Improving Cognitive Performance of 9-12 Years Old Children: Just Dance? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Amika S Singh,Renate H M De Groot,Emi Saliasi,Mai J M Chinapaw,Vera Van Den Berg

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00174

Abstract

Exercise is assumed to have positive effects on children’s cognitive performance. However, given the inconclusive evidence for the long-term effects of exercise, it is difficult to advice schools on what specific exercise programs can improve children’s cognitive performance. In particular, little is known about the effects of small exercise programs that may be feasible in daily school practice. Therefore, we assessed the effects of a 9-weeks program consisting of daily exercise breaks on children’s cognitive performance, aerobic fitness and physical activity levels. We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial in 21 classes of eight Dutch primary schools. A total of 512 children aged 9–12 years participated. The exercise intervention had a duration of 9 weeks and consisted of a daily 10-min classroom-based exercise break of moderate to vigorous intensity. Before and after the intervention, we used four cognitive tasks (i.e., the Attention Network Test, Stroop test, d2 test of attention and Fluency task) to measure children’s cognitive performance in domains of selective attention, inhibition and memory retrieval. In addition, we measured aerobic fitness with a Shuttle Run test and physical activity during school hours by accelerometers. We analyzed data using mixed models, adjusting for baseline scores, class and school. After 9 weeks, there were no intervention effects on children’s cognitive performance or aerobic fitness. Children in the intervention group spent 2.9 min more of their school hours in moderate to vigorous physical activity as compared to the children in the control group. In conclusion, daily 10-min exercise breaks in the classroom did not improve, nor deteriorate cognitive performance in children. The exercise breaks had no effect on children’s fitness, and resulted in 2.9 min more time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity during school hours. Daily exercise breaks can be implemented in the classroom to promote children’s physical activity during school time, without adverse effect on their cognitive performance.

Highlights

The assumed positive relationship between exercise and cognitive performance is widely used to advocate in favor of increasing exercise opportunities in schools (e.g., Erwin et al, 2012; Webster et al, 2015; Savina et al, 2016)
We examined the effects of the intervention on selective attention, inhibition, and semantic memory retrieval, since these cognitive domains are associated with children’s academic performance (Rueda et al, 2010; Stevens and Bavelier, 2012)
Our results are in line with the study of Costigan et al (2016) who assessed the effect of two 8-week exercise interventions, consisting of short exercise bouts that were implemented three times a week, on executive functioning in adolescents

Summary

Introduction

The assumed positive relationship between exercise and cognitive performance is widely used to advocate in favor of increasing exercise opportunities in schools (e.g., Erwin et al, 2012; Webster et al, 2015; Savina et al, 2016). Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown that the evidence for the long-term effects of structured exercise programs on children’s cognitive performance is inconclusive; some studies report positive effects, while others report no effects (see for reviews Donnelly et al, 2016; Li et al, 2017; Watson et al, 2017; Singh et al, 2018). It can be concluded that increasing the time spent on exercise in school at the cost of academic lessons does not negatively impact children’s cognitive performance (Donnelly et al, 2016; Singh et al, 2018). Due to substantial heterogeneity in interventions (e.g., duration, frequency, content), it is difficult to advise schools on the optimal form of exercise interventions to improve children’s cognitive performance (Donnelly et al, 2016; Watson et al, 2017; Singh et al, 2018)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion