Temporal Dynamics of Cognitive Change following Acute Aerobic Physical Activity in Emerging Adults

Temporal Dynamics of Cognitive Change following Acute Aerobic Physical Activity in Emerging Adults | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Temporal Dynamics of Cognitive Change following Acute Aerobic Physical Activity in Emerging Adults Praveen Pasupathi, Megan O'Brokta, Andrew Cornwall, Bryan Montero-Herrera, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8148315/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Existing research underscores the positive influence of acute physical activity (PA) on cognition, including executive functions and episodic memory. However, it remains unclear whether the timing of assessment influences the extent and the patterns of cognitive improvements following acute PA, particularly in emerging adults. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of acute PA across different cognitive domains (episodic memory, working memory, and inhibitory control) at different time windows in emerging adults. Using a within-participants cross-over design, thirty emerging adults ( n = 30; 22.4 ± 1.6 years; 21 females) visited the lab on two separate days engaging in either 30-minutes of moderate-intensity PA or seated rest. Participants completed a battery of cognitive tasks at pre- and post-acute PA and seated rest including a word recognition task (encoding phase completed 5–8 minutes post PA and rest; recall phase completed 29–33 minutes post PA and rest), a change detection dot task (completed 9–28 minutes post PA and rest), and a modified flanker task (34–38 minutes post PA and rest). Results revealed improved memory recall performance, specifically for primacy and recency accuracy. However, results for the change detection and the flanker task revealed no change after acute PA compared to seated rest. Together, these results reveal temporal specific effects and suggest that the timing of cognitive assessment following is critical for capturing cognitive benefits of acute PA, especially in emerging adults. Acute exercise executive functions episodic memory cognition emerging adults Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 1. Introduction Accumulating evidence demonstrates that an acute bout of physical activity (PA) enhances executive function (EF) and episodic memory (Chang et al., 2012 ; Erickson et al., 2019 ; Hillman et al., 2008 ; Labban & Etnier, 2011 , 2018 ; Loprinzi et al., 2019 ; Ludyga et al., 2016 ; Pontifex et al., 2019 ; Qazi et al., 2024 ; Roig et al., 2013 ; Sng et al., 2018 ; Verburgh et al., 2014 ). Enhancing these cognitive functions through PA could significantly contribute to improved daily performances and long-term benefits to work success, scholastic performance, and effective daily activities (Ahmed et al., 2023 ; Bailey, 2007 ; Gray-Burrows et al., 2019 ; Moffitt et al., 2011 ; Peters et al., 2019 ; Shields et al., 2017 ; Tulving, 2002 ; Yonelinas et al., 2022 ). However, prior research is inconsistent due to only evaluating individual cognitive domains following PA and substantial variability in PA parameters across studies (e.g., duration, intensity, time, type) (Haverkamp et al., 2020 ; Labban & Etnier, 2018 ; Rathore & Lom, 2017 ; Sng et al., 2018 , 2018 ; Verburgh et al., 2014 ). Furthermore, given that EF and episodic memory share similar processing mechanisms (McCabe et al., 2010 ; Vandermorris et al., 2013 ), measuring a single domain obscures the interpretation between a general (i.e., global cognitive improvements) and a selective effect on cognitive domains. In addition, there is a limited understanding of temporal-specific cognitive enhancements following acute PA (Pontifex et al., 2019 ). To address these inconsistencies and provide a more holistic understanding of the effects of acute PA on cognition, this study sought to investigate temporal dynamics of episodic memory and aspects of EF after 30 minutes of sustained moderate-intensity aerobic PA in emerging adults. This approach allows for the simultaneous assessment of EF and memory, thereby offering insights into how these cognitive functions interact and are collectively influenced by acute PA. Emerging adults, defined as a period between adolescence and full-fledged adulthood (~ 18–25 years old), is marked by critical developmental transitions in cognitive, social, and emotional domains. During this time, individuals often experience increased independence, the pursuit of higher education, career exploration, and the establishment of long-term goals. Cognitive functions like EF and episodic memory are particularly important during this phase, as they underpin decision-making, problem-solving, and learning, which are crucial for academic success, career preparation, and life management. EF represents a set of higher order cognitive operations that underlie selection, scheduling, coordination, and monitoring of complex, goal-directed process involved in perception, memory, and action (Norman & Shallice, 1986 ; Rogers & Monsell, 1995 ). Inhibitory control, a component of EF, refers to the ability to focus on task-relevant demands while suppressing irrelevant responses (Diamond, 2013 ; Miyake et al., 2000 ). Most research to date affirms improvements in inhibitory control outcomes following an acute bout of PA in emerging adults (Chang et al., 2012 ; O’Leary et al., 2011 ; Pontifex et al., 2019 ; Verburgh et al., 2014 ). However, these enhancements appear time-dependent following acute PA. For instance, improvements have been observed both immediately (< 5 minutes) and shortly after (5–15 minutes) aerobic PA (Chang et al., 2014 ; Chang et al., 2017 ; Kamijo et al., 2009 ; Pontifex et al., 2019 ). In contrast, studies assessing inhibitory control after a long delay (30–45 minutes) often report maintenance (i.e., no change) rather than improvements, despite replicating similar exercise interventions (Drollette et al., 2022 ; Hillman et al., 2003 ; Themanson & Hillman, 2006 ). These studies suggest that the timing of cognitive assessment following acute PA is crucial for inhibitory control improvements. However, most investigations to date focus on assessments within 15 minutes of PA, leaving the prolonged effects beyond 30 minutes underexplored (Pontifex et al., 2019 ). To address this gap, the present study aimed to evaluate inhibitory control after a long delay to replicate previous research suggesting sustained performance following acute PA. Unlike inhibitory control, working memory, another key component of EF, is not evaluated as often in acute PA research (Haverkamp et al., 2020 ; Ludyga et al., 2016 ; Pontifex et al., 2019 ; Verburgh et al., 2014 ) and critical timing of assessment is less evident compared to inhibitory control outcomes. Working memory involves storage, maintenance, and manipulation of information for a brief period (Baddeley, 1992 ; Diamond, 2013 ; Miyake et al., 2000 ). Early research reported moderate improvements in working memory following acute bouts of aerobic PA, particularly noting faster response times when evaluated immediately after moderate-intensity (Pontifex et al., 2009 ; Roig et al., 2013 ). However, more recent meta-analyses have shown small or inconsistent effects, with some investigations revealing no significant improvements following moderate-intensity PA (Haverkamp et al., 2020 ; Rathore & Lom, 2017 ). For instance, working memory performance was not modulated when assessed shortly after (5–15 minutes) acute PA (Coles & Tomporowski, 2008 ; Gothe et al., 2013 ; Li et al., 2014 ). However, assessment following high-intensity PA after a long delay (40 minutes), revealed working memory improvements in emerging adults (Drollette & Meadows, 2022 ). These results contradict Tempest and colleagues ( 2017 ) on the timing of assessment and intensity of acute PA on working memory, with their results revealing that high-intensity PA attenuated performance, and low-intensity PA maintained performance when assessed immediately after. The lack of consistent results could also be attributed to baseline performance, such that selective improvements were observed in individuals with lower baseline performance (Sibley & Beilock, 2007 ). Together, these mixed findings suggest that variables such as timing of assessment, intensity, individual differences, and research design significantly influence the effects of acute PA on working memory in emerging adults (Gothe et al., 2013 ; Haverkamp et al., 2020 ; Li et al., 2014 ; Ludyga et al., 2016 ; Pontifex et al., 2019 ; Rathore & Lom, 2017 ; Verburgh et al., 2014 ). Further research is needed to formulate a greater understanding of working memory and the optimal timing of cognitive assessment for greater benefits following acute PA. Recognizing the importance of timing in assessing cognitive outcomes, the present study will align its assessment timing with the optimal windows identified in inhibitory control research (5–15 minutes post-PA) given the close relationship between inhibitory control and working memory. This approach aims to determine whether similar improvements at optimal timing can be observed in working memory. Although studies have isolated the effects on specific components of EF, a few investigations have evaluated inhibitory control and working memory together following acute PA (Drollette et al., 2012 ; Gothe et al., 2013 ; Weng et al., 2015 ). For example, pre-adolescent children improved inhibitory control performance on a flanker task following an acute bout of PA at moderate intensity but maintained working memory performance after a short delay (Drollette et al., 2012 ). Contrastingly, Weng and colleagues ( 2015 ) reported no improvements in inhibitory control but observed improved working memory assessed after a short delay (6-minutes) following acute moderate-intensity PA in adults. In contrast, Gothe and colleagues ( 2013 ) found no changes in either inhibitory control or working memory evaluated following a short delay (4-minutes) after acute PA at moderate intensity in emerging adults. These inconsistent findings underscore the multifaceted nature of EF and the need for a nuanced examination of acute PA on various aspects of EF that appear to modulate over distinct time courses (short and long delays) following a single bout of acute PA. By examining these time-dependent effects, this study seeks to clarify how acute PA influences different components of EF and offer insights into the optimal timing for assessing EF. Research indicates that EF plays a pivotal role in memory retrieval and shares a similar underlying mechanism with episodic memory (McCabe et al., 2010 ; Vandermorris et al., 2013 ). Episodic memoy refers to the ability to recall prior spatial and temporal events (Tulving, 1993 ). Therefore, modulation in EF following acute PA may influence episodic memory. Research suggests that timing is also a significant moderating factor for memory benefits following acute PA (Labban & Etnier, 2011 , 2018 ; Loprinzi et al., 2019 ) but not at 24h post-PA (Labban & Etnier, 2018 ; Sng et al., 2018 ). Specifically, word recall was improved at 30-minutes, 60-minutes, and 24h following acute PA (Labban & Etnier, 2011 , 2018 ). However, word recognition was not improved 24h post-PA in adults (Labban & Etnier, 2018 ; Sng et al., 2018 ). Research suggests that greater time between PA bout and memory assessment (24h) offers fewer chances to learn words potentially leading to no change in recognition performance at 24h post-PA (Labban & Etnier, 2018 ). This may explain null and inconsistent findings in recent meta-analyses on episodic memory with limited investigations assessing immediately after acute PA in young adults (Qazi et al., 2024 ). Alternatively, preadolescent children improved primacy accuracy on a word recognition task shortly after (5-minutes) acute PA (Drollette & Hillman, 2020 ). Although these results are in children, they do highlight that the immediate assessment of episodic memory following a single session of PA may be crucial for strengthening short and long-term episodic memory and subsequent evaluations in emerging adults. Therefore, further research is needed to investigate this trend in emerging adults by assessing episodic memory immediately after acute PA. To fully understand the cognitive benefits of acute PA, it is imperative to move beyond the isolated examination of individual cognitive domains and instead evaluate multiple domains within the same study. EF and episodic memory, for instance, share overlapping neural substrates and cognitive mechanisms (McCabe et al., 2010 ; Vandermorris et al., 2013 ). Consequently, the effects of PA on these domains are likely interdependent, making it challenging to determine whether observed improvements are domain-specific or reflect a more global enhancement in cognitive functioning. Research that evaluates only a single cognitive domain may lead to an incomplete or even misleading understanding of how PA influences the brain. For example, improvements in episodic memory following PA may stem in part from enhanced EF, given that EF facilitates memory encoding and retrieval processes. Similarly, PA-induced gains in EF might influence memory performance through shared attentional and working memory processes. Without measuring both EF and episodic memory within the same study, it is impossible to discern whether observed cognitive benefits are specific to one domain, mutually reinforcing, or indicative of global cognitive enhancements. Moreover, assessing multiple cognitive outcomes allows for the exploration of how these domains interact in response to PA. This is particularly relevant because cognitive tasks often require the simultaneous recruitment of EF and memory. For example, solving a complex problem or planning an activity relies on the ability to hold and manipulate information (working memory) while retrieving relevant past experiences (episodic memory). By investigating multiple domains concurrently, this study provides a more ecologically valid representation of how cognition operates in real-world settings and how PA may influence these interactions. This study aims to evaluate inhibitory control, working memory, and episodic memory during a time period with predictable outcomes based on prior research following acute PA. We hypothesized that acute PA will enhance EF and episodic memory through both domain-specific and global cognitive mechanisms, with the timing of cognitive assessment revealing distinct temporal patterns of improvement. Specifically, we hypothesize that: (1) episodic memory performance will show immediate improvements when assessed directly after acute PA, reflecting enhanced encoding and retrieval processes; (2) working memory will improve during an short-delay window (5–20 minutes post-PA); and (3) inhibitory control will be maintained after a longer delay (≥ 25 minutes post-PA), consistent with sustained engagement and regulation. Measuring these cognitive domains within the same study will allow us to determine whether the observed benefits are specific to each domain, mutually reinforcing across domains, or indicative of global cognitive enhancements. By evaluating several cognitive domains after a single bout of PA, this study sought to provide more robust and generalizable findings, contributing to the development of more effective exercise interventions for cognitive enhancement. 2. Methods 2.1. Participants Emerging adults ( n = 30) were recruited from the [removed for peer review] via flyers and advertisements in Kinesiology undergraduate courses. Inclusion criteria for this study included emerging adults ages 18 to 25 years, normal or corrected-to-normal vision based on the minimal 20/20 standard, and free of any neurological conditions that would limit their completion of the cognitive tasks. After meeting the inclusion criteria, participants completed the informed consent via Qualtrics in accordance with the University’s Institutional Review Board. 2.2. Measures 2.2.1 Cognitive Tasks 2.2.1.1. Flanker Task Participants completed a modified version of the Eriksen flanker task (Eriksen & Eriksen, 1974 ) to assess aspects of inhibitory control. The flanker task involved stimuli consisting of five arrows in white color presented at the center of the black screen using PsychoPy software (version 1.90.3) (Peirce et al., 2019 ). Participants were instructed to respond to the directionality of the center arrow amidst either congruent (<<<<>>>>) or incongruent (<<><><>>) trials by pressing the left thumb response if the center arrow was pointing to the left and right thumb press if the center arrow was pointing to the right using outside buttons on a 4-button response pad (Current Designs Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA). In addition, participants were instructed to respond as accurately and quickly as possible. Each stimuli was presented for 100 milliseconds (ms) with a variable inter-trial interval (ITI) of 1000, 1200, and 1400 ms. Participants completed two blocks of 108 trials with equiprobable congruent and incongruent trials. Prior to each experimental session, a practice session that included 42 trials was completed. Response accuracy and reaction time (RT) measures were assessed for each trial condition (congruent, incongruent). Additionally, interference scores were computed for RT (incongruent – congruent) and response accuracy (congruent - incongruent). 2.2.1.2. Change Detection Task A change detection dot task was utilized to assess working memory. A single trial consisted of a presentation of a white direction arrow (200 ms duration), memory array (150 ms duration), retention interval (1000 ms duration), and test array (2000 ms duration) in sequential order with an inter-trial interval (ITI) of 1000 ms. Participants were asked to maintain their focus on a white fixation dot presented in the center of the grey screen (RGB: 128 128 128) throughout the duration of each trial. While maintaining central focus, participants were instructed that an arrow would appear above the fixation dot, and they would need to remember the colored dots that appeared on the side of the screen corresponding to the direction of the arrow (i.e., memory array). Dots appeared on both sides of the screen consisting of random set sizes of 2, 3, 4, or 5-dots of random color (out of a possible 10 distinct colors, RGB values: red = 255 0 0; green = 0 255 0; blue = 0 0 255; magenta = 255 0 255; yellow = 255 255 0; cyan = 0 255 255; orange = 255 103 1; white = 255 255 255; brown 113 56 0; black 0 0 0). Following a delay (i.e., retention interval), participants responded to the test array by indicating whether the memory and test array were the same or different (i.e., “Did any dots in the attended side of the screen change color?”). Responses were recorded using a response pad by pressing either the left or the right button corresponding to a correct or incorrect match of color in the attended side of the screen with response selection (i.e., left or right response) counterbalanced for each participant. For example, participant A required a left response for color change and a right response for no change in color while participant B required a left response for no color change and a right response for color change. Participants completed 80 trials for each block with a total of three blocks completed for the present study (6 minutes per block; 1-minute delay between blocks) with equiprobable color change, directionality, and the number of dots (2, 3, 4, and 5) in each block. Before each experimental session, a practice session was completed with 32 trials. Response accuracy and RT were assessed for each set size separately (2, 3, 4, and 5-dots). Accuracy was calculated based on participants ability to correctly detect whether the memory and test arrays were same or different. Specifically, hit rate (correctly identifying a color change), correct rejection rate (correctly identifying no-color change). RT was measured as the time taken to repond to the test array, with mean RT calculated for correct responses for each set size to examine processing speed. Calculation of individual memory capacity was used to assess working memory load following previous research [ k = (hit rate - false alarm) * set size] such that k is assumed to increase with set size load and reach asymptote at an individual’s working memory capacity (Cowan, 2001 ). 