Differential effects of prolonged aerobic and resistance exercise on cognitive functioning in sedentary young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives Inconsistencies in the literature make it difficult to outline the relationship between exercise and cognition in young adults. Our aim is to better understand the relationship between prolonged aerobic and resistance exercise and cognitive abilities in sedentary young adults, and how this relationship is mediated by changes in cardiovascular fitness. Methods Twenty-three volunteers were recruited and assigned to two groups to complete one hour of continuous daily workout sessions of aerobic (SPIN) and anaerobic (SCSW) exercises over a 30 day period. Each subject was provided with a Polar-10 wearable to record the heart rate (HR) activity during the workout sessions. The workout sessions were completed during five consecutive days over four consecutive weeks. Each week, HR data were collected from the last workout session. Volunteers also completed a neurocognitive test battery (Cambridge Brain Sciences, CBS) each exercise session, including an additional baseline measure before exercise regime began. Results We found that memory, reasoning and verbal abilities improved throughout the aerobic, but not the resistance exercise program. We found a positive correlation between heart rate index (HRI) and memory and reasoning test scores. We also found a negative correlation between reasoning ability and HRM (heart rate mean), and heart rate skewness (SKW). The results of a regression model to predict memory and reasoning abiltiies revealed that memory was best predicted by HRI and HRM, while the reasoning ability was best predicted by only HRI. Conclusion Regular aerobic exercises improved specific cognitive performance and it was possible to predict the performance by employing the HR parameters HRI and HRM.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".