Moderate aerobic exercise, but not anticipation of exercise, improves cognitive control

Evidence suggests a single bout of exercise can improve cognitive control. However, many studies only include assessments after exercise. It is unclear whether exercise changes as a result, or in anticipation, of exercise. To examine changes in cognitive control due to moderate aerobic exercise, and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2020-11, Vol.15 (11), p.e0242270
Hauptverfasser: Bergelt, Maximilian, Fung Yuan, Vanessa, O'Brien, Richard, Middleton, Laura E, Martins Dos Santos, Wellington
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Evidence suggests a single bout of exercise can improve cognitive control. However, many studies only include assessments after exercise. It is unclear whether exercise changes as a result, or in anticipation, of exercise. To examine changes in cognitive control due to moderate aerobic exercise, and anticipation of such exercise. Thirty-one young healthy adults (mean age 22 years; 55% women) completed three conditions (randomized order): 1) exercise (participants anticipated and completed exercise); 2) anticipation (participants anticipated exercise but completed rest); and 3) rest (participants anticipated and completed rest). Cognitive control was assessed with a modified Flanker task at three timepoints: (1) early (20 min pre-intervention, pre-reveal in anticipation session); (2) pre-intervention (after reveal); and (3) post-intervention. An accuracy-weighted response time (RTLISAS) was the primary outcome, analyzed with a linear mixed effects modeling approach. There was an interaction between condition and time (p = 0.003) and between session and time (p = 0.015). RTLISAS was better post-exercise than post-rest and post-deception, but was similar across conditions at other timepoints. RTLISAS improved across time in session 1 and session 2, but did not improve over time in session 3. There were also main effects of condition (p = 0.024), session (p = 0.005), time (p
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0242270