2.2.1.3. Word Recognition Task The word recognition task was divided into two phases (i.e., encoding and memory phase) and completed separately with the change detection task performed between the encoding and memory phase. The encoding phase required participants to memorize a list of 30 words without responding. The memory phase required participants to recognize the 30 words during the delayed recognition phase (old words) intermixed with 30 new words that were not present during the study phase (new words). Words were selected from the MRC Psycholinguistic Database (Coltheart, 1981 ; Wilson, 1987 ) based on the number of letters (3–6), written frequency, concreteness, familiarity, and age of acquisition. Words were chosen that were commonly used by emerging adults. In addition, words were assigned to non-overlapping, word lists that contained an equiprobable value of words that matched based on the MRC database selection criteria. This was to ensure that each iteration of the words was equally difficult for emerging adults. Each word was 3 cm tall capitalized in white Arial font presented on a black background for 100 ms with an ITI of 1200 ms. The stimuli presentation was consistent throughout the encoding and the recognition phase using the PsychoPy software (version 1.90.3) (Peirce et al., 2019 ). Participants were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible with a button response to old and new words on the same response pad (same as used in the flanker task). Left and right response options for old and new word designations were counterbalanced across participants through random assignment. For example, participant A required a left response for old words and a right response for new words, while participant B required a right response for old words and a left response for new words. The outcome variables included accuracy and RT for old and new words, and primacy (first 10 words during the encoding phase) and recency (last 10 words during the encoding phase). Primacy and recency effects are well-established phenomena in memory research, reflecting the distinct cognitive and neural mechanisms involved in encoding and retrieval. The primacy effect is primarily attributed to enhanced encoding into long-term memory, facilitated by greater attentional resources and rehearsal opportunities during the early stages of the study phase. In contrast, the recency effect reflects superior recall of recently encountered information, relying more heavily on short-term or working memory processes. By evaluating these distinct components of memory, the task allows us to examine whether acute PA exerts differential effects on the encoding and retrieval processes associated with primacy and recency. This approach also helps determine whether memory enhancements following PA are driven by improved long-term encoding mechanisms, short-term retention, or a combination of both. 2.2.2. Ratings of Perceived Exertion and Heart Rate Physical exertion was measured using the self-report Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) Scale that ranged from 6 (very light exertion) to 20 (maximal exertion) (Borg, 1982 ). Heart rate (HR) was recorded using a Polar monitor placed around the torso at the start of each experimental session. 2.2.3. Fitness Assessment Participants were fitted with a Polar HR monitor, measured for height and weight (i.e, stadiometer and a Tanita WB-300 Plus digital scale), and informed about the orientation of the equipment (i.e, wearing a mouth apparatus and nose clip while running on a treadmill) by a trained experimenter. A modified version of the Balke protocol (American College of Sports Medicine, 2022 ) was used for the graded exercise test (GXT) to assess fitness while participants ran on a motor-driven treadmill. The GXT involved a warm-up for 3 minutes at a comfortable pace which was agreed upon during the first minute of the assessment for each participant. After 3 minutes of warm-up, the participants set a speed that was constant throughout the assessment. The treadmill grade increased by 2.5% every two minutes. Maximal aerobic capacity (VO 2 peak) was measured using a computerized in-direct calorimetry system (ParvoMedics True Max 2400 L). Relative peak oxygen consumption was expressed in milliliters of oxygen consumed per kilogram of body weight per minute (mL/kg/min). Maximal HR from fitness assessment was used to determine exercise intensity for the PA condition. 2.3. Procedures Using a within-subject cross-over randomized design, all participants completed three sessions in a laboratory on three separate days with a minimum of two days between the second and third sessions. Prior to the first session, participants completed pre-eligibility questions regarding age and ability to engage in physical activity using Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). During the first visit, participants signed the informed consent before completing the Health and History Demographics, the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q), and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ; Craig et al., 2003 ) through the online Qualtrics survey. They then completed the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, Second Edition (WASI-II; Wechsler, 2011 ) in a paper-pencil format to obtain an Intelligent Quotient (IQ) score. Following these assessments, individuals completed a practice session of each computerized cognitive task before completing a graded exercise test (GXT). During the second and third sessions (see Fig. 1 for study design), participants completed either a rest or exercise condition which was counterbalanced across participants. During each session, the participants wore a Polar HR monitor and completed a practice session of cognitive tasks followed by a baseline assessment (i.e., before) of cognitive tasks. Next, participants performed either the exercise or rest conditions. For the exercise condition, participants completed 20-minutes of running on a treadmill at 70% of maximum HR (HR max was computed based on maximal HR achieved following GXT on day one) with a 5-minute warmup and cool down. In the seated rest condition, participants studied for their undergraduate classes for 30 minutes. During each experimental session, HR and RPE were recorded every two minutes. A five-minute break at the end of PA and seated rest was included to allow HR to return to baseline after PA. The cognitive tasks were completed before and after exercise or rest in the following order: the encoding phase of the memory task (total time: 3-minutes), the change detection task (total time: 19 minutes), the word recognition memory phase of the memory task (total time: 4 minutes), and the flanker task (total time: 4 minutes). All cognitive tasks took approximately 30-minutes to complete at each assessment period (i.e., before and after PA and seated rest), see Fig. 2 . The time window for each cognitive task following acute PA and seated rest were as follows (accounting for 1-minute delay between cognitive tasks): memory encoding phase (start-end) 5–8 minutes, change detection task 9–28 minutes; memory recall phase 29–33 minutes, and flanker task 34–38 minutes. 2.4. Statistical Analysis Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS (Version 29.0.2.0) (IBM Corp, 2023 ). A sensitivity analysis was computed using G*Power v3.1.9.7 (Faul et al., 2007 ) for the 2 (Condition) × 2 (Time) within-subjects design (one group; four measurements). With N = 24, α = .05, power = .80, correlation among repeated measures (ρ) = .50, and nonsphericity correction (ε) = 0.70, the minimum detectable omnibus effect was Cohen’s F = 0.278. This indicates the study was powered to detect approximately medium or larger within-subjects effects. Analyses were conducted using separate repeated measures of ANOVA for each construct. Main effects and interaction were reported using partial η p 2 . The Huynh-Feldt correction was applied for violations of sphericity within each model, particularly for the Time factor (before and after) in all analyses. Post hoc t -test comparisons were conducted to follow up on significant interactions or main effects of Mode, Time, and Type for flanker response accuracy, RT, interference scores, and change detection task accuracy and RT. Effect sizes were reported using Cohen’s d (small ≤ 0.2, medium = 0.5, and large ≥ 0.80). Flanker response accuracy and mean RT were analyzed separately using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) × 2 (Time: before and after each mode) × 2 (Type: congruent, incongruent) repeated measures of ANOVA. Interference scores for flanker mean RT and accuracy were analyzed using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) × 2 (Time: before, after) repeated measures of ANOVA. The change detection task response accuracy, mean RT, and k -score were analyzed separately using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) × 2 (Time: before, after) × 4 (Type: 2-dots, 3-dots, 4-dots, 5-dots) repeated measures of ANOVA. Word recognition response accuracy and RT were analyzed separately for old/new and primacy/recency outcomes using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) × 2 (Time: before, after) × 2 (Type: old, new / primacy, recency) repeated measures of ANOVA. Additionally, a separate t-test was conducted to compare HR and RPE across the 30-minute exercise and seated rest conditions to assess the manipulation of the intervention. 3. Results 3.1. Demographic results and Table 1 A total of 30 participants were recruited, including 21 females and 9 males. The average age for this sample was 23.1 ± 26 years. Mean BMI and aerobic Fitness were 26.3 ± 7.4 and 37.1 ± 7.6 mL/kg/min, respectively. A majority of the sample identified as non-Hispanic White or Caucasian, and Black or African American, see Table 1 for demographics of the study sample. Table 1 Means (± SD) for demographics and fitness measures. Measures Participants N (females) 30 (21) Age (years) 23.1 ± 2.6 BMI 26.3 ± 7.4 Fitness (mL/kg/min) 37.1 ± 7.6 Fitness percentile (%) 52.8 ± 28.5 IQ 90 ± 9.7 Maternal Education Advanced degree 7 Bachelor’s degree 6 Some college 11 High School Graduate 6 Hispanic or Latino Yes 2 No 28 Race White or Caucasian 10 Black or African American 14 Mixed 2 Asian 3 Not reported 1 Note . BMI is calculated as weight divided by the square of height (i.e., kg/m 2 ). IQ = intelligent quotient measured with the Weschsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence second edition (WASI-II). 3.2. Preliminary analysis T-test comparisons identified that the mean HR during the acute PA (127 ± 7.4 bpm) was significantly greater than the rest condition [76.5 ± 12.6 bpm; t (29) = 20.9, p ≤ .01]. Additionally, the mean RPE was significantly higher for the PA condition (10.1 ± 2.4) compared to the rest condition [6.34 ± 0.7; t (29) = 8.2, p ≤ .01], see Fig. 3 . 3.3. Flanker task: Table 2 presents the statistical summary of the flanker task model. The repeated measures of ANOVA revealed a main effect of Type for response accuracy, [ F (1,29) = 47.40, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .62]. This main effect was superseded by a significant Time × Type interaction [ F (1,29) = 4.48, p ≤ .05, η p 2 = .13]. Decomposition of the interaction effect revealed greater response accuracy for the before condition (congruent trials: 96.6 ± 3.3%, incongruent trials: 89.8 ± 7.6%) compared to the after condition [(congruent trials: 96.1 ± 4.2%, incongruent trials: 88.1 ± 8.4%), t ’s (29) ≥ 6.46, p’ s ≤ .01]. For flanker RT, there was a significant main effect of Time [ F (1,29) = 12.95, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .31] and Type [ F (1,29) = 208.21, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .88]. Lastly, interference accuracy results revealed a main effect of Time [ F (1,29) = 4.48, p ≤ .05, η p 2 = .12]. No other main effects or interaction effects were found. Table 2 Summary of repeated measures of ANOVA for Flanker task Model F df1/df2 P η p 2 Response Accuracy Mode 0.005 1,29 .94 0.01 Time 2.09 1,29 .16 0.07 Type 47.40 1,29 ≤ .01* 0.62 Mode × Time 0.007 1,29 .94 0.01 Mode × Type 0.06 1,29 .81 0.01 Time × Type a 4.48 1,29 ≤ .05* 0.13 Mode × Time × Type 3.54 1,29 .07 0.11 RT Mode 0.16 1,29 .69 0.01 Time 12.95 1,29 ≤ .01* 0.31 Type 208.21 1,29 ≤ .01* 0.88 Mode × Time 0.58 1,29 .45 0.02 Mode × Type 0.51 1,29 .48 0.02 Time × Type 0.79 1,29 .38 0.03 Mode × Time × Type 0.68 1,29 .42 0.02 Interference Accuracy Mode 0.06 1,29 .81 0.01 Time 4.48 1,29 ≤ .05* 0.13 Mode × Time 3.54 1,29 .07 0.11 Interference RT Mode 0.51 1,29 .48 0.02 Time 0.79 1,29 .38 0.03 Mode × Time 0.68 1,29 .42 0.02 Note. * Indicates significant results, p ≤ .05. (Mode: rest and PA, Time: before and after each mode, Type: congruent and incongruent trials, reference group is in bold). a Post hoc t -test for Model Time × Type, t = 6.49, p ≤ .01. 3.4. Change detection task: Table 3 presents the statistical summary of the change detection task model. The omnibus analysis for response accuracy revealed only a main effect of Type [ F (1,29) = 124.93, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .81]. No other main or interaction effects were found for response accuracy. The analysis for RT revealed a main effect of Time [ F (1,29) = 96.69, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .77] and Size [ F (1,29) = 33.19, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .53]. This main effect was superseded by a Time × Size interaction [ F (1,29) = 10.99, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .28]. Post hoc tests showed longer RT across all set sizes for the before condition (2-dot: 683.2 ± 123.7, 3-dot: 729.6 ± 123.6, 4-dot: 755.2 ± 128.5, 5-dot: 784.9 ± 156.2) compared to the after condition [(2-dot: 634.6 ± 132.4, 3-dot: 659.0 ± 133.8, 4-dot: 681.6 ± 143.3, 5-dot: 687.1 ± 141.7 ms); t’s (29) ≥ 6.65, p’s ≤ .01]. Additionally, an increase in RT was observed with an increase in set size for the before [ t’s (29) ≥ 3.45, p ≤ .01] and after [ t’s (29) ≥ 2.85, p’s ≤ .01] condition, except for 4-dot compared to 5-dot in the after condition [ t (29) = 0.75, p = .46]. The analysis for k -score accuracy revealed a main effect of Size [ F (1,29) = 36.68, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .56], indicating greater accuracy with an increase in dot size except for 3-dot compared to 5-dot and 4-dot compared to 5-dot. No other main or interaction effects were found. Table 3 Summary of repeated measures of ANOVA for the Change detection task Model F df1/df2 p η p 2 Response Accuracy Mode 0.67 1,29 .42 0.02 Time 0.10 1,29 .75 0.01 Type 124.93 1,29 ≤ .01* 0.81 Mode × Time 0.37 1,29 .54 0.01 Mode × Type 0.41 1,29 .75 0.14 Time × Type 0.92 1,29 .43 0.03 Mode × Time × Type 2.40 1,29 .13 0.07 RT Mode 1.01 1,29 .32 0.03 Time 96.69 1,29 ≤ .01* 0.77 Type 33.19 1,29 ≤ .01* 0.53 Mode × Time 0.01 1,29 .92 0.00 Mode × Type 0.55 3,72 .61 0.02 Time × Type a,b,c 10.99 3,72 ≤ .01* 0.28 Mode × Time × Type 1.05 3,72 .37 0.04 k-score Mode 0.36 1,29 .55 0.01 Time 0.01 1,29 .97 0.01 Size 36.68 2,44 ≤ .01* 0.56 Mode × Time 0.15 1,29 .69 0.01 Mode × Type 0.29 2,68 .78 0.01 Time × Type 0.97 2,68 .39 0.03 Mode × Time × Type 1.76 2,61 .18 0.06 Note. * Indicates significant results, p ≤ .05. (Mode: rest and PA, Time: before and after each mode, Type: 2 , 3, 4, and 5 dots, reference group is in bold). Post hoc t- test for Model Time × Type: a t ’s ≥ 6.65, p ≤ .01 [Time: before (2, 3, 4 & 5 dots) vs after (2, 3, 4 & 5 dots)] b t ’s ≥ 3.45, p ≤ .01 [Type: before (2, 3, 4 & 5 dots)] c t ’s ≥ 2.85, p ≤ .01 [Type: after (2, 3, 4, 5 dots)]. After 4 vs after 5 dots, p > .05. 3.5. Word recognition task: Table 4 presents the statistical summary of the model. The omnibus analysis for response accuracy of old and new words revealed a main effect of Time [ F (1,29) = 4.14, p ≤ .05, η p 2 = .13], which was superceded by a Mode × Time interaction [ F (1,29) = 5.16, p ≤ .03, η p 2 = .15]. Decomposition of the interaction effect revealed a significant trend observed for greater accuracy after exercise (78.2 ± 2.2%) compared to before exercise [74.1 ± 2.5%; t (29) = 1.79, p = .08]. Analysis for RT revealed a main effect of Type [ F (1,29) = 25.25, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .49]. No other main or interaction effects were found for RT. The omnibus analysis for primacy/recency accuracy revealed a main effect of Type [ F (1,29) = 12.08, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .29], which was superseded by Mode × Time interaction [ F (1,29) = 3.96, p ≤ .05, η p 2 = .12] and Time × Type interaction [ F (1,29) = 4.16, p ≤ .05, η p 2 = .13]. Decomposition of Mode × Time interaction showed greater primacy/recency response accuracy after exercise (77.3 ± 3.2%) compared to before exercise [69.2 ± 4.0%; t (29) = 2.23, p ≤ .03], see Fig. 4 . In addition, the decomposition of Time × Type interaction revealed greater accuracy for recency for the after conditions (72.33 ± 3.3%) compared to before conditions [72.33 ± 3.3%, t (29) = 2.98, p ≤ .01] and primacy before (77.66 ± 3.1%) compared to recency before [34.83 ± 3.6%, t (29) = 4.19, p ≤ .01]. No other main or interaction effects were observed for primacy/recency accuracy. The omnibus analysis for primacy/recency RT revealed a main effect of Type [ F (1,29) = 17.99, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .40], which was superseded by Time × Type interaction [ F (1,29) = 7.99, p ≤ .01, η p 2 = .23]. Decomposition of the interaction effect showed faster RT for recency words in the after (834.9 ± 25.9 ms) compared to the before experimental conditions [890.2 ± 23.6 ms; t (29) = 2.53, p ≤ .02] and primacy (817.1 ± 23.9 ms) compared to recency before experimental conditions [890.2 ± 23.7 ms; t (29) = 3.56, p ≤ .01]. Table 4 Summary of repeated measures of ANOVA for Word Recognition task Model F df1/df2 p η p 2 Old/New words Response Accuracy Mode 0.35 1,29 .56 0.01 Time 0.31 1,29 .58 0.11 Type 4.14 1,29 ≤ .05* 0.13 Mode × Time a 5.16 1,29 ≤ .03* 0.15 Mode × Type 0.35 1,29 .54 0.01 Time × Type 1.49 1,29 .23 0.05 Mode × Time × Type 0.08 1,29 .77 0.01 RT Mode 0.01 1,26 .98 0.01 Time 1.12 1,26 .30 0.04 Type 25.25 1,26 ≤ .01* 0.49 Mode × Time 0.29 1,26 .59 0.01 Mode × Type 1.61 1,26 .22 0.06 Time × Type 0.17 1,26 .69 0.01 Mode × Time × Type 0.23 1,26 .63 0.01 Primacy/Recency words Response Accuracy Mode 0.01 1,29 .93 0.01 Time 2.58 1,29 .12 0.08 Type 12.08 1,29 ≤ .01* 0.29 Mode × Time b 3.96 1,29 .05* 0.12 Mode × Type 0.65 1,29 .43 0.02 Time × Type c, d 4.16 1,29 .05* 0.13 Mode × Time × Type 0.18 1,29 .68 0.01 RT Mode 0.11 1,27 .74 0.01 Time 0.28 1,27 .60 0.01 Type 17.99 1,27 ≤ .01* 0.40 Mode × Time 0.37 1,27 .58 0.01 Mode × Type 1.24 1,27 .28 0.04 Time × Type e, f 7.99 1,27 < .01* 0.23 Mode × Time × Type 0.41 1,27 .53 0.01 Note. * Indicates significant results, p ≤ .05. RT data were not computed for three participants. (Mode: rest and PA, Time: before and after each mode, Type: old , new, primacy and recency words, reference group is in bold). Post hoc t- test for Model Mode × Time: a t = 1.79, p = .08 [Mode: before exercise vs after exercise] b t = 2.23, p ≤ .03 [Mode: before exercise vs after exercise] c t = 2.98, p ≤ .01 [Time: before recency vs after recency] d t = 4.19, p ≤ .01 [Type: before primacy vs before recency] e t = 2.53, p ≤ .02 [Time: before recency vs after recency] f t = 3.56, p ≤ .01 [Type: before primacy vs before recency] 4. Discussion This study examined the time-dependent effects of acute moderate-intensity PA on episodic memory and EF in emerging adults.. Our findings reveal that episodic memory significantly improved when assessed immediately after PA, suggesting enhanced encoding or retrieval processes. In contrast, inhibitory control and working memory performance was maintained when assessed after a delay following PA. Together, the present findings indicate that acute PA offers temporal-specific enhancements in cognition, with enhancements in episodic memory and maintenance in EF among emerging adults. This underscores the importance of task-specific and time-sensitive assessments when evaluating the cognitive effects of PA, as different cognitive domains respond uniquely rather than uniformly. The flanker results from the present study align with prior investigations showing maintenance in inhibitory control performance evaluated after a delay (25–48 minutes) following acute PA (Drollette et al., 2022 ; Hillman et al., 2003 ; Themanson & Hillman, 2006 ). Although inhibitory control benefits are generally more pronounced within a short window (5–20 minutes) post PA, our findings suggest that performance is maintained beyond 20 minutes, as observed in emerging adults. Our results and interpretations are consistent with the literature and, together, highlight that acute PA benefits are time-dependent for inhibitory control, such that assessment conducted beyond the optimal window (20 minutes) reveals a return to baseline for inhibitory control performance in emerging adults. However, one possibility for lack of improvements in inhibitory control may be attributed to ceiling effects, where cognitive performance is at the highest level in emerging adults, leaving little room for improvement compared to children and older adults following acute PA (Chang et al., 2012 ; Ferguson et al., 2021 ; Ludyga et al., 2016 ; Pontifex et al., 2019 ). Regarding memory, our results differ from previous research on the timing of executive function benefits, particularly inhibitory control, which suggests that greater benefits are likely observed within a narrow time window (5–20 minutes) after acute PA (Chang et al., 2012 ; Pontifex et al., 2019 ). However, working memory outcomes are also influenced by intensity-specific effects, individual differences, and psychological factors. For example, prior research demonstrates that greater benefits are observed following acute high-intensity PA compared to moderate-intensity PA in young adults (Chang et al., 2012 ; Drollette & Meadows, 2022 ). It is possible that moderate-intensity PA might not be sufficient enough to elicit changes in working memory performance. Another explanation may be attributed to the affect, motivation, and individual differences at baseline. Previous investigations have highlighted that individuals with lower EF and affect at baseline reveal greater benefits for EF following acute PA (Ishihara et al., 2021 ; Johnson et al., 2022 ; Sibley & Beilock, 2007 ). Based on this research, it is possible that psychological states at baseline in the present study may have contributed to the maintenance of working memory performance post PA. Future research should consider incorporating affective measures and their potential influence on the acute PA and cognition paradigm. Unlike EF results, our study found improvements in word recognition, specifically primacy and recency accuracy, when assessed immediately after acute PA in emerging adults. These results align with previous research in preadolescent children, which revealed enhanced primacy accuracy on a word recognition task after light-intensity walking (Drollette & Hillman, 2020 ). These findings compliment child research by further suggesting that an acute bout of moderate-intensity PA improves recognition memory when assessed immediately after PA in emerging adults. Interestingly, our results contradict a recent meta-analysis (Qazi et al. 2024 ), which reported a small detrimental effect ( d = -0.05) on word recognition memory following acute PA. It is important to note that the studies included in this meta-analysis primarily assessed episodic memory 24 hours after acute PA and were limited in immediate administration in emerging adults. This gap may have contributed to the smaller effect sizes observed in studies that did not assess memory immediately after PA. The present study highlight that immediate evaluation of episodic memory improved performance following acute PA. These finding suggests that the timing of assessment may play a crucial role in capturing cognitive benefits after acute PA. A proposed mechanism for observed improvements in memory may be elevated arousal levels induced by PA. Research shows that PA increases arousal during and returns to baseline after PA (Lambourne & Tomporowski, 2010 ). Furthermore, engaging in PA prior to word encoding enhance memory storage and retrieval in adults (Labban & Etnier, 2011 , 2018 ; Lambourne & Tomporowski, 2010 ; Niedermeier et al., 2020 ; Schwabe et al., 2008 ; Sharot & Phelps, 2004 ). Thus, it is possible that arousal levels were heightened during acute PA which enhanced the remembering of words during the encoding phase immediately after PA and retrieval/identification of words during the delayed recognition. This mechanism may explain the improved episodic memory observed immediately following acute PA in emerging adults. While this study provides valuable insights into the time-dependent effects of acute PA on cognition, several limitations warrant consideration. First, although we assessed multiple cognitive domains, cognitive flexibility—an important component of EF—was not included. Given its role in adapting to new information and shifting between tasks, future studies should examine how acute PA influences cognitive flexibility alongside inhibitory control and working memory. Next, individual differences in psychological states, such as affect and motivation, were not assessed. Previous research suggests that acute PA may be more beneficial for individuals with lower baseline affect or motivation levels (Johnson et al., 2022 ). Without these measures, it remains unclear whether the observed cognitive effects were moderated by psychological factors. Incorporating affective and motivational assessments in future research could help clarify for whom and under what conditions acute PA provides the greatest cognitive benefit. Finally, the study design focused on a single bout of moderate-intensity PA, limiting generalizability to other exercise intensities and durations. High-intensity PA has been shown to differentially affect cognitive function, particularly working memory (Drollette & Meadows, 2022 ). Future work should compare how different intensities, durations, and modalities of PA influence cognitive outcomes to refine exercise-based cognitive interventions. Despite these limitations, this study provides novel evidence that acute PA selectively enhances episodic memory while maintaining executive functions, reinforcing the need for task- and time-specific approaches when evaluating PA-induced cognitive changes. Future research should refine methodological approaches to identify the mechanisms underlying these selective effects and determine optimal exercise prescriptions for cognitive benefits. In conclusion, this study provides evidence that the cognitive benefits of acute PA are selective rather than global, with episodic memory improving immediately after a bout of moderate-intensity PA, while inhibitory control and working memory remained stable. These findings underscore the importance of timing in cognitive assessment, as different cognitive domains may respond uniquely to PA-induced neurophysiological changes. Understanding these time-dependent effects is crucial for optimizing exercise-based cognitive interventions, particularly in academic and professional settings where memory retention and EF play critical roles. Future research should explore how factors such as PA intensity, individual baseline cognitive states, and neurobiological mechanisms influence these selective cognitive benefits, ultimately guiding the development of targeted exercise prescriptions for cognitive enhancement in emerging adults. Declarations Declaration of competing interest: The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. Funding: No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript. Availability of data and materials: All data and materials will be made available upon request. Ethics approval and consent to participate: All study activities were approved by the University of North Carolina at Greensboro Institutional Review Board. All participants gave informed consent. Authors Contributions: P.A.P – Formal analysis, original manuscript, and figure preparation. E.S.D – Conceptualization, methodology, data collection, and original manuscript. E.S.D, M.M.O, A.S.C, B.M-H, and A.D.K – Manuscript review. A.D.K – Analysis review. References Ahmed, H., Pauly-Takacs, K., & Abraham, A. (2023). Evaluating the effects of episodic and semantic memory induction procedures on divergent thinking in younger and older adults. PLOS ONE , 18 (6), e0286305. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286305 American College of Sports Medicine (2022). ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription (Eleventh edition). Wolters Kluwer. Baddeley, A. (1992). Working Memory. Science , 255 (5044), 556–559. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1736359 Bailey, C. E. (2007). Cognitive Accuracy and Intelligent Executive Function in the Brain and in Business. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences , 1118 (1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1412.011 Borg, G. A. V. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise , 14 (5), 377–381. https://doi.org/10.1249/00005768-198205000-00012 Chang, Y., Alderman, B. L., Chu, C., Wang, C., Song, T., & Chen, F. (2017). Acute exercise has a general facilitative effect on cognitive function: A combined ERP temporal dynamics and BDNF study. Psychophysiology , 54 (2), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12784 Chang, Y. K., Labban, J. D., Gapin, J. I., & Etnier, J. L. (2012). The effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. Brain Research , 1453 , 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2012.02.068 Chang, Y. K., Chi, L., Etnier, J. L., Wang, C. C., Chu, C. H., & Zhou, C. (2014). Effect of acute aerobic exercise on cognitive performance: Role of cardiovascular fitness. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 15 (5), 464–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.04.007 Coles, K., & Tomporowski, P. D. (2008). Effects of acute exercise on executive processing, short-term and long-term memory. Journal of Sports Sciences , 26 (3), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410701591417 Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A , 33 (4), 497–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748108400805 Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 24 (1), 87–114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922 Craig, C. L., Marshall, A. L., SjoStroM, M., Bauman, A. E., Booth, M. L., Ainsworth, B. E., Pratt, M., Ekelund, U., Yngve, A., Sallis, J. F., & Oja, P. (2003). International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-Country Reliability and Validity. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise , 35 (8), 1381–1395. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB Diamond, A. (2013). Executive Functions. Annual Review of Psychology , 64 (1), 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750 Drollette, E. S., & Hillman, C. H. (2020). Walking effects on memory in children: Implications for individual differences in BMI. Mental Health and Physical Activity , 18 , 100317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhpa.2020.100317 Drollette, E. S., Johnson, M. N., & Meadows, C. C. (2022). No Change in Inhibitory Control or P3 Following Different High-Intensity Interval Exercise Modalities. Brain Sciences , 12 (2). Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12020185 Drollette, E. S., & Meadows, C. C. (2022). The effects of acute high-intensity interval exercise on the temporal dynamics of working memory and contralateral delay activity. Psychophysiology , 59 (11), e14112. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.14112 Drollette, E. S., Shishido, T., Pontifex, M. B., & Hillman, C. H. (2012). Maintenance of Cognitive Control during and after Walking in Preadolescent Children. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise , 44 (10), 2017–2024. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e318258bcd5 Erickson, K. I., Hillman, C., Stillman, C. M., Ballard, R. M., Bloodgood, B., Conroy, D. E., Macko, R., Marquez, D. X., Petruzzello, S. J., Powell, K. E., & FOR 2018 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY GUIDELINES ADVISORY COMMITTEE*. (2019). Physical Activity, Cognition, and Brain Outcomes: A Review of the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise , 51 (6), 1242–1251. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000001936 Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics , 16 (1), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203267 Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods , 39 (2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146 Ferguson, H. J., Brunsdon, V. E. A., & Bradford, E. E. F. (2021). The developmental trajectories of executive function from adolescence to old age. Scientific Reports , 11 (1), 1382. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80866-1 Gothe, N., Pontifex, M. B., Hillman, C., & McAuley, E. (2013). The Acute Effects of Yoga on Executive Function. Journal of Physical Activity and Health , 10 (4), 488–495. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.10.4.488 Gray-Burrows, K., Taylor, N., O’Connor, D., Sutherland, E., Stoet, G., & Conner, M. (2019). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the executive function-health behaviour relationship. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine , 7 (1), 253–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2019.1637740 Haverkamp, B. F., Wiersma, R., Vertessen, K., Van Ewijk, H., Oosterlaan, J., & Hartman, E. (2020). Effects of physical activity interventions on cognitive outcomes and academic performance in adolescents and young adults: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences , 38 (23), 2637–2660. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2020.1794763 Hillman, C. H., Erickson, K. I., & Kramer, A. F. (2008). Be smart, exercise your heart: Exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience , 9 (1), 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2298 Hillman, C. H., Snook, E. M., & Jerome, G. J. (2003). Acute cardiovascular exercise and executive control function. International Journal of Psychophysiology , 48 (3), 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(03)00080-1 Corp, I. B. M. (2023). C. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 29.0.2.0 [Computer Software] Armonk, NY . Ishihara, T., Drollette, E. S., Ludyga, S., Hillman, C. H., & Kamijo, K. (2021). The effects of acute aerobic exercise on executive function: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews , 128 , 258–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.06.026 Johnson, M. N., Maher, J. P., Meadows, C. C., Bittel, K. M., Hevel, D. J., & Drollette, E. S. (2022). Positive affect moderates inhibitory control and positive affect following a single bout of self-select aerobic exercise. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 60 , 102141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102141 Kamijo, K., Hayashi, Y., Sakai, T., Yahiro, T., Tanaka, K., & Nishihira, Y. (2009). Acute Effects of Aerobic Exercise on Cognitive Function in Older Adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 64B (3), 356–363. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbp030 Labban, J. D., & Etnier, J. L. (2011). Effects of Acute Exercise on Long-Term Memory. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport , 82 (4), 712–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2011.10599808 Labban, J. D., & Etnier, J. L. (2018). The Effect of Acute Exercise on Encoding and Consolidation of Long-Term Memory. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 40 (6), 336–342. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2018-0072 Lambourne, K., & Tomporowski, P. (2010). The effect of exercise-induced arousal on cognitive task performance: A meta-regression analysis. Brain Research , 1341 , 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.03.091 Li, L., Men, W. W., Chang, Y. K., Fan, M. X., Ji, L., & Wei, G. X. (2014). Acute Aerobic Exercise Increases Cortical Activity during Working Memory: A Functional MRI Study in Female College Students. Plos One , 9 (6), e99222. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099222 Loprinzi, P., Blough, J., Crawford, L., Ryu, S., Zou, L., & Li, H. (2019). The Temporal Effects of Acute Exercise on Episodic Memory Function: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Brain Sciences , 9 (4), 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci9040087 Ludyga, S., Gerber, M., Brand, S., Holsboer-Trachsler, E., & Pühse, U. (2016). Acute effects of moderate aerobic exercise on specific aspects of executive function in different age and fitness groups: A meta-analysis: Moderate exercise and executive function. Psychophysiology , 53 (11), 1611–1626. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12736 McCabe, D. P., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M. A., Balota, D. A., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2010). The relationship between working memory capacity and executive functioning: Evidence for a common executive attention construct. Neuropsychology , 24 (2), 222–243. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017619 Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The Unity and Diversity of Executive Functions and Their Contributions to Complex Frontal Lobe Tasks: A Latent Variable Analysis. Cognitive Psychology , 41 (1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., Houts, R., Poulton, R., Roberts, B. W., Ross, S., Sears, M. R., Thomson, W. M., & Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 108 (7), 2693–2698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108 Niedermeier, M., Weiss, E. M., Steidl-Müller, L., Burtscher, M., & Kopp, M. (2020). Acute Effects of a Short Bout of Physical Activity on Cognitive Function in Sport Students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 17 (10), 3678. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103678 Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to Action: Willed and Automatic Control of Behavior. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and Self-Regulation (pp. 1–18). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-0629-1_1 O’Leary, K. C., Pontifex, M. B., Scudder, M. R., Brown, M. L., & Hillman, C. H. (2011). The effects of single bouts of aerobic exercise, exergaming, and videogame play on cognitive control. Clinical Neurophysiology , 122 (8), 1518–1525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2011.01.049 Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E., & Lindeløv, J. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods , 51 (1), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y Peters, S. L., Fan, C. L., & Sheldon, S. (2019). Episodic memory contributions to autobiographical memory and open-ended problem-solving specificity in younger and older adults. Memory & Cognition , 47 (8), 1592–1605. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00953-1 Pontifex, M. B., Hillman, C. H., Fernhall, B., Thompson, K. M., & Valentini, T. A. (2009). The Effect of Acute Aerobic and Resistance Exercise on Working Memory. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise , 41 (4), 927–934. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181907d69 Pontifex, M. B., McGowan, A. L., Chandler, M. C., Gwizdala, K. L., Parks, A. C., Fenn, K., & Kamijo, K. (2019). A primer on investigating the after effects of acute bouts of physical activity on cognition. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 40 , 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.08.015 Qazi, A. S., Schmid, D., Gridley, N., Lambourne, K., Daly-Smith, A. J., & Tomporowski, P. D. (2024). The effects of acute exercise on long-term episodic memory: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Cognition , 3 , 1367569. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcogn.2024.1367569 Rathore, A., & Lom, B. (2017). The effects of chronic and acute physical activity on working memory performance in healthy participants: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Systematic Reviews , 6 (1), 124. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0514-7 Rogers, R., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a Predictable Switch Between Simple Cognitive Tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 124 , 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207 Roig, M., Nordbrandt, S., Geertsen, S. S., & Nielsen, J. B. (2013). The effects of cardiovascular exercise on human memory: A review with meta-analysis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews , 37 (8), 1645–1666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.06.012 Schwabe, L., Bohringer, A., Chatterjee, M., & Schachinger, H. (2008). Effects of pre-learning stress on memory for neutral, positive and negative words: Different roles of cortisol and autonomic arousal. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory , 90 (1), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2008.02.002 Sharot, T., & Phelps, E. A. (2004). How arousal modulates memory: Disentangling the effects of attention and retention. Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience , 4 (3), 294–306. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.4.3.294 Shields, G. S., Moons, W. G., & Slavich, G. M. (2017). Better executive function under stress mitigates the effects of recent life stress exposure on health in young adults. Stress (Amsterdam, Netherlands) , 20 (1), 92–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10253890.2017.1286322 Sibley, B. A., & Beilock, S. L. (2007). Exercise and Working Memory: An Individual Differences Investigation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 29 (6), 783–791. