Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31961904›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2020

Does squatting need attention?-A dual-task study on cognitive resources in resistance exercise.

Fabian Herold, Dennis Hamacher, Alexander Törpel, Leonard Goldschmidt, Notger G Müller, Lutz Schega

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Resistance exercising on unstable surface leads to Pupil Dilation.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Influence of Acute Sprint Interval Training on Cognitive Performance of Healthy Younger Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fabian HeroldResearch Group Neuroprotection, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3453-090X
Dennis HamacherInstitute III, Department of Sport Science, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Alexander TörpelInstitute III, Department of Sport Science, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3142-6819
Leonard GoldschmidtInstitute III, Department of Sport Science, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Notger G MüllerResearch Group Neuroprotection, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Magdeburg, Germany.
Lutz SchegaInstitute III, Department of Sport Science, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg · DEGerman Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAccumulating evidence shows that acute resistance exercises and long-term resistance training positively influence cognitive functions, but the underlying mechanisms have been rarely investigated. One explanatory approach assumes that the execution of resistance exercises requires higher cognitive processes which, in turn, lead to an 'indirect' training of higher cognitive functions. However, current knowledge on the engagement of higher cognitive functions during the execution of resistance exercises is relatively sparse. Hence, the purpose of this study was to examine to what extent cognitive resources are needed to perform a resistance exercise in the form of barbell back squatting.

methodsTwenty-four young adults performed a cognitive task (serial subtraction of 7's) during standing and during barbell back squatting on a Smith machine. The total number and the number of correct responses were analyzed and taken as indicators of the cognitive load imposed by the experimental condition (squatting) and the control condition (standing). Additionally, participants' perceived exertion, mean heart rate, and the number of squats they were able to perform were assessed.

resultsWhile accuracy scores were found not to be significantly different between conditions, the numbers of total and of correct responses were significantly lower during squatting than during standing. Additionally, during squatting a higher number of total answers was given in the fifth set compared to the first set. We attribute this phenomenon to a learning effect. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant correlation between cognitive measures and perceived exertion.

conclusionResults suggest that perceived exertion cannot explain the higher dual-task costs observed during squatting. They rather reflect that more cognitive resources are needed to perform low-load barbell back squats than during standing. However, further research is necessary to confirm and generalize these findings.

Indexed as

Biofeedback, PsychologyExerciseAdultAttentionCognitionFemaleHumansMaleMuscle, SkeletalPostureResistance TrainingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31961904
PMCPMC6974039
OpenAlexW3000841892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.