self-control task on performance of a graded exercise test (GXT) to voluntary exhaustion. Using a randomized crossover design, we tested the hypothesis that there would be a reduction in time to exhaustion on the GXT after completing a high-demand self-control task (stop-signal task [SST]) compared to a low-demand control task (watching a brief documentary). Participants (N =8 males; 17-25 years) performed a baseline GXT on a cycle ergometer preceded by either the SST or control task. Seven days later, they completed a follow-up GXT preceded by the alternate self-control task. Participants reached voluntary exhaustion on the GXT faster after completing the SST (433.25 ± 110.28s) compared to the control condition (450.88 ± 101.81s) (P < .01). These results support the strength model of self-control and suggest there are common brain-based mechanisms that are taxed by cognitively- and physically-demanding tasks. Results are discussed in terms of limited resource and motivational interpretations. Findings may have important implications for athletes’ training and pre-competition strategies. Future research should consider how the type and duration of cognitive and exercise tasks affect the rate and extent of self-control depletion as well as the time it takes to replenish self-control resources.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".