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.29.6.783 Sng, E., Frith, E., & Loprinzi, P. D. (2018). Temporal Effects of Acute Walking Exercise on Learning and Memory Function. American Journal of Health Promotion , 32 (7), 1518–1525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117117749476 Tempest, G., Davranche, K., Brisswalter, J., Perrey, S., & Radel, R. (2017). The differential effects of prolonged exercise upon executive function and cerebral oxygenation. Brain and Cognition , 14 , 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2017.02.001 Themanson, J. R., & Hillman, C. H. (2006). Cardiorespiratory fitness and acute aerobic exercise effects on neuroelectric and behavioral measures of action monitoring. Neuroscience , 141 (2), 757–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2006.04.004 Tulving, E. (1993). What Is Episodic Memory? Current Directions in Psychological Science , 2 (3), 67–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770899 Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic Memory: From Mind to Brain. Annual Review of Psychology , 53 (1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135114 Vandermorris, S., Sheldon, S., Winocur, G., & Moscovitch, M. (2013). Differential Contributions of Executive and Episodic Memory Functions to Problem Solving in Younger and Older Adults. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , 19 (10), 1087–1096. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617713000982 Verburgh, L., Königs, M., Scherder, E. J. A., & Oosterlaan, J. (2014). Physical exercise and executive functions in preadolescent children, adolescents and young adults: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine , 48 (12), 973–979. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2012-091441 Wechsler, D. (2011). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence—Second Edition . https://doi.org/10.1037/t15171-000 Weng, T. B., Pierce, G. L., Darling, W. G., & Voss, M. W. (2015). Differential Effects of Acute Exercise on Distinct Aspects of Executive Function. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise , 47 (7), 1460–1469. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000542 Wilson, M. (1987). MRC psycholinguistic database: Machine usable dictionary. Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils , 1–14. Yonelinas, A., Ramsey, M., & Riddell, C. (2022). Recognition Memory: The Role of Recollection and Familiarity . The Oxford Handbook of Human Memory. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8148315","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":560265290,"identity":"7d566993-82fe-49af-9a76-c9dafadd5df5","order_by":0,"name":"Praveen Pasupathi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of North Carolina at Greensboro","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Praveen","middleName":"","lastName":"Pasupathi","suffix":""},{"id":560265291,"identity":"677f23e4-6a52-44c3-9585-c5675ae3e7f9","order_by":1,"name":"Megan O'Brokta","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of North Carolina at Greensboro","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Megan","middleName":"","lastName":"O'Brokta","suffix":""},{"id":560265292,"identity":"3154015e-9855-4a53-8325-e2863b415545","order_by":2,"name":"Andrew Cornwall","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of North Carolina at Greensboro","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Andrew","middleName":"","lastName":"Cornwall","suffix":""},{"id":560265293,"identity":"b99fdfa4-5a17-45da-a68e-b1f0e9aba285","order_by":3,"name":"Bryan Montero-Herrera","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of North Carolina at Greensboro","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Bryan","middleName":"","lastName":"Montero-Herrera","suffix":""},{"id":560265294,"identity":"ed85f02f-7749-413a-a0bf-d0b3bd6b0450","order_by":4,"name":"Aubrey Kehoe","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of North Carolina at Greensboro","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Aubrey","middleName":"","lastName":"Kehoe","suffix":""},{"id":560265295,"identity":"ad93475a-e472-451f-8312-76180cbb4201","order_by":5,"name":"Eric Drollette","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of North Carolina at Greensboro","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Eric","middleName":"","lastName":"Drollette","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-11-18 18:23:33","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8148315/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8148315/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":98376472,"identity":"e08b2071-fb19-4111-97f4-f5e994ce2608","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":564405,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"JCE2025Manuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/b9abc64e8cf20bfbe1f0f5d7.docx"},{"id":98376474,"identity":"ec3f147b-7959-453a-9360-196301e6270a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":159680,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure1.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/af787bca22cb1436e74d4481.docx"},{"id":98376469,"identity":"9a4fbd63-13e7-494a-9e8d-289bcada6f25","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:17","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":16284,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table1.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/5333324ac570c975190d6e19.docx"},{"id":98440166,"identity":"906cdfc1-1d34-49c3-84e0-2ccd563861a3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 17:03:25","extension":"docx","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":18073,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table2.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/ce021c05afddd5e495cfdd41.docx"},{"id":98376476,"identity":"d4c46404-b9ad-4b5c-84cd-3bee0e58f86b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"docx","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":126263,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure2.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/4bee32c799e6e70b9e0d4c92.docx"},{"id":98439269,"identity":"75935743-598b-4454-a150-7509f6e5fbe5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 17:01:30","extension":"docx","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":18462,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table3.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/c1e69db95a0572a4d3ccf33b.docx"},{"id":98441061,"identity":"45472fd7-b2d7-4df7-b896-f7507b49b13a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 17:04:49","extension":"docx","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":105796,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure3.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/3ea8e873fbb60e6d69a4ec35.docx"},{"id":98376475,"identity":"6f6a943d-9769-4f7d-ad91-9bea65a83db8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"docx","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":20018,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table4.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/753bfb40dbc01b8708850013.docx"},{"id":98376478,"identity":"eb3e7334-9c33-45b9-bb74-322b65218c40","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"docx","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":68659,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure4.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/6c577ea665aa4cf172d19777.docx"},{"id":98376480,"identity":"6b538ecc-d80b-4f15-8368-a2cedc83b8f1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"json","order_by":9,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":7341,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"f39fad0734774bd7bb7425f2994b6ac4.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/92cc07bfb4c6b414a374136a.json"},{"id":98376483,"identity":"a3ec0697-e5a3-433f-9dd4-73e0664cb384","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"xml","order_by":10,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":258815,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"f39fad0734774bd7bb7425f2994b6ac41enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/b5b72774408a50a63fa9b735.xml"},{"id":98439750,"identity":"e8a7f9f7-c8ad-446c-a494-8bb5adf5f370","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 17:02:53","extension":"jpeg","order_by":17,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":46740,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/8127fbf49b0de6fb9e3a0599.jpeg"},{"id":98376482,"identity":"e883a33f-2fe5-4fc5-813f-1c205bfc70b0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"jpeg","order_by":18,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":43454,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage8.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/df178debdd81614a2ae71b23.jpeg"},{"id":98376484,"identity":"e717a2f1-6035-422d-8bbb-fead01014a1e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"xml","order_by":20,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":260197,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"f39fad0734774bd7bb7425f2994b6ac41structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/851bdbdfb498b3a66e50f866.xml"},{"id":98376481,"identity":"e88fcdce-8656-40df-a1b9-846aaa39188f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:18","extension":"html","order_by":21,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":281258,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/bae03cddef2fd6e5dbd3beeb.html"},{"id":98376466,"identity":"031440e4-20bb-482b-8220-2fe8fe128165","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:17","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":91646,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStudy Design\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/111c71896039ead492e0a199.jpg"},{"id":98439529,"identity":"31665cae-4a1a-4ace-8c47-6893d4dadc3f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 17:02:02","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":91740,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eOrder and Time spent for each Cognitive Assessment. \u003cem\u003eNote. \u003c/em\u003eDuring the Encoding and the Delayed recognition task, each word was presented for 100 ms with an inter-trial interval (ITI) of 1200 ms. For the change detection task, the sequence of stimulus presentations was fixation stimuli (200 ms), a memory array (150 ms), a retention interval (100 ms), and a test array (2000 ms). The ITI for the flanker task was 1000 ms, 1200 ms, 1400 ms.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/ac51dc8653f6009dade4aa41.jpg"},{"id":98439130,"identity":"1e7ebf0b-54cc-4fbf-9a78-b7790c4c7f71","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 17:01:14","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":57857,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eHeart Rate in beats per minute (BPM). (b) Ratings of Perceived Exertion (RPE). \u003cem\u003eNote. \u003c/em\u003eHR and RPE information were collected during the 30-minute experimental condition.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/c8fd86197c0802bc0068b0de.jpg"},{"id":98376467,"identity":"88137899-60b8-4bc4-9ced-d5ff5af4641a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 07:07:17","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":41469,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePrimacy and Recency Response Accuracy before and after PA and rest condition. *\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; .05.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/07a012e1cf071d71ea63acc6.jpg"},{"id":98622563,"identity":"b296a329-a0ba-41b9-8abd-cdc47e547d8e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-19 16:57:58","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1585526,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8148315/v1/82c82272-174a-46b7-82da-ec3477e0aa7c.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Temporal Dynamics of Cognitive Change following Acute Aerobic Physical Activity in Emerging Adults","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAccumulating evidence demonstrates that an acute bout of physical activity (PA) enhances executive function (EF) and episodic memory (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Erickson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Hillman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Loprinzi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Ludyga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Qazi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Roig et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Sng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Verburgh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Enhancing these cognitive functions through PA could significantly contribute to improved daily performances and long-term benefits to work success, scholastic performance, and effective daily activities (Ahmed et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Bailey, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Gray-Burrows et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Moffitt et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Peters et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Shields et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Tulving, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e; Yonelinas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). However, prior research is inconsistent due to only evaluating individual cognitive domains following PA and substantial variability in PA parameters across studies (e.g., duration, intensity, time, type) (Haverkamp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Rathore \u0026amp; Lom, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Sng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Verburgh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, given that EF and episodic memory share similar processing mechanisms (McCabe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Vandermorris et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), measuring a single domain obscures the interpretation between a general (i.e., global cognitive improvements) and a selective effect on cognitive domains. In addition, there is a limited understanding of temporal-specific cognitive enhancements following acute PA (Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). To address these inconsistencies and provide a more holistic understanding of the effects of acute PA on cognition, this study sought to investigate temporal dynamics of episodic memory and aspects of EF after 30 minutes of sustained moderate-intensity aerobic PA in emerging adults. This approach allows for the simultaneous assessment of EF and memory, thereby offering insights into how these cognitive functions interact and are collectively influenced by acute PA.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmerging adults, defined as a period between adolescence and full-fledged adulthood (~\u0026thinsp;18\u0026ndash;25 years old), is marked by critical developmental transitions in cognitive, social, and emotional domains. During this time, individuals often experience increased independence, the pursuit of higher education, career exploration, and the establishment of long-term goals. Cognitive functions like EF and episodic memory are particularly important during this phase, as they underpin decision-making, problem-solving, and learning, which are crucial for academic success, career preparation, and life management. EF represents a set of higher order cognitive operations that underlie selection, scheduling, coordination, and monitoring of complex, goal-directed process involved in perception, memory, and action (Norman \u0026amp; Shallice, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e; Rogers \u0026amp; Monsell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e). Inhibitory control, a component of EF, refers to the ability to focus on task-relevant demands while suppressing irrelevant responses (Diamond, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Miyake et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). Most research to date affirms improvements in inhibitory control outcomes following an acute bout of PA in emerging adults (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; O\u0026rsquo;Leary et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Verburgh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, these enhancements appear time-dependent following acute PA. For instance, improvements have been observed both immediately (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5 minutes) and shortly after (5\u0026ndash;15 minutes) aerobic PA (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Kamijo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, studies assessing inhibitory control after a long delay (30\u0026ndash;45 minutes) often report maintenance (i.e., no change) rather than improvements, despite replicating similar exercise interventions (Drollette et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Hillman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Themanson \u0026amp; Hillman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). These studies suggest that the timing of cognitive assessment following acute PA is crucial for inhibitory control improvements. However, most investigations to date focus on assessments within 15 minutes of PA, leaving the prolonged effects beyond 30 minutes underexplored (Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). To address this gap, the present study aimed to evaluate inhibitory control after a long delay to replicate previous research suggesting sustained performance following acute PA.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnlike inhibitory control, working memory, another key component of EF, is not evaluated as often in acute PA research (Haverkamp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Ludyga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Verburgh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) and critical timing of assessment is less evident compared to inhibitory control outcomes. Working memory involves storage, maintenance, and manipulation of information for a brief period (Baddeley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e; Diamond, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Miyake et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). Early research reported moderate improvements in working memory following acute bouts of aerobic PA, particularly noting faster response times when evaluated immediately after moderate-intensity (Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Roig et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). However, more recent meta-analyses have shown small or inconsistent effects, with some investigations revealing no significant improvements following moderate-intensity PA (Haverkamp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Rathore \u0026amp; Lom, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, working memory performance was not modulated when assessed shortly after (5\u0026ndash;15 minutes) acute PA (Coles \u0026amp; Tomporowski, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Gothe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, assessment following high-intensity PA after a long delay (40 minutes), revealed working memory improvements in emerging adults (Drollette \u0026amp; Meadows, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). These results contradict Tempest and colleagues (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) on the timing of assessment and intensity of acute PA on working memory, with their results revealing that high-intensity PA attenuated performance, and low-intensity PA maintained performance when assessed immediately after. The lack of consistent results could also be attributed to baseline performance, such that selective improvements were observed in individuals with lower baseline performance (Sibley \u0026amp; Beilock, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Together, these mixed findings suggest that variables such as timing of assessment, intensity, individual differences, and research design significantly influence the effects of acute PA on working memory in emerging adults (Gothe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Haverkamp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Ludyga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Rathore \u0026amp; Lom, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Verburgh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Further research is needed to formulate a greater understanding of working memory and the optimal timing of cognitive assessment for greater benefits following acute PA. Recognizing the importance of timing in assessing cognitive outcomes, the present study will align its assessment timing with the optimal windows identified in inhibitory control research (5\u0026ndash;15 minutes post-PA) given the close relationship between inhibitory control and working memory. This approach aims to determine whether similar improvements at optimal timing can be observed in working memory.