The effect of exercise on social cognitive function in adolescents: the mechanism of emotion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With increasing global attention on adolescent mental health and cognitive development, physical activity has emerged as a key factor in promoting all-round development. This study investigates the effects of moderate-intensity physical activity on adolescents’ social cognitive function, with a focus on the mediating role of emotional regulation. A 12-week intervention was conducted with 300 adolescents aged 12 to 18. Physical activity levels were objectively measured using accelerometers, social cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA), and emotional state was measured using the Emotional Regulation Scale (ERS). The results showed that moderate-intensity physical activity significantly improved social cognitive functions, particularly in social information processing and emotional understanding (p < 0.01). Emotional regulation played a key mediating role in this process, explaining 38% of the total effect (p < 0.001). Gender and BMI were also found to moderate this effect, with females and individuals with a normal BMI showing more significant improvements (p < 0.05). These findings support the integration of moderate physical activity into adolescents’ routines to enhance their cognitive, emotional, and social development.
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.
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 it