ArticleCognitive processing2026
Effects of acute cardiovascular exercise and coordinative motor activity on verbal functions and attention.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Language is a cognitive domain essential for communication; however, its responsiveness to acute physical exercise or activity is unexplored. This quasi-randomized trial examined the effects of different intervention modalities on verbal functions and attention. Ninety-eight participants were assigned to high-intensity interval training (HIIT), coordinatively demanding motor activity (COOR), or a sedentary control group (CG). A pre-post design with a 24-hour follow-up assessed semantic (VFsem) and category-switching verbal fluency (VFsw), verbal learning, and attention. No group × time effects were observed for verbal learning encoding (p = .258); however, HIIT showed a steeper learning slope compared to CG (p = .044). Following an interference list, proactive interference was unaffected (p = .428), whereas retroactive interference differed significantly between groups (p = .019), with CG showing lower susceptibility than both intervention groups. No group differences were found for consolidation after 20 min or 24 h (p's ≥ .271). Semantic verbal fluency improved significantly following HIIT relative to CG (p = .029), with no significant effects in VFsw (p = .221) or attention (p = .187). We conclude an intensity-dependent pattern following the interventions, manifesting as enhanced semantic lexical retrieval and an exploratory finding of a steeper encoding following HIIT, compared to CG, with COOR in between, accompanied by an increased susceptibility to retroactive interference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42525336What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.