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough studies have isolated the effects on specific components of EF, a few investigations have evaluated inhibitory control and working memory together following acute PA (Drollette et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Gothe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Weng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). For example, pre-adolescent children improved inhibitory control performance on a flanker task following an acute bout of PA at moderate intensity but maintained working memory performance after a short delay (Drollette et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Contrastingly, Weng and colleagues (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) reported no improvements in inhibitory control but observed improved working memory assessed after a short delay (6-minutes) following acute moderate-intensity PA in adults. In contrast, Gothe and colleagues (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) found no changes in either inhibitory control or working memory evaluated following a short delay (4-minutes) after acute PA at moderate intensity in emerging adults. These inconsistent findings underscore the multifaceted nature of EF and the need for a nuanced examination of acute PA on various aspects of EF that appear to modulate over distinct time courses (short and long delays) following a single bout of acute PA. By examining these time-dependent effects, this study seeks to clarify how acute PA influences different components of EF and offer insights into the optimal timing for assessing EF.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch indicates that EF plays a pivotal role in memory retrieval and shares a similar underlying mechanism with episodic memory (McCabe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Vandermorris et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Episodic memoy refers to the ability to recall prior spatial and temporal events (Tulving, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, modulation in EF following acute PA may influence episodic memory. Research suggests that timing is also a significant moderating factor for memory benefits following acute PA (Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Loprinzi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) but not at 24h post-PA (Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Sng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Specifically, word recall was improved at 30-minutes, 60-minutes, and 24h following acute PA (Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). However, word recognition was not improved 24h post-PA in adults (Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Sng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Research suggests that greater time between PA bout and memory assessment (24h) offers fewer chances to learn words potentially leading to no change in recognition performance at 24h post-PA (Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). This may explain null and inconsistent findings in recent meta-analyses on episodic memory with limited investigations assessing immediately after acute PA in young adults (Qazi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Alternatively, preadolescent children improved primacy accuracy on a word recognition task shortly after (5-minutes) acute PA (Drollette \u0026amp; Hillman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Although these results are in children, they do highlight that the immediate assessment of episodic memory following a single session of PA may be crucial for strengthening short and long-term episodic memory and subsequent evaluations in emerging adults. Therefore, further research is needed to investigate this trend in emerging adults by assessing episodic memory immediately after acute PA.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo fully understand the cognitive benefits of acute PA, it is imperative to move beyond the isolated examination of individual cognitive domains and instead evaluate multiple domains within the same study. EF and episodic memory, for instance, share overlapping neural substrates and cognitive mechanisms (McCabe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Vandermorris et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, the effects of PA on these domains are likely interdependent, making it challenging to determine whether observed improvements are domain-specific or reflect a more global enhancement in cognitive functioning. Research that evaluates only a single cognitive domain may lead to an incomplete or even misleading understanding of how PA influences the brain. For example, improvements in episodic memory following PA may stem in part from enhanced EF, given that EF facilitates memory encoding and retrieval processes. Similarly, PA-induced gains in EF might influence memory performance through shared attentional and working memory processes. Without measuring both EF and episodic memory within the same study, it is impossible to discern whether observed cognitive benefits are specific to one domain, mutually reinforcing, or indicative of global cognitive enhancements. Moreover, assessing multiple cognitive outcomes allows for the exploration of how these domains interact in response to PA. This is particularly relevant because cognitive tasks often require the simultaneous recruitment of EF and memory. For example, solving a complex problem or planning an activity relies on the ability to hold and manipulate information (working memory) while retrieving relevant past experiences (episodic memory). By investigating multiple domains concurrently, this study provides a more ecologically valid representation of how cognition operates in real-world settings and how PA may influence these interactions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study aims to evaluate inhibitory control, working memory, and episodic memory during a time period with predictable outcomes based on prior research following acute PA. We hypothesized that acute PA will enhance EF and episodic memory through both domain-specific and global cognitive mechanisms, with the timing of cognitive assessment revealing distinct temporal patterns of improvement. Specifically, we hypothesize that: (1) episodic memory performance will show immediate improvements when assessed directly after acute PA, reflecting enhanced encoding and retrieval processes; (2) working memory will improve during an short-delay window (5\u0026ndash;20 minutes post-PA); and (3) inhibitory control will be maintained after a longer delay (\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;25 minutes post-PA), consistent with sustained engagement and regulation. Measuring these cognitive domains within the same study will allow us to determine whether the observed benefits are specific to each domain, mutually reinforcing across domains, or indicative of global cognitive enhancements. By evaluating several cognitive domains after a single bout of PA, this study sought to provide more robust and generalizable findings, contributing to the development of more effective exercise interventions for cognitive enhancement.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmerging adults (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;30) were recruited from the [removed for peer review] via flyers and advertisements in Kinesiology undergraduate courses. Inclusion criteria for this study included emerging adults ages 18 to 25 years, normal or corrected-to-normal vision based on the minimal 20/20 standard, and free of any neurological conditions that would limit their completion of the cognitive tasks. After meeting the inclusion criteria, participants completed the informed consent via Qualtrics in accordance with the University\u0026rsquo;s Institutional Review Board.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.1 Cognitive Tasks\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section4\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.1.1. Flanker Task\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants completed a modified version of the Eriksen flanker task (Eriksen \u0026amp; Eriksen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e) to assess aspects of inhibitory control. The flanker task involved stimuli consisting of five arrows in white color presented at the center of the black screen using PsychoPy software (version 1.90.3) (Peirce et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Participants were instructed to respond to the directionality of the center arrow amidst either congruent (\u0026lt;\u0026lt;\u0026lt;\u0026lt;\u0026lt; or \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt;) or incongruent (\u0026lt;\u0026lt;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;\u0026lt; or \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt;) trials by pressing the left thumb response if the center arrow was pointing to the left and right thumb press if the center arrow was pointing to the right using outside buttons on a 4-button response pad (Current Designs Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA). In addition, participants were instructed to respond as accurately and quickly as possible. Each stimuli was presented for 100 milliseconds (ms) with a variable inter-trial interval (ITI) of 1000, 1200, and 1400 ms. Participants completed two blocks of 108 trials with equiprobable congruent and incongruent trials. Prior to each experimental session, a practice session that included 42 trials was completed. Response accuracy and reaction time (RT) measures were assessed for each trial condition (congruent, incongruent). Additionally, interference scores were computed for RT (incongruent \u0026ndash; congruent) and response accuracy (congruent - incongruent).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section4\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.1.2. Change Detection Task\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA change detection dot task was utilized to assess working memory. A single trial consisted of a presentation of a white direction arrow (200 ms duration), memory array (150 ms duration), retention interval (1000 ms duration), and test array (2000 ms duration) in sequential order with an inter-trial interval (ITI) of 1000 ms. Participants were asked to maintain their focus on a white fixation dot presented in the center of the grey screen (RGB: 128 128 128) throughout the duration of each trial. While maintaining central focus, participants were instructed that an arrow would appear above the fixation dot, and they would need to remember the colored dots that appeared on the side of the screen corresponding to the direction of the arrow (i.e., memory array). Dots appeared on both sides of the screen consisting of random set sizes of 2, 3, 4, or 5-dots of random color (out of a possible 10 distinct colors, RGB values: red\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;255 0 0; green\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0 255 0; blue\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0 0 255; magenta\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;255 0 255; yellow\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;255 255 0; cyan\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0 255 255; orange\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;255 103 1; white\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;255 255 255; brown 113 56 0; black 0 0 0). Following a delay (i.e., retention interval), participants responded to the test array by indicating whether the memory and test array were the same or different (i.e., \u0026ldquo;Did any dots in the attended side of the screen change color?\u0026rdquo;). Responses were recorded using a response pad by pressing either the left or the right button corresponding to a correct or incorrect match of color in the attended side of the screen with response selection (i.e., left or right response) counterbalanced for each participant. For example, participant A required a left response for color change and a right response for no change in color while participant B required a left response for no color change and a right response for color change. Participants completed 80 trials for each block with a total of three blocks completed for the present study (6 minutes per block; 1-minute delay between blocks) with equiprobable color change, directionality, and the number of dots (2, 3, 4, and 5) in each block. Before each experimental session, a practice session was completed with 32 trials. Response accuracy and RT were assessed for each set size separately (2, 3, 4, and 5-dots). Accuracy was calculated based on participants ability to correctly detect whether the memory and test arrays were same or different. Specifically, hit rate (correctly identifying a color change), correct rejection rate (correctly identifying no-color change). RT was measured as the time taken to repond to the test array, with mean RT calculated for correct responses for each set size to examine processing speed. Calculation of individual memory capacity was used to assess working memory load following previous research [\u003cem\u003ek\u003c/em\u003e = (hit rate - false alarm) * set size] such that \u003cem\u003ek\u003c/em\u003e is assumed to increase with set size load and reach asymptote at an individual\u0026rsquo;s working memory capacity (Cowan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section4\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.1.3. Word Recognition Task\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe word recognition task was divided into two phases (i.e., encoding and memory phase) and completed separately with the change detection task performed between the encoding and memory phase. The encoding phase required participants to memorize a list of 30 words without responding. The memory phase required participants to recognize the 30 words during the delayed recognition phase (old words) intermixed with 30 new words that were not present during the study phase (new words). Words were selected from the MRC Psycholinguistic Database (Coltheart, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1987\u003c/span\u003e) based on the number of letters (3\u0026ndash;6), written frequency, concreteness, familiarity, and age of acquisition. Words were chosen that were commonly used by emerging adults. In addition, words were assigned to non-overlapping, word lists that contained an equiprobable value of words that matched based on the MRC database selection criteria. This was to ensure that each iteration of the words was equally difficult for emerging adults. Each word was 3 cm tall capitalized in white Arial font presented on a black background for 100 ms with an ITI of 1200 ms. The stimuli presentation was consistent throughout the encoding and the recognition phase using the PsychoPy software (version 1.90.3) (Peirce et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Participants were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible with a button response to old and new words on the same response pad (same as used in the flanker task). Left and right response options for old and new word designations were counterbalanced across participants through random assignment. For example, participant A required a left response for old words and a right response for new words, while participant B required a right response for old words and a left response for new words. The outcome variables included accuracy and RT for old and new words, and primacy (first 10 words during the encoding phase) and recency (last 10 words during the encoding phase). Primacy and recency effects are well-established phenomena in memory research, reflecting the distinct cognitive and neural mechanisms involved in encoding and retrieval. The primacy effect is primarily attributed to enhanced encoding into long-term memory, facilitated by greater attentional resources and rehearsal opportunities during the early stages of the study phase. In contrast, the recency effect reflects superior recall of recently encountered information, relying more heavily on short-term or working memory processes. By evaluating these distinct components of memory, the task allows us to examine whether acute PA exerts differential effects on the encoding and retrieval processes associated with primacy and recency. This approach also helps determine whether memory enhancements following PA are driven by improved long-term encoding mechanisms, short-term retention, or a combination of both.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.2. Ratings of Perceived Exertion and Heart Rate\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePhysical exertion was measured using the self-report Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) Scale that ranged from 6 (very light exertion) to 20 (maximal exertion) (Borg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e). Heart rate (HR) was recorded using a Polar monitor placed around the torso at the start of each experimental session.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.3. Fitness Assessment\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants were fitted with a Polar HR monitor, measured for height and weight (i.e, stadiometer and a Tanita WB-300 Plus digital scale), and informed about the orientation of the equipment (i.e, wearing a mouth apparatus and nose clip while running on a treadmill) by a trained experimenter. A modified version of the Balke protocol (American College of Sports Medicine, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) was used for the graded exercise test (GXT) to assess fitness while participants ran on a motor-driven treadmill. The GXT involved a warm-up for 3 minutes at a comfortable pace which was agreed upon during the first minute of the assessment for each participant. After 3 minutes of warm-up, the participants set a speed that was constant throughout the assessment. The treadmill grade increased by 2.5% every two minutes. Maximal aerobic capacity (VO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e peak) was measured using a computerized in-direct calorimetry system (ParvoMedics True Max 2400 L). Relative peak oxygen consumption was expressed in milliliters of oxygen consumed per kilogram of body weight per minute (mL/kg/min). Maximal HR from fitness assessment was used to determine exercise intensity for the PA condition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Procedures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsing a within-subject cross-over randomized design, all participants completed three sessions in a laboratory on three separate days with a minimum of two days between the second and third sessions. Prior to the first session, participants completed pre-eligibility questions regarding age and ability to engage in physical activity using Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). During the first visit, participants signed the informed consent before completing the Health and History Demographics, the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q), and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ; Craig et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e) through the online Qualtrics survey. They then completed the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, Second Edition (WASI-II; Wechsler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) in a paper-pencil format to obtain an Intelligent Quotient (IQ) score. Following these assessments, individuals completed a practice session of each computerized cognitive task before completing a graded exercise test (GXT).