Cognitive function during passive heat exposure is not affected by short‐term heat acclimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hyperthermia affects cognitive performance, particularly decision‐making, the speed of performing a task and the ability to perform complex tasks. Cognitive performance is generally thought to be impaired by hyperthermia, although a u‐shaped relationship may exist between the level of hyperthermia and cognitive performance. Few studies have examined potential strategies to alter the relationship between hyperthermia and cognitive performance. Heat acclimation improves the physiological responses to heat exposure, but its effects of cognitive function remain understudied. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how cognitive performance during acute heat stress is modulated by short‐term heat acclimation. METHODS Eight healthy adults (25 ± 4 years, 4 women/4 men) participated in the study. Participants first underwent either (n=6) a 7‐day controlled hyperthermia protocol (internal body temperature ≥38.6°C for 60 minutes) or (n=2) a 7‐day time‐control period. After a minimum 1‐week washout, participants crossed‐over to the other condition. On days 1 and 7, participants performed a digital Stroop test to evaluate their response time to reading, counting, inhibition and overswitch tasks at baseline and after 60 minutes at an internal body temperature ≥38.6°C or after a 60‐minute time‐control period. RESULTS On day 1 of the control condition, reaction time during reading (−6 ms [−31, 19], p=0.79), counting (11 ms [−21, 42], p=0.66), inhibition (−31 ms [−95, 34], p=0.44) and overswitch (−38 ms [−82, 6], p=0.09) tasks was not acutely affected by a 60‐minute time‐control period. On day 1 of the heat acclimation protocol, internal body temperature (39.00 ± 0.17°C, p<0.01), mean skin temperature (37.66 ± 0.55°C, p<0.01) and heart rate (110 ± 11 bpm, p<0.01) were greater during the cognitive tasks performed under heat stress. Heat exposure acutely improved response time during reading (−56 ms [−81, −31], p<0.01), counting (−57 ms [−89, −26], p<0.01), inhibition (−84 ms [−149, −20], p=0.01) and overswitch (−68 ms [−113, −24], p<0.01). However, heat acclimation did not affect cognitive performance during each of the cognitive tasks as determined from 3‐way interactions (time × condition × day) for reading (p=1.00), counting (p=0.73), inhibition (p=0.09) and overswitch (p=0.70). CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that heat exposure acutely improves reaction time during reading, counting, inhibition and overswitch cognitive tasks, but that this improvement is not affected by 7 days of heat acclimation. Support or Funding Information Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (RGPIN‐2017‐04243)
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) | 0.003 | 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".