BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Research Article
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
1 of 14
Acute low- and higher-volume resistance circuit training improves immediate and short-
term cognition in young adults
RONALD V. CROCE1 | MICHAEL HORVAT2
1 Motor Control & Biomechanics Lab, Kinesiology Department, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA.
2 University of Georgia, Kinesiology Department, Athens, GA, USA.
Correspondence to: Dr. Ronald Croce, Kinesiology Department, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03820, USA.
email: rvc@unh.edu
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
HIGHLIGHTS
• Both low- and higher-volume circuit training
incorporating resistance exercise improves performance
in complex but not simple information processing tasks in
young adults.
• Only higher-volume circuit training incorporating
resistance exercise improves executive functioning in
young adults.
• Acute exercise facilitates correct choice response and
inhibits competing choices in multichoice and dual-task
conditions, increasing cortical processing speed.
• Previous investigations support these findings, showing
that acute exercise improves executive and non-
executive functioning in adults.
ABBREVIATIONS
BNDF Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor
CON Non-exercise-control
DT Dual-task
FPN Frontoparietal Network
HRR Heart rate reserve
HV-RCT Higher Volume RCT
IGF-1 Insulin Growth Factor-1
LV-RCT Low Volume RCT
MC Multichoice
METs Metabolic Equivalents
MMSE Mini-Mental State Exam
MT Movement time
η2 Eta square
PFC Prefrontal cortex
RCT Resistance circuit training
RPT Response time
RT Reaction time
SC Single choice
TMT Trail Making Test
1-RM 1-repetition maximum
PUBLICATION DATA
Received 10 11 2024
Accepted 02 01 2025
Published 05 01 2025
BACKGROUND: Exercise’s significance in promoting health and fitness cannot be
overstated. In addition, various exercises have been shown to enhance cognition. The
combination of aerobic and strength benefits in resistance circuit training (RCT) offers a
unique opportunity to study how two different outcomes of exercise interact to enhance
cognitive function. Such research could lead to new recommendations for improving cognitive
and motor performance.
AIM: The present study investigated the role of two volumes of resistance circuit training (Low
Volume [LV-RCT] of approximately 11 min and Higher Volume [HV-RCT] of approximately 23
min) on information processing speed and executive function.
METHOD: Thirty adult male and female volunteers (18, male; 12, female) between the ages
of 18-25 (mean [± standard deviation]: 22.37 ±2.06) were randomly recruited and assigned to
either a non-exercise-control (CON), an LV-RCT, or an HV-RCT group. Participants took part
in an introductory session followed one day later by an exercise session. During the exercise
session, participants participated in timed single-choice, multichoice, and dual-task response-
time tasks to ascertain information processing and the Trail Making Test to ascertain
executive functioning. Information processing was analyzed by fractionating total response
time into reaction and movement times. In the exercise session, measurements were taken
pre-exercise, 1 min (immediately), and 20 min (short-term) postexercise. The observed
benefits in the intervention groups were compared to those in the control group using
repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS: The following outcomes were found: (1) on the single-choice task, there were no
significant differences among groups; (2) on the multichoice task and dual-task, both RCT
groups displayed decreased reaction (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.04, p < 0.01, η2 = 0.04, respectively)
and response times (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.05, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.10, respectively) postexercise, with
no differences between RCT groups; and (3) On the Trail Making Test, participants in the HV-
RCT condition, and not the LV-RCT condition, improved their executive function scores (p <
0.05, η2 = 0.06).
CONCLUSION: Despite small effect sizes for some data, results indicated that resistance
circuit training can improve young adults’ cognitive processing speed on complex stimulus-
response tasks and executive functioning. The combination of aerobic and strength benefits
found in circuit training emerges as a unique opportunity to study how two different outcomes
of exercise interact to enhance cognitive function.
KEYWORDS: Circuit training | Executive function | Information processing | Cognition |
Response time
INTRODUCTION
Exercise’s significance in promoting health and fitness cannot be overstated. Regular physical activity is a cornerstone of health
and well-being 1. Beyond the physical realm, exercise’s mental health and cognitive benefits are also significant 2. Although most research
in this area has focused on chronic physical activity and its relationship to cognition, more recent investigations have investigated how
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
2 of 14
Research Article
acute exercise affects various components of cognitive functioning 3.