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the second and third sessions (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e for study design), participants completed either a rest or exercise condition which was counterbalanced across participants. During each session, the participants wore a Polar HR monitor and completed a practice session of cognitive tasks followed by a baseline assessment (i.e., before) of cognitive tasks. Next, participants performed either the exercise or rest conditions. For the exercise condition, participants completed 20-minutes of running on a treadmill at 70% of maximum HR (HR\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e was computed based on maximal HR achieved following GXT on day one) with a 5-minute warmup and cool down. In the seated rest condition, participants studied for their undergraduate classes for 30 minutes. During each experimental session, HR and RPE were recorded every two minutes. A five-minute break at the end of PA and seated rest was included to allow HR to return to baseline after PA. The cognitive tasks were completed before and after exercise or rest in the following order: the encoding phase of the memory task (total time: 3-minutes), the change detection task (total time: 19 minutes), the word recognition memory phase of the memory task (total time: 4 minutes), and the flanker task (total time: 4 minutes). All cognitive tasks took approximately 30-minutes to complete at each assessment period (i.e., before and after PA and seated rest), see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. The time window for each cognitive task following acute PA and seated rest were as follows (accounting for 1-minute delay between cognitive tasks): memory encoding phase (start-end) 5\u0026ndash;8 minutes, change detection task 9\u0026ndash;28 minutes; memory recall phase 29\u0026ndash;33 minutes, and flanker task 34\u0026ndash;38 minutes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Statistical Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatistical analyses were performed using SPSS (Version 29.0.2.0) (IBM Corp, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). A sensitivity analysis was computed using G*Power v3.1.9.7 (Faul et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e) for the 2 (Condition) \u0026times; 2 (Time) within-subjects design (one group; four measurements). With N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;24, α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.05, power\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.80, correlation among repeated measures (ρ)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.50, and nonsphericity correction (ε)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.70, the minimum detectable omnibus effect was Cohen\u0026rsquo;s F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.278. This indicates the study was powered to detect approximately medium or larger within-subjects effects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalyses were conducted using separate repeated measures of ANOVA for each construct. Main effects and interaction were reported using partial η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e. The Huynh-Feldt correction was applied for violations of sphericity within each model, particularly for the Time factor (before and after) in all analyses. Post hoc \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e-test comparisons were conducted to follow up on significant interactions or main effects of Mode, Time, and Type for flanker response accuracy, RT, interference scores, and change detection task accuracy and RT. Effect sizes were reported using Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d (small\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.2, medium\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.5, and large\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;0.80). Flanker response accuracy and mean RT were analyzed separately using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) \u0026times; 2 (Time: before and after each mode) \u0026times; 2 (Type: congruent, incongruent) repeated measures of ANOVA. Interference scores for flanker mean RT and accuracy were analyzed using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) \u0026times; 2 (Time: before, after) repeated measures of ANOVA. The change detection task response accuracy, mean RT, and \u003cem\u003ek\u003c/em\u003e-score were analyzed separately using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) \u0026times; 2 (Time: before, after) \u0026times; 4 (Type: 2-dots, 3-dots, 4-dots, 5-dots) repeated measures of ANOVA. Word recognition response accuracy and RT were analyzed separately for old/new and primacy/recency outcomes using a 2 (Mode: rest, exercise) \u0026times; 2 (Time: before, after) \u0026times; 2 (Type: old, new / primacy, recency) repeated measures of ANOVA. Additionally, a separate t-test was conducted to compare HR and RPE across the 30-minute exercise and seated rest conditions to assess the manipulation of the intervention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Demographic results and Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 30 participants were recruited, including 21 females and 9 males. The average age for this sample was 23.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;26 years. Mean BMI and aerobic Fitness were 26.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.4 and 37.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.6 mL/kg/min, respectively. A majority of the sample identified as non-Hispanic White or Caucasian, and Black or African American, see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e for demographics of the study sample.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMeans (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SD) for demographics and fitness measures.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeasures\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN (females)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30 (21)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge (years)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBMI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFitness (mL/kg/min)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFitness percentile (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;28.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIQ\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;9.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaternal Education\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdvanced degree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e7\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSome college\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh School Graduate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHispanic or Latino\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRace\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhite or Caucasian\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBlack or African American\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMixed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAsian\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot reported\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote\u003c/em\u003e. BMI is calculated as weight divided by the square of height (i.e., kg/m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e). IQ\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;intelligent quotient measured with the Weschsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence second edition (WASI-II).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Preliminary analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eT-test comparisons identified that the mean HR during the acute PA (127\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026plusmn;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;7.4 bpm) was significantly greater than the rest condition [76.5\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026plusmn;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;12.6 bpm; \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20.9, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01]. Additionally, the mean RPE was significantly higher for the PA condition (10.1\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026plusmn;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;2.4) compared to the rest condition [6.34\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026plusmn;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.7; \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.2, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01], see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Flanker task:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e presents the statistical summary of the flanker task model. The repeated measures of ANOVA revealed a main effect of Type for response accuracy, [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.40, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.62]. This main effect was superseded by a significant Time \u0026times; Type interaction [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.48, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.13]. Decomposition of the interaction effect revealed greater response accuracy for the before condition (congruent trials: 96.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.3%, incongruent trials: 89.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.6%) compared to the after condition [(congruent trials: 96.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.2%, incongruent trials: 88.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.4%), \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s (29)\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;6.46, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003es\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01]. For flanker RT, there was a significant main effect of Time [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12.95, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.31] and Type [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;208.21, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.88]. Lastly, interference accuracy results revealed a main effect of Time [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.48, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.12]. No other main effects or interaction effects were found.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSummary of repeated measures of ANOVA for Flanker task\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf1/df2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eη\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eResponse Accuracy\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le; .01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le; .05*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRT\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e208.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eInterference Accuracy\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eInterference RT\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e*\u003c/b\u003e Indicates significant results, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05. (Mode: \u003cb\u003erest\u003c/b\u003e and PA, Time: \u003cb\u003ebefore\u003c/b\u003e and after each mode, Type: \u003cb\u003econgruent\u003c/b\u003e and incongruent trials, reference group is in bold).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e Post hoc \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e-test for Model Time \u0026times; Type, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.49, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Change detection task:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e presents the statistical summary of the change detection task model. The omnibus analysis for response accuracy revealed only a main effect of Type [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;124.93, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.81]. No other main or interaction effects were found for response accuracy. The analysis for RT revealed a main effect of Time [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;96.69, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.77] and Size [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;33.19, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.53]. This main effect was superseded by a Time \u0026times; Size interaction [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.99, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.28]. Post hoc tests showed longer RT across all set sizes for the before condition (2-dot: 683.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;123.7, 3-dot: 729.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;123.6, 4-dot: 755.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;128.5, 5-dot: 784.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;156.2) compared to the after condition [(2-dot: 634.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;132.4, 3-dot: 659.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;133.8, 4-dot: 681.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;143.3, 5-dot: 687.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;141.7 ms); \u003cem\u003et\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;6.65, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01]. Additionally, an increase in RT was observed with an increase in set size for the before [\u003cem\u003et\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;3.45, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01] and after [\u003cem\u003et\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;2.85, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01] condition, except for 4-dot compared to 5-dot in the after condition [\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.75, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.46]. The analysis for \u003cem\u003ek\u003c/em\u003e-score accuracy revealed a main effect of Size [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;36.68, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.56], indicating greater accuracy with an increase in dot size except for 3-dot compared to 5-dot and 4-dot compared to 5-dot. No other main or interaction effects were found.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSummary of repeated measures of ANOVA for the Change detection task\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf1/df2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eη\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eResponse Accuracy\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e124.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRT\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e96.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type \u003csup\u003ea,b,c\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ek-score\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSize\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2,44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2,68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2,68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2,61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e*\u003c/b\u003e Indicates significant results, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05. (Mode: \u003cb\u003erest\u003c/b\u003e and PA, Time: \u003cb\u003ebefore\u003c/b\u003e and after each mode, Type: \u003cb\u003e2\u003c/b\u003e, 3, 4, and 5 dots, reference group is in bold).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost hoc \u003cem\u003et-\u003c/em\u003etest for Model Time \u0026times; Type:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;6.65, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01 [Time: before (2, 3, 4 \u0026amp; 5 dots) vs after (2, 3, 4 \u0026amp; 5 dots)]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;3.45, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01 [Type: before (2, 3, 4 \u0026amp; 5 dots)]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;2.85, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01 [Type: after (2, 3, 4, 5 dots)]. After 4 vs after 5 dots, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.05.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5. Word recognition task:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e presents the statistical summary of the model. The omnibus analysis for response accuracy of old and new words revealed a main effect of Time [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.14, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.13], which was superceded by a Mode \u0026times; Time interaction [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.16, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.03, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.15]. Decomposition of the interaction effect revealed a significant trend observed for greater accuracy after exercise (78.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.2%) compared to before exercise [74.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.5%; \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.79, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.08]. Analysis for RT revealed a main effect of Type [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;25.25, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.49]. No other main or interaction effects were found for RT. The omnibus analysis for primacy/recency accuracy revealed a main effect of Type [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12.08, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.29], which was superseded by Mode \u0026times; Time interaction [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.96, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.12] and Time \u0026times; Type interaction [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.16, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.13]. Decomposition of Mode \u0026times; Time interaction showed greater primacy/recency response accuracy after exercise (77.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.2%) compared to before exercise [69.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.0%; \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.23, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.03], \u003cb\u003esee\u003c/b\u003e Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. In addition, the decomposition of Time \u0026times; Type interaction revealed greater accuracy for recency for the after conditions (72.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.3%) compared to before conditions [72.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.3%, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.98, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01] and primacy before (77.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.1%) compared to recency before [34.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.6%, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.19, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01]. No other main or interaction effects were observed for primacy/recency accuracy. The omnibus analysis for primacy/recency RT revealed a main effect of Type [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;17.99, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.40], which was superseded by Time \u0026times; Type interaction [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e (1,29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.99, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.23]. Decomposition of the interaction effect showed faster RT for recency words in the after (834.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;25.9 ms) compared to the before experimental conditions [890.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;23.6 ms; \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.53, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.02] and primacy (817.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;23.9 ms) compared to recency before experimental conditions [890.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;23.7 ms; \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.56, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSummary of repeated measures of ANOVA for Word Recognition task\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf1/df2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eη\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOld/New words\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eResponse Accuracy\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.03*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRT\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePrimacy/Recency words\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eResponse Accuracy\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.96\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.05*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type \u003csup\u003ec, d\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.05*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRT\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime \u0026times; Type \u003csup\u003ee, f\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode \u0026times; Time \u0026times; Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e*\u003c/b\u003e Indicates significant results, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05. RT data were not computed for three participants. (Mode: \u003cb\u003erest\u003c/b\u003e and PA, Time: \u003cb\u003ebefore\u003c/b\u003e and after each mode, Type: \u003cb\u003eold\u003c/b\u003e, new, \u003cb\u003eprimacy\u003c/b\u003e and recency words, reference group is in bold).