4.6 Article

Differential Effects of Acute Exercise on Distinct Aspects of Executive Function

Journal

MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE
Volume 47, Issue 7, Pages 1460-1469

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000542

Keywords

COGNITION; INHIBITORY CONTROL; WORKING MEMORY; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; CYCLING

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To increase understanding about the effects of moderate-intensity physical activity on cognitive function, the current study examined whether a single bout of aerobic exercise exerts differential effects on distinct aspects of executive function in healthy young adults. Methods A within-subjects study was designed where 26 young adult participants (mean age = 25.23 yr, 12 males) engaged in a 30-min bout of both (a) moderate-intensity aerobic cycling and (b) passive motor-driven cycling, occurring on two separate occasions and counterbalanced in their order. To assess changes in cognitive function, performance on two tasks of executive functionworking memory and inhibitory control, counterbalanced in the order of administrationwas collected before and immediately after each exercise session. Results Results indicate that working memory performance on the 2-back condition of a facial n-back task was acutely enhanced by moderate-intensity exercise (mean increase in accuracy = 6.4% 1.1%), which was significantly greater than the changes after passive exercise control (P < 0.05). This finding was not observed for inhibitory control in which neither of the exercise sessions elicited significant changes in performance on a flanker task. Conclusions Acute aerobic exercise evokes differential effects on executive functions. This specificity in behavioral outcomes leads to the prediction that brain mechanisms related to working memory, compared to inhibitory control, are selectively benefited by moderate-intensity exercise.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available