A Single Bout of Exercise Provides a Persistent Benefit to Cognitive Flexibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: A single bout of exercise enhances activity within the cortical networks that support executive function. It is, however, unclear whether exercise improves each core component of executive function and for how long a putative benefit might persist. Method: In Experiment 1, participants completed 20-min of aerobic exercise (via cycle ergometer) and cognitive flexibility—a core component of executive function—was examined pre-exercise, and at immediate, 30- and 60-min post-exercise assessments. Experiment 2 entailed a non-exercise control (i.e., participants sat on the ergometer without exercising) involving the same timeline of cognitive flexibility assessment. Cognitive flexibility was measured via stimulus-driven (SD) and minimally delayed (MD) saccades arranged in an AABB paradigm. SD and MD saccades require a response at target onset and after target offset, respectively, with the latter requiring executive control. Work has shown that reaction times 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). Results: Experiment 1 showed a unidirectional switch-cost at each assessment; however, the switch-cost magnitude was decreased at immediate and 30-min assessments compared to the pre- and 60-min assessments. In contrast, Experiment 2 did not elicit a change in switch-cost magnitude across the different assessments. Discussion/Conclusion: Thus, a single-bout of exercise benefitted the cognitive flexibility component of executive function in the immediate and 30-min post-exercise assessments.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".