Changes in cognitive control and mood across repeated exercise sessions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Acute exercise elicits benefits to cognition and mood. The consistency and accumulation of benefits across exercise sessions remains unclear. This exploratory study evaluated the reproducibility and accumulation of changes in cognitive control and mood across multiple exercise sessions. Thirty young healthy adults (18–35 years) were recruited to exercise ( N = 14; age: 21.71 [ SD = 1.64]; 57% female) or control ( N = 16; age: 22.25 [ SD = 3.68]; 56% female) groups. Participants attended six sessions over 2 weeks (EX = 20‐min mod‐intensity cycling; CO = 20‐min reading). Cognitive control was assessed using a Flanker task (accuracy‐adjusted response time, RT LISAS ) pre‐/post‐intervention. Mood was reported 5×/day on exercise and non‐exercise days (pre, post, 11:30 am, 3 pm, and 8 pm) using the Bond–Lader VAS. Cognitive control and mood improved acutely (within session) following exercise compared with control ( F (1, 592) = 6.11, p = .0137; F (1, 305.93) = 38.68, p < .0001; F (1, 307.06) = 13.69, p = .0003) and were consistent across sessions. Cognitive control also improved across sessions in both groups ( F (5, 282.22) = 11.06, p < .0001). These results suggest that: (1) acute effects of exercise on cognition and mood are consistent across multiple sessions; (2) the Flanker task learning effects continue over many trials/sessions; and (3) accumulated mood effects require further investigation. Future studies should further explore the connection between acute exercise exposures and accumulated cognitive benefits.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".