Lauren A Grieco1, Esbelle M Jowers1, Vanessa L Errisuriz1, John B Bartholomew2. 1. Department of Kinesiology and Health Education, The University of Texas at Austin, USA. 2. Department of Kinesiology and Health Education, The University of Texas at Austin, USA. Electronic address: jbart@austin.utexas.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physically active academic lessons are an effective intervention to reduce sedentary time and increase student physical activity. They have also been shown to enhance task engagement, as indicated by observations of attention and behavior control, time on task (TOT). However, it is not clear if the improved TOT stems from the physical activity or if it is the result of an enjoyable break from traditional instruction. If it is due to physical activity, what dose of intensity is required for the effect? This study was designed to test these questions. METHODS: Participants were 320 children (7-9years) recruited from school districts in Central Texas in 2012. They were assigned by classroom (n=20) to one of four conditions: 1) sedentary, standard lesson (n=72); 2) sedentary academic game (n=87); 3) low to moderate intensity PA (LMPA), academic game (n=81); and 4) moderate to vigorous intensity PA (MVPA), academic game (n=76). Measures included PA via accelerometer and TOT. RESULTS: Mixed-method RMANOVA indicated TOT decreased following the standard lesson (p<0.001), showed no change following the sedentary academic game (p=0.68), and increased following the LMPA (p<0.01) and MVPA (p<0.001) academic games. CONCLUSIONS: While the sedentary, academic game prevented the reduction in TOT observed in the standard lesson, PA resulted in increased TOT. Future research should be designed to examine the potential academic benefits of the change in TOT.
BACKGROUND: Physically active academic lessons are an effective intervention to reduce sedentary time and increase student physical activity. They have also been shown to enhance task engagement, as indicated by observations of attention and behavior control, time on task (TOT). However, it is not clear if the improved TOT stems from the physical activity or if it is the result of an enjoyable break from traditional instruction. If it is due to physical activity, what dose of intensity is required for the effect? This study was designed to test these questions. METHODS:Participants were 320 children (7-9years) recruited from school districts in Central Texas in 2012. They were assigned by classroom (n=20) to one of four conditions: 1) sedentary, standard lesson (n=72); 2) sedentary academic game (n=87); 3) low to moderate intensity PA (LMPA), academic game (n=81); and 4) moderate to vigorous intensity PA (MVPA), academic game (n=76). Measures included PA via accelerometer and TOT. RESULTS: Mixed-method RMANOVA indicated TOT decreased following the standard lesson (p<0.001), showed no change following the sedentary academic game (p=0.68), and increased following the LMPA (p<0.01) and MVPA (p<0.001) academic games. CONCLUSIONS: While the sedentary, academic game prevented the reduction in TOT observed in the standard lesson, PA resulted in increased TOT. Future research should be designed to examine the potential academic benefits of the change in TOT.
Authors: Stuart M Shore; Michael L Sachs; Jeffrey R Lidicker; Stephanie N Brett; Adam R Wright; Joseph R Libonati Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Benjamin D Sylvester; Martyn Standage; Tavinder K Ark; Shane N Sweet; Peter R Crocker; Bruno D Zumbo; Mark R Beauchamp Journal: J Sport Exerc Psychol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 3.016
Authors: Katrina D DuBose; Elizabeth E Stewart; Shannon R Charbonneau; Matthew S Mayo; Joseph E Donnelly Journal: Acta Paediatr Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 2.299
Authors: T L McKenzie; E J Stone; H A Feldman; J N Epping; M Yang; P K Strikmiller; L A Lytle; G S Parcel Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Richard P Troiano; David Berrigan; Kevin W Dodd; Louise C Mâsse; Timothy Tilert; Margaret McDowell Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Cheryl A Gibson; Bryan K Smith; Katrina D Dubose; J Leon Greene; Bruce W Bailey; Shannon L Williams; Joseph J Ryan; Kristin H Schmelzle; Richard A Washburn; Debra K Sullivan; Matthew S Mayo; Joseph E Donnelly Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2008-07-07 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Natalie M Golaszewski; John B Bartholomew; Vanessa L Errisuriz; Elizabeth Korinek; Esbelle Jowers Journal: Health Behav Policy Rev Date: 2021-03
Authors: Timothy J Walker; Derek W Craig; Michael C Robertson; Jacob Szeszulski; Maria E Fernandez Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Kerli Mooses; Katrin Mägi; Eva-Maria Riso; Maarja Kalma; Priit Kaasik; Merike Kull Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-01-23 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Andy J Daly-Smith; Stephen Zwolinsky; Jim McKenna; Phillip D Tomporowski; Margaret Anne Defeyter; Andrew Manley Journal: BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med Date: 2018-03-27
Authors: Timothy K Behrens; Whitney M Holeva; Dick Carpenter; Elizabeth Tucker; Carmen Luna; John Donovan; Julaine Field; Cheryl Kelly Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2017-03-01
Authors: Álvaro Infantes-Paniagua; Ana Filipa Silva; Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo; Hugo Sarmento; Francisco Tomás González-Fernández; Sixto González-Víllora; Filipe Manuel Clemente Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2021-05-21