One important cognitive function involves information processing and using reaction (RT), movement (MT), and response
(RPT) times to infer such capacity 3. Reaction time is when the stimulus is recognized and processed; MT is the time from the conclusion
of RT to completing the motor response; and RPT is the entire process from stimulus recognition to completion of the motor task. One
may think of RPT as the capacity to rapidly respond to a stimulus and involves sensory, perceptual, and motor processes.
Another important cognitive function is executive functioning. Executive function is generally conceptualized as ‘higher level’ or
‘metacognitive’ functioning that oversees other more basic cognitive functions such as regulating emotions and attention and is often
described as the brain’s internal management system 4. Executive function includes three core domains: inhibitory control (the ability to
make appropriate decisions without being affected by internal tendencies or external distractions), cognitive flexibility (the ability to use
inhibitory control and working memory to alter or redress one’s perspective of, and approach to, a given situation), and working memory
(the ability to store or update specific information in response to task demands). Both speed of information processing and executive
function are associated with academic performance, vocational achievement, and positive social relationships and are key determinants
of successful aging 5.
Researchers have demonstrated that aerobic exercise can improve information processing and the core domains of executive
functioning 2,6. Although not as prevalent as aerobic exercise, resistance exercise 5 and exercise using a combination of aerobic and
resistance exercise 7 have also been shown to enhance these functions. Exercise is believed to improve cognitive performance because
it acts as a ‘physiological stressor,’ elevating concentrations of lactate 7, catecholamines, and/or brain-derived neurotrophins 2,8, such as
Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF), Insulin Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1), Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF), and Irisin, that
are involved in attention and cognitive processes.
According to Martineau et al. 3, the elevation of these key biochemicals in the cortex can influence the functioning of the
Frontoparietal Network (FPN), which is involved in many functions, including decision-making, task-switching, response inhibition,
attention, and executive function during goal-directed tasks. The prefrontal cortex (PFC) is responsible for the flexible allocation of
cognitive resources and helps prioritize information based on task relevance. Concurrently, the parietal cortex maintains and shifts
attention across different stimuli. This coordination ensures that individuals can focus on pertinent tasks, suppress distractions, and
engage in goal-directed movements. In addition, the FPN directly interacts with the basal ganglia and motor and premotor regions and is
involved in planning, coordinating, and executing voluntary motor actions. Overall, exercise appears to increase concentrations of key
biochemicals in the cortex and influence cortical areas that impact sensorimotor behavior 2,3.
A particular type of exercise that has not been investigated sufficiently as affecting cognition is resistance circuit training (RCT).
Circuit training is a popular, time-efficient exercise mode and is an excellent way of simultaneously improving cardiovascular fitness, body
composition, muscular strength, and muscular endurance 9. Circuit training programs can either incorporate resistance exercises
exclusively, cardiovascular exercises exclusively, or a combination of both resistance and cardiovascular exercises. Resistance circuit
training routinely involves rotating through up to 12 exercises targeting different muscle groups. In RCT regimens, participants complete a
series of exercises for a certain number of repetitions (typically 12-20) or for a certain amount of time (typically between 30- to 60 s),
moving from one exercise to another exercise for the same number of repetitions or time with little or no rest between exercises. When
performed properly, RCT routines can elevate heart rate and keep it elevated throughout the entire circuit session, thereby creating an
aerobic effect 9. Moreover, like traditional resistance exercise programs, RCT programs can be differentiated by volume and intensity,
where volume describes how much work is performed throughout a training session (e.g., number of repetitions performed and/or the
number of circuits performed), and where intensity describes the difficulty or the amount of resistance used.
Purpose
Research into the relationship between circuit training and cognition is important for several reasons: Firstly, it may offer
insights into how exercise influences brain health, provide alternative methods for enhancing cognitive performance, and contribute to
preventing or mitigating cognitive decline. Secondly, the effect of RCT on an individual’s speed of responding and decision-making to an
external stimulus has several important implications for understanding the interaction between cognition and motor performance.
Improving response time is crucial in sports, as well as being important in performing activities of daily living. The combination of aerobic
and strength benefits of RCT offers a unique opportunity to study how two different outcomes of exercise interact to enhance cognition
and motor behavior.