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost hoc \u003cem\u003et-\u003c/em\u003etest for Model Mode \u0026times; Time:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.79, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.08 [Mode: before exercise vs after exercise]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.23, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.03 [Mode: before exercise vs after exercise]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.98, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01 [Time: before recency vs after recency]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ed\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.19, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01 [Type: before primacy vs before recency]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ee\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.53, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.02 [Time: before recency vs after recency]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003csup\u003ef\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.56, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.01 [Type: before primacy vs before recency]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study examined the time-dependent effects of acute moderate-intensity PA on episodic memory and EF in emerging adults.. Our findings reveal that episodic memory significantly improved when assessed immediately after PA, suggesting enhanced encoding or retrieval processes. In contrast, inhibitory control and working memory performance was maintained when assessed after a delay following PA. Together, the present findings indicate that acute PA offers temporal-specific enhancements in cognition, with enhancements in episodic memory and maintenance in EF among emerging adults. This underscores the importance of task-specific and time-sensitive assessments when evaluating the cognitive effects of PA, as different cognitive domains respond uniquely rather than uniformly.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe flanker results from the present study align with prior investigations showing maintenance in inhibitory control performance evaluated after a delay (25\u0026ndash;48 minutes) following acute PA (Drollette et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Hillman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Themanson \u0026amp; Hillman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Although inhibitory control benefits are generally more pronounced within a short window (5\u0026ndash;20 minutes) post PA, our findings suggest that performance is maintained beyond 20 minutes, as observed in emerging adults. Our results and interpretations are consistent with the literature and, together, highlight that acute PA benefits are time-dependent for inhibitory control, such that assessment conducted beyond the optimal window (20 minutes) reveals a return to baseline for inhibitory control performance in emerging adults. However, one possibility for lack of improvements in inhibitory control may be attributed to ceiling effects, where cognitive performance is at the highest level in emerging adults, leaving little room for improvement compared to children and older adults following acute PA (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Ferguson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Ludyga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding memory, our results differ from previous research on the timing of executive function benefits, particularly inhibitory control, which suggests that greater benefits are likely observed within a narrow time window (5\u0026ndash;20 minutes) after acute PA (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Pontifex et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). However, working memory outcomes are also influenced by intensity-specific effects, individual differences, and psychological factors. For example, prior research demonstrates that greater benefits are observed following acute high-intensity PA compared to moderate-intensity PA in young adults (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Drollette \u0026amp; Meadows, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). It is possible that moderate-intensity PA might not be sufficient enough to elicit changes in working memory performance. Another explanation may be attributed to the affect, motivation, and individual differences at baseline. Previous investigations have highlighted that individuals with lower EF and affect at baseline reveal greater benefits for EF following acute PA (Ishihara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Sibley \u0026amp; Beilock, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Based on this research, it is possible that psychological states at baseline in the present study may have contributed to the maintenance of working memory performance post PA. Future research should consider incorporating affective measures and their potential influence on the acute PA and cognition paradigm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnlike EF results, our study found improvements in word recognition, specifically primacy and recency accuracy, when assessed immediately after acute PA in emerging adults. These results align with previous research in preadolescent children, which revealed enhanced primacy accuracy on a word recognition task after light-intensity walking (Drollette \u0026amp; Hillman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). These findings compliment child research by further suggesting that an acute bout of moderate-intensity PA improves recognition memory when assessed immediately after PA in emerging adults. Interestingly, our results contradict a recent meta-analysis (Qazi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), which reported a small detrimental effect (\u003cem\u003ed\u003c/em\u003e = -0.05) on word recognition memory following acute PA. It is important to note that the studies included in this meta-analysis primarily assessed episodic memory 24 hours after acute PA and were limited in immediate administration in emerging adults. This gap may have contributed to the smaller effect sizes observed in studies that did not assess memory immediately after PA. The present study highlight that immediate evaluation of episodic memory improved performance following acute PA. These finding suggests that the timing of assessment may play a crucial role in capturing cognitive benefits after acute PA.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA proposed mechanism for observed improvements in memory may be elevated arousal levels induced by PA. Research shows that PA increases arousal during and returns to baseline after PA (Lambourne \u0026amp; Tomporowski, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, engaging in PA prior to word encoding enhance memory storage and retrieval in adults (Labban \u0026amp; Etnier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Lambourne \u0026amp; Tomporowski, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Niedermeier et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Schwabe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Sharot \u0026amp; Phelps, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, it is possible that arousal levels were heightened during acute PA which enhanced the remembering of words during the encoding phase immediately after PA and retrieval/identification of words during the delayed recognition. This mechanism may explain the improved episodic memory observed immediately following acute PA in emerging adults.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile this study provides valuable insights into the time-dependent effects of acute PA on cognition, several limitations warrant consideration. First, although we assessed multiple cognitive domains, cognitive flexibility\u0026mdash;an important component of EF\u0026mdash;was not included. Given its role in adapting to new information and shifting between tasks, future studies should examine how acute PA influences cognitive flexibility alongside inhibitory control and working memory. Next, individual differences in psychological states, such as affect and motivation, were not assessed. Previous research suggests that acute PA may be more beneficial for individuals with lower baseline affect or motivation levels (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Without these measures, it remains unclear whether the observed cognitive effects were moderated by psychological factors. Incorporating affective and motivational assessments in future research could help clarify for whom and under what conditions acute PA provides the greatest cognitive benefit. Finally, the study design focused on a single bout of moderate-intensity PA, limiting generalizability to other exercise intensities and durations. High-intensity PA has been shown to differentially affect cognitive function, particularly working memory (Drollette \u0026amp; Meadows, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Future work should compare how different intensities, durations, and modalities of PA influence cognitive outcomes to refine exercise-based cognitive interventions. Despite these limitations, this study provides novel evidence that acute PA selectively enhances episodic memory while maintaining executive functions, reinforcing the need for task- and time-specific approaches when evaluating PA-induced cognitive changes. Future research should refine methodological approaches to identify the mechanisms underlying these selective effects and determine optimal exercise prescriptions for cognitive benefits.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, this study provides evidence that the cognitive benefits of acute PA are selective rather than global, with episodic memory improving immediately after a bout of moderate-intensity PA, while inhibitory control and working memory remained stable. These findings underscore the importance of timing in cognitive assessment, as different cognitive domains may respond uniquely to PA-induced neurophysiological changes. Understanding these time-dependent effects is crucial for optimizing exercise-based cognitive interventions, particularly in academic and professional settings where memory retention and EF play critical roles. Future research should explore how factors such as PA intensity, individual baseline cognitive states, and neurobiological mechanisms influence these selective cognitive benefits, ultimately guiding the development of targeted exercise prescriptions for cognitive enhancement in emerging adults.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of competing interest:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials:\u003c/strong\u003e All data and materials will be made available upon request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate:\u003c/strong\u003e All study activities were approved by the University of North Carolina at Greensboro Institutional Review Board. All participants gave informed consent.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors Contributions:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eP.A.P – Formal analysis, original manuscript, and figure preparation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eE.S.D – Conceptualization, methodology, data collection, and original manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eE.S.D, M.M.O, A.S.C, B.M-H, and A.D.K – Manuscript review.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA.D.K – Analysis review.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhmed, H., Pauly-Takacs, K., \u0026amp; Abraham, A. (2023). Evaluating the effects of episodic and semantic memory induction procedures on divergent thinking in younger and older adults. \u003cem\u003ePLOS ONE\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(6), e0286305. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286305\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1371/journal.pone.0286305\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAmerican College of Sports Medicine (2022). \u003cem\u003eACSM\u0026rsquo;s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription\u003c/em\u003e (Eleventh edition). Wolters Kluwer.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaddeley, A. (1992). Working Memory. \u003cem\u003eScience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e255\u003c/em\u003e(5044), 556\u0026ndash;559. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.1736359\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/science.1736359\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBailey, C. E. (2007). Cognitive Accuracy and Intelligent Executive Function in the Brain and in Business. \u003cem\u003eAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1118\u003c/em\u003e(1), 122\u0026ndash;141. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1412.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1196/annals.1412.011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBorg, G. A. V. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. \u003cem\u003eMedicine \u0026amp; Science in Sports \u0026amp; Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(5), 377\u0026ndash;381. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1249/00005768-198205000-00012\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1249/00005768-198205000-00012\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChang, Y., Alderman, B. L., Chu, C., Wang, C., Song, T., \u0026amp; Chen, F. (2017). Acute exercise has a general facilitative effect on cognitive function: A combined ERP temporal dynamics and BDNF study. \u003cem\u003ePsychophysiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e54\u003c/em\u003e(2), 289\u0026ndash;300. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12784\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/psyp.12784\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChang, Y. K., Labban, J. D., Gapin, J. I., \u0026amp; Etnier, J. L. (2012). The effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eBrain Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1453\u003c/em\u003e, 87\u0026ndash;101. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2012.02.068\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.brainres.2012.02.068\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChang, Y. K., Chi, L., Etnier, J. L., Wang, C. C., Chu, C. H., \u0026amp; Zhou, C. (2014). Effect of acute aerobic exercise on cognitive performance: Role of cardiovascular fitness. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(5), 464\u0026ndash;470. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.04.007\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.04.007\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eColes, K., \u0026amp; Tomporowski, P. D. (2008). Effects of acute exercise on executive processing, short-term and long-term memory. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(3), 333\u0026ndash;344. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02640410701591417\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02640410701591417\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eColtheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database. \u003cem\u003eThe Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(4), 497\u0026ndash;505. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14640748108400805\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14640748108400805\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. \u003cem\u003eBehavioral and Brain Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(1), 87\u0026ndash;114. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S0140525X01003922\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCraig, C. L., Marshall, A. L., SjoStroM, M., Bauman, A. E., Booth, M. L., Ainsworth, B. E., Pratt, M., Ekelund, U., Yngve, A., Sallis, J. F., \u0026amp; Oja, P. (2003). International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-Country Reliability and Validity. \u003cem\u003eMedicine \u0026amp; Science in Sports \u0026amp; Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1381\u0026ndash;1395. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDiamond, A. (2013). Executive Functions. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Review of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e64\u003c/em\u003e(1), 135\u0026ndash;168. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDrollette, E. S., \u0026amp; Hillman, C. H. (2020). Walking effects on memory in children: Implications for individual differences in BMI. \u003cem\u003eMental Health and Physical Activity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e, 100317. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhpa.2020.100317\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.mhpa.2020.100317\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDrollette, E. S., Johnson, M. N., \u0026amp; Meadows, C. C. (2022). No Change in Inhibitory Control or P3 Following Different High-Intensity Interval Exercise Modalities. \u003cem\u003eBrain Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(2). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003eArticle 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12020185\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"Article 2. 10.3390/brainsci12020185\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDrollette, E. S., \u0026amp; Meadows, C. C. (2022). The effects of acute high-intensity interval exercise on the temporal dynamics of working memory and contralateral delay activity. \u003cem\u003ePsychophysiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e59\u003c/em\u003e(11), e14112. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.14112\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/psyp.14112\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDrollette, E. S., Shishido, T., Pontifex, M. B., \u0026amp; Hillman, C. H. (2012). Maintenance of Cognitive Control during and after Walking in Preadolescent Children. \u003cem\u003eMedicine \u0026amp; Science in Sports \u0026amp; Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(10), 2017\u0026ndash;2024. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e318258bcd5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1249/MSS.0b013e318258bcd5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eErickson, K. I., Hillman, C., Stillman, C. M., Ballard, R. M., Bloodgood, B., Conroy, D. E., Macko, R., Marquez, D. X., Petruzzello, S. J., Powell, K. E., \u0026amp; FOR 2018 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY GUIDELINES ADVISORY COMMITTEE*. (2019). Physical Activity, Cognition, and Brain Outcomes: A Review of the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines. \u003cem\u003eMedicine and Science in Sports and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1242\u0026ndash;1251. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000001936\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1249/MSS.0000000000001936\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEriksen, B. A., \u0026amp; Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. \u003cem\u003ePerception \u0026amp; Psychophysics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 143\u0026ndash;149. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203267\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3758/BF03203267\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFaul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., \u0026amp; Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. \u003cem\u003eBehavior Research Methods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e(2), 175\u0026ndash;191. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3758/BF03193146\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFerguson, H. J., Brunsdon, V. E. A., \u0026amp; Bradford, E. E. F. (2021). The developmental trajectories of executive function from adolescence to old age. \u003cem\u003eScientific Reports\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1382. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80866-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41598-020-80866-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGothe, N., Pontifex, M. B., Hillman, C., \u0026amp; McAuley, E. (2013). The Acute Effects of Yoga on Executive Function. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Physical Activity and Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(4), 488\u0026ndash;495. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.10.4.488\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1123/jpah.10.4.488\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGray-Burrows, K., Taylor, N., O\u0026rsquo;Connor, D., Sutherland, E., Stoet, G., \u0026amp; Conner, M. (2019). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the executive function-health behaviour relationship. \u003cem\u003eHealth Psychology and Behavioral Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(1), 253\u0026ndash;268. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2019.1637740\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/21642850.2019.1637740\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaverkamp, B. F., Wiersma, R., Vertessen, K., Van Ewijk, H., Oosterlaan, J., \u0026amp; Hartman, E. (2020). Effects of physical activity interventions on cognitive outcomes and academic performance in adolescents and young adults: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e(23), 2637\u0026ndash;2660. