Acute Effects of an Afterschool Running and Reading Program on Executive Functioning in Children: An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Emerging research within school settings suggests acute forms of physical activity and exercise lead to improvements in executive functioning among children. However, research pertaining to these effects within the afterschool setting remains limited. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the acute effects of a community-based afterschool running and reading program on executive functioning in 8-12-year-old children. Method: Fifty participants were initially recruited to participate in this study. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, data collection was terminated prematurely which resulted in a sample size of 15 participants. Participants (N = 10) from School 1 completed two batteries of executive function assessments (i.e., inhibition, switching, and updating) separated by 15-minutes of running or 15-minutes of sedentary reading. Whereas only 5 participants from School 2 completed assessments of executive functioning prior to and following the running portion of the program (due to early the termination of data collection). Results: Overall, executive function scores improved across each assessment following the running condition when compared to the reading condition (School 1). Inhibition scores significantly improved, and these effects were very large (School 1). Across both schools, improvements in executive functioning following the running portion of the program ranged from small-large in effect size. Conclusion: Findings from the present study provide initial evidence for the acute effects of a community-based afterschool running and reading program on executive functioning in children. Future research with larger samples in afterschool settings is recommended to replicate this preliminary work.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".