A Single Bout of Aerobic Exercise Provides an Immediate “Boost” to Cognitive Flexibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Executive function includes the core components of working memory, inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility. A wealth of studies have shown that working memory and inhibitory control are improved following a single bout of exercise; however, a paucity – and equivocal – body of work has demonstrated a similar benefit for cognitive flexibility. Cognitive flexibility underlies switching between different attentional- and motor-related goals, and a potential limitation of previous work examining this component in an exercise context is that they included tasks involving non-executive processes (i.e., numerosity, parity and language judgments). To address this issue, Experiment 1 employed a 20-min bout of aerobic exercise and examined pre- and immediate post-exercise cognitive flexibility via stimulus-driven (SD) and minimally delayed (MD) saccades ordered in an AABB task-switching paradigm. SD saccades are a standard task requiring a response at target onset, whereas MD saccades are a non-standard and top-down task requiring a response only after the target is extinguished. Work has shown that RTs for a SD saccade preceded by a MD saccade are longer than when a SD saccade is preceded by its same task-type, whereas the converse switch does not influence performance (i.e., the unidirectional switch-cost). Experiment 1 yielded a 28 ms and 8 ms unidirectional switch-cost pre- and post-exercise, respectively (ps<.001); however, the magnitude of the switch-cost was reduced post-exercise (p=.005). Experiment 2 involved a non-exercise control condition and yielded a reliable and equivalent magnitude unidirectional switch-cost at a pre- (28 ms) and post-break (26 ms) assessment (ps<.001). Accordingly, a single-bout of exercise improved task-switching efficiency and thereby provides convergent evidence that exercise can provide a global benefit to the core components of executive 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".