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2020.1794763\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02640414.2020.1794763\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHillman, C. H., Erickson, K. I., \u0026amp; Kramer, A. F. (2008). Be smart, exercise your heart: Exercise effects on brain and cognition. \u003cem\u003eNature Reviews Neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1), 58\u0026ndash;65. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2298\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/nrn2298\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHillman, C. H., Snook, E. M., \u0026amp; Jerome, G. J. (2003). Acute cardiovascular exercise and executive control function. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Psychophysiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e(3), 307\u0026ndash;314. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(03)00080-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S0167-8760(03)00080-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCorp, I. B. M. (2023). C. \u003cem\u003eIBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 29.0.2.0 [Computer Software] Armonk, NY\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIshihara, T., Drollette, E. S., Ludyga, S., Hillman, C. H., \u0026amp; Kamijo, K. (2021). The effects of acute aerobic exercise on executive function: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience \u0026amp; Biobehavioral Reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e128\u003c/em\u003e, 258\u0026ndash;269. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.06.026\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.06.026\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnson, M. N., Maher, J. P., Meadows, C. C., Bittel, K. M., Hevel, D. J., \u0026amp; Drollette, E. S. (2022). Positive affect moderates inhibitory control and positive affect following a single bout of self-select aerobic exercise. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e, 102141. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102141\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102141\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKamijo, K., Hayashi, Y., Sakai, T., Yahiro, T., Tanaka, K., \u0026amp; Nishihira, Y. (2009). Acute Effects of Aerobic Exercise on Cognitive Function in Older Adults. \u003cem\u003eThe Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e64B\u003c/em\u003e(3), 356\u0026ndash;363. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbp030\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/geronb/gbp030\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLabban, J. D., \u0026amp; Etnier, J. L. (2011). Effects of Acute Exercise on Long-Term Memory. \u003cem\u003eResearch Quarterly for Exercise and Sport\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e82\u003c/em\u003e(4), 712\u0026ndash;721. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2011.10599808\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02701367.2011.10599808\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLabban, J. D., \u0026amp; Etnier, J. L. (2018). The Effect of Acute Exercise on Encoding and Consolidation of Long-Term Memory. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e(6), 336\u0026ndash;342. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2018-0072\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1123/jsep.2018-0072\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLambourne, K., \u0026amp; Tomporowski, P. (2010). The effect of exercise-induced arousal on cognitive task performance: A meta-regression analysis. \u003cem\u003eBrain Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1341\u003c/em\u003e, 12\u0026ndash;24. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.03.091\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.brainres.2010.03.091\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, L., Men, W. W., Chang, Y. K., Fan, M. X., Ji, L., \u0026amp; Wei, G. X. (2014). Acute Aerobic Exercise Increases Cortical Activity during Working Memory: A Functional MRI Study in Female College Students. \u003cem\u003ePlos One\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(6), e99222. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099222\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1371/journal.pone.0099222\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLoprinzi, P., Blough, J., Crawford, L., Ryu, S., Zou, L., \u0026amp; Li, H. (2019). The Temporal Effects of Acute Exercise on Episodic Memory Function: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. \u003cem\u003eBrain Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(4), 87. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci9040087\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/brainsci9040087\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLudyga, S., Gerber, M., Brand, S., Holsboer-Trachsler, E., \u0026amp; P\u0026uuml;hse, U. (2016). Acute effects of moderate aerobic exercise on specific aspects of executive function in different age and fitness groups: A meta-analysis: Moderate exercise and executive function. \u003cem\u003ePsychophysiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e53\u003c/em\u003e(11), 1611\u0026ndash;1626. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12736\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/psyp.12736\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcCabe, D. P., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M. A., Balota, D. A., \u0026amp; Hambrick, D. Z. (2010). The relationship between working memory capacity and executive functioning: Evidence for a common executive attention construct. \u003cem\u003eNeuropsychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(2), 222\u0026ndash;243. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/a0017619\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/a0017619\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., \u0026amp; Wager, T. D. (2000). The Unity and Diversity of Executive Functions and Their Contributions to Complex Frontal Lobe Tasks: A Latent Variable Analysis. \u003cem\u003eCognitive Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(1), 49\u0026ndash;100. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1006/cogp.1999.0734\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., Houts, R., Poulton, R., Roberts, B. W., Ross, S., Sears, M. R., Thomson, W. M., \u0026amp; Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e108\u003c/em\u003e(7), 2693\u0026ndash;2698. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1073/pnas.1010076108\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNiedermeier, M., Weiss, E. M., Steidl-M\u0026uuml;ller, L., Burtscher, M., \u0026amp; Kopp, M. (2020). Acute Effects of a Short Bout of Physical Activity on Cognitive Function in Sport Students. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(10), 3678. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103678\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ijerph17103678\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNorman, D. A., \u0026amp; Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to Action: Willed and Automatic Control of Behavior. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, \u0026amp; D. Shapiro (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eConsciousness and Self-Regulation\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 1\u0026ndash;18). Springer US. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-0629-1_1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-1-4757-0629-1_1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Leary, K. C., Pontifex, M. B., Scudder, M. R., Brown, M. L., \u0026amp; Hillman, C. H. (2011). The effects of single bouts of aerobic exercise, exergaming, and videogame play on cognitive control. \u003cem\u003eClinical Neurophysiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e122\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1518\u0026ndash;1525. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2011.01.049\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.clinph.2011.01.049\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., H\u0026ouml;chenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E., \u0026amp; Lindel\u0026oslash;v, J. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. \u003cem\u003eBehavior Research Methods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e(1), 195\u0026ndash;203. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeters, S. L., Fan, C. L., \u0026amp; Sheldon, S. (2019). Episodic memory contributions to autobiographical memory and open-ended problem-solving specificity in younger and older adults. \u003cem\u003eMemory \u0026amp; Cognition\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e47\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1592\u0026ndash;1605. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00953-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3758/s13421-019-00953-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePontifex, M. B., Hillman, C. H., Fernhall, B., Thompson, K. M., \u0026amp; Valentini, T. A. (2009). The Effect of Acute Aerobic and Resistance Exercise on Working Memory. \u003cem\u003eMedicine \u0026amp; Science in Sports \u0026amp; Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(4), 927\u0026ndash;934. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181907d69\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181907d69\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePontifex, M. B., McGowan, A. L., Chandler, M. C., Gwizdala, K. L., Parks, A. C., Fenn, K., \u0026amp; Kamijo, K. (2019). A primer on investigating the after effects of acute bouts of physical activity on cognition. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;22. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.08.015\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.08.015\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQazi, A. S., Schmid, D., Gridley, N., Lambourne, K., Daly-Smith, A. J., \u0026amp; Tomporowski, P. D. (2024). The effects of acute exercise on long-term episodic memory: A systematic review and meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Cognition\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e, 1367569. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fcogn.2024.1367569\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fcogn.2024.1367569\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRathore, A., \u0026amp; Lom, B. (2017). The effects of chronic and acute physical activity on working memory performance in healthy participants: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. \u003cem\u003eSystematic Reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1), 124. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0514-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s13643-017-0514-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRogers, R., \u0026amp; Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a Predictable Switch Between Simple Cognitive Tasks. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Experimental Psychology: General\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e124\u003c/em\u003e, 207\u0026ndash;231. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoig, M., Nordbrandt, S., Geertsen, S. S., \u0026amp; Nielsen, J. B. (2013). The effects of cardiovascular exercise on human memory: A review with meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience \u0026amp; Biobehavioral Reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1645\u0026ndash;1666. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.06.012\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.06.012\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchwabe, L., Bohringer, A., Chatterjee, M., \u0026amp; Schachinger, H. (2008). Effects of pre-learning stress on memory for neutral, positive and negative words: Different roles of cortisol and autonomic arousal. \u003cem\u003eNeurobiology of Learning and Memory\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e90\u003c/em\u003e(1), 44\u0026ndash;53. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2008.02.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.nlm.2008.02.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSharot, T., \u0026amp; Phelps, E. A. (2004). How arousal modulates memory: Disentangling the effects of attention and retention. \u003cem\u003eCognitive Affective \u0026amp; Behavioral Neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(3), 294\u0026ndash;306. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.4.3.294\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3758/CABN.4.3.294\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShields, G. S., Moons, W. G., \u0026amp; Slavich, G. M. (2017). Better executive function under stress mitigates the effects of recent life stress exposure on health in young adults. \u003cem\u003eStress (Amsterdam, Netherlands)\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(1), 92\u0026ndash;102. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10253890.2017.1286322\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10253890.2017.1286322\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSibley, B. A., \u0026amp; Beilock, S. L. (2007). Exercise and Working Memory: An Individual Differences Investigation. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(6), 783\u0026ndash;791. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.29.6.783\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1123/jsep.29.6.783\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSng, E., Frith, E., \u0026amp; Loprinzi, P. D. (2018). Temporal Effects of Acute Walking Exercise on Learning and Memory Function. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Health Promotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(7), 1518\u0026ndash;1525. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0890117117749476\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0890117117749476\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTempest, G., Davranche, K., Brisswalter, J., Perrey, S., \u0026amp; Radel, R. (2017). The differential effects of prolonged exercise upon executive function and cerebral oxygenation. \u003cem\u003eBrain and Cognition\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e, 133\u0026ndash;141. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2017.02.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.bandc.2017.02.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThemanson, J. R., \u0026amp; Hillman, C. H. (2006). Cardiorespiratory fitness and acute aerobic exercise effects on neuroelectric and behavioral measures of action monitoring. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e141\u003c/em\u003e(2), 757\u0026ndash;767. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2006.04.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.neuroscience.2006.04.004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTulving, E. (1993). What Is Episodic Memory? \u003cem\u003eCurrent Directions in Psychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(3), 67\u0026ndash;70. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770899\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770899\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTulving, E. (2002). Episodic Memory: From Mind to Brain. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Review of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e53\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;25. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135114\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135114\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVandermorris, S., Sheldon, S., Winocur, G., \u0026amp; Moscovitch, M. (2013). Differential Contributions of Executive and Episodic Memory Functions to Problem Solving in Younger and Older Adults. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(10), 1087\u0026ndash;1096. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617713000982\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S1355617713000982\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVerburgh, L., K\u0026ouml;nigs, M., Scherder, E. J. A., \u0026amp; Oosterlaan, J. (2014). Physical exercise and executive functions in preadolescent children, adolescents and young adults: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Sports Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e(12), 973\u0026ndash;979. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2012-091441\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1136/bjsports-2012-091441\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWechsler, D. (2011). \u003cem\u003eWechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence\u0026mdash;Second Edition\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/t15171-000\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/t15171-000\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWeng, T. B., Pierce, G. L., Darling, W. G., \u0026amp; Voss, M. W. (2015). Differential Effects of Acute Exercise on Distinct Aspects of Executive Function. \u003cem\u003eMedicine \u0026amp; Science in Sports \u0026amp; Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e47\u003c/em\u003e(7), 1460\u0026ndash;1469. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000542\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1249/MSS.0000000000000542\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilson, M. (1987). MRC psycholinguistic database: Machine usable dictionary. \u003cem\u003eCouncil for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;14.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYonelinas, A., Ramsey, M., \u0026amp; Riddell, C. (2022). \u003cem\u003eRecognition Memory: The Role of Recollection and Familiarity\u003c/em\u003e. The Oxford Handbook of Human Memory.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Acute exercise, executive functions, episodic memory, cognition, emerging adults","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8148315/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8148315/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eExisting research underscores the positive influence of acute physical activity (PA) on cognition, including executive functions and episodic memory. However, it remains unclear whether the timing of assessment influences the extent and the patterns of cognitive improvements following acute PA, particularly in emerging adults. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of acute PA across different cognitive domains (episodic memory, working memory, and inhibitory control) at different time windows in emerging adults. Using a within-participants cross-over design, thirty emerging adults (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;30; 22.4\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026plusmn;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;1.6 years; 21 females) visited the lab on two separate days engaging in either 30-minutes of moderate-intensity PA or seated rest. Participants completed a battery of cognitive tasks at pre- and post-acute PA and seated rest including a word recognition task (encoding phase completed 5\u0026ndash;8 minutes post PA and rest; recall phase completed 29\u0026ndash;33 minutes post PA and rest), a change detection dot task (completed 9\u0026ndash;28 minutes post PA and rest), and a modified flanker task (34\u0026ndash;38 minutes post PA and rest). Results revealed improved memory recall performance, specifically for primacy and recency accuracy. However, results for the change detection and the flanker task revealed no change after acute PA compared to seated rest. Together, these results reveal temporal specific effects and suggest that the timing of cognitive assessment following is critical for capturing cognitive benefits of acute PA, especially in emerging adults.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Temporal Dynamics of Cognitive Change following Acute Aerobic Physical Activity in Emerging Adults","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-12-17 07:07:13","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8148315/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"55415191-25aa-4358-aeec-58dccd958055","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 17th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-07T13:53:53+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-12-17 07:07:13","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8148315","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8148315","identity":"rs-8148315","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}