| Literature DB >> 34394381 |
Hainan Fan1, Shuai Qi1, Guoyuang Huang2, Zhao Xu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inhibitory control deficits may be one important cause for smartphone addiction. The available studies have shown that acute aerobic exercise may improve the inhibitory control. However, there is still lack of research on how regimens of an acute exercise affect this inhibitory control. The present study was to examine the effects of an acute aerobic exercise at three different exercise intensities on changes in the inhibitory control function including response inhibition and interference control in college students with smartphone addiction.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34394381 PMCID: PMC8360726 DOI: 10.1155/2021/5530126
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Flowchart of the study. EIG, exercise intervention groups; LI, low intensity; MI, moderate intensity; HI, high intensity.
Figure 2Process of response inhibition testing for study 1.
Figure 3Process of each trial in study 2.
Data for the accuracy of the NoGo stimulus and the RT and accuracy of the Go stimulus.
| Variables | Time | Low intensity | Moderate intensity | High intensity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy of the NoGo stimulus (%) | Pretest | 74.33 ± 2.98 | 76.33 ± 8.03 | 71.67 ± 5.18 |
| Posttest | 83.00 ± 2.72 | 96.33 ± 6.38 | 83.33 ± 3.20 | |
| Difference | 8.67 ± 6.50 | 20.00 ± 7.13 | 11.66 ± 7.90 | |
|
| 8.78 | 46.75 | 15.91 | |
| 0.012 | ≤0.001 | 0.002 | ||
|
| ||||
| RT of the Go stimulus (ms) | Pretest | 319.92 ± 51.59 | 348.11 ± 40.25 | 306.41 ± 20.89 |
| Posttest | 307.25 ± 57.51 | 271.66 ± 34.83 | 271.60 ± 18.39 | |
| Difference | 12.67 ± 8.99 | 76.45 ± 6.77 | 34.81 ± 6.93 | |
|
| 13.76 | 501.47 | 104.01 | |
| 0.003 | ≤0.001 | ≤0.001 | ||
|
| ||||
| Accuracy of the Go stimulus (%) | Pretest | 99.22 ± 0.63 | 98.22 ± 1.90 | 98.33 ± 1.28 |
| Posttest | 99.78 ± 0.31 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | 99.44 ± 0.78 | |
Note. Values are means ± SD (n = 15). F and p. values were determined by simple effect analysis. A p value ≤0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
Data for the RT and accuracy of consistent trials and inconsistent trials.
| RT (ms) | Accuracy (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groups | Trials | Pretest | Posttest | Pretest | Posttest |
| Low intensity | Consistent | 460.08 ± 10.13 | 424.88 ± 40.68 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | 100.00 ± 0.00 |
| Inconsistent | 505.39 ± 24.86 | 484.04 ± 34.01 | 98.33 ± 3.33 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | |
|
| |||||
| Moderate intensity | Consistent | 453.42 ± 25.57 | 422.42 ± 27.15 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | 100.00 ± 0.00 |
| Inconsistent | 492.36 ± 23.29 | 469.66 ± 34.47 | 99.17 ± 1.67 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | |
|
| |||||
| High intensity | Consistent | 458.09 ± 24.09 | 419.62 ± 45.44 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | 100.00 ± 0.00 |
| Inconsistent | 506.48 ± 17.63 | 466.08 ± 44.46 | 99.17 ± 1.67 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | |
Note. Values are means ± SD (n = 15). RT = reaction time. There were no significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between different conditions in study 2.