Trial reportScientific reports2024
Evaluating the impact of a short bout of stair-climbing on creative thinking in a between-subjects pretest posttest comparison study.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Editorial: Advances in the understanding of the affective and cognitive effects of physical activity, exercise, and sports.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Editorial: Exploring goal-directed behavior through creativity: perspectives from psychology, neuroscience, and psychiatry.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Evaluating the impact of rock climbing on mental health and emotional well-being in adolescents.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent studies have indicated potential links between short bouts of physical activity like stair-climbing and enhanced creative thinking. However, previous research featured limitations, such as using an uncommon 3 flights round-trip design and lacking baseline creative thinking evaluations. To rectify these limitations and build a more comprehensive understanding, the present study adopts a between-subjects pretest posttest comparison design to scrutinize the effects of ascending stair-climbing on both divergent and convergent thinking. 52 subjects underwent a pretest, followed by random assignment to one of four interventions: ascending stair-climbing for 2, 5, or 8 flights, or taking an elevator for 8 flights, before progressing to a posttest. The results revealed a notable improvement in convergent thinking, measured by the increased number of solved matchstick arithmetic problems (d = 1.165), for participants who climbed 2 flights of stairs compared to those who took the elevator. However, climbing 5 or 8 flights showed no such impact on convergent thinking, and stair-climbing, regardless of the number of flights, did not influence divergent thinking. These findings underscore the utility of brief stair-climbing as an accessible means to enhance convergent thinking in everyday settings, providing a nuanced insight into the relationship between physical activity and creative thinking processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.