According to Chen et al. 7, further research into the acute effects of exercise with aerobic and resistance exercise components
on cognitive processes and executive function is warranted. No studies were found investigating the impact of volume-based RCT
programs on cognition and executive functioning. Accordingly, this investigation explored the acute effects of low and higher-volume RCT
protocols (LV-RCT and HV-RCT, respectively) on cognition and executive functioning in young adults. It was hypothesized that such an
exercise routine would be a potent stressor facilitating cognition in young adults.
METHODS
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
3 of 14
Research Article
Participants
Using an effect size of η2 < 0.14 as an estimate for a power analysis (1-ß = .80) based on repeated measures ANOVA, a power
analysis suggested a minimum sample size of 40 participants; however, due to logistical problems encountered in accessing the circuit
training area, a smaller number of participants engaged in the experiment. Thirty participants (18, male; 12, female) between the ages of
18-25 (mean [± standard deviation]: 22.37 ±2.06) were randomly recruited from seacoast New Hampshire and took part in single choice
(SC; participants responded to a stimulus light by pressing a response button), multichoice (MC, 5-choices: participants responded to
differently colored stimulus lights by pressing the appropriate corresponding response buttons), and dual-task (DT: counting backward by
seven whilst performing the MC task) conditions to assess information processing 3 and the Trail Making Test Parts A and B (TMT-A and
B) to assess executive function 4, before and after an acute bout of one of three volumes of RCT: a non-exercise Control [CON] condition,
in which participants did not exercise and solely sat quietly in the circuit training exercise space; (2) an LV-RCT condition, in which
participants completed one circuit of the prescribed exercises; or (3) an HV-RCT condition, in which participants completed two circuits of
the prescribed exercises. Each group contained equal numbers of male (6) and female (4) participants.
Participants were recreationally active, exercising 3-5 days/week for approximately 1 hr/session, and based on a physical and
mental health questionnaire and the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), had normal cognitive function. Participants were excluded from
taking part in the study if they: (1) scored below 25 points on the MMSE; (2) participated competitively in endurance or weight training-
related activities; (3) had a serious chronic mental, central nervous system, or cardiac issues; (4) were on antidepressants or anxiolytics;
(5) had respiratory, orthopedic, or arthritic conditions that may impede performing the RCT programs; and/or (6) had a history of
traumatic brain injuries or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Exclusion criteria before partaking in both session one and session two
included not performing moderate to strenuous aerobic activity within 12 hours before each session (moderate [3–6 Metabolic
Equivalents] to vigorous [> 6 METs]) and not consuming alcohol or caffeine within 12 hr before each session. There was no effort to
control nutrition other than informing participants to have a normal breakfast. This investigation adhered to ethical standards in the
Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the University of New Hampshire Institutional Review Board for Research with Human
Subjects. Subjects provided written consent before participation.
Instrumentation
The stimulus-response apparatus used to measure RT, MT, and RPT was developed by the Electrical Engineering and
Kinesiology Departments at the University of New Hampshire and has been described in detail previously 3 (Figure 1). The TMT was used
to measure executive function 10,11. The TMT is a timed neuropsychological test of visual-spatial search, task-switching inhibition, and
cognitive flexibility. It comprises two components: TMT-A (visuospatial abilities) and TMT-B (cognitive flexibility, task-switching, and task
inhibition). The time difference to complete TMT-B and TMT-A is calculated to measure executive function 11 (Figure 2).
Figure 1. Configuration of the response-time apparatus.
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
4 of 14
Research Article
Figure 2. Example of sequencing in the Trail Making Test Part-A (TMT-A) and Part-B (TMT-B).
Experimental Design and Procedures
In Session 1, participants were explained the study’s purpose and importance, the TMT, SC, MC, and DT tests, and the three
exercise conditions. After reading and signing informed consent, they were given a physical and mental health questionnaire and MMSE
to determine if they had physical, cognitive, or psychological characteristics that might exclude them from participating. After completing
the questionnaire, participants were randomly assigned to one of the three treatment groups, after which each participant’s heart rate
reserve (HRR) was determined using the Karvonen formula 1,3. Participants were randomly assigned to groups using a random number
generator computer program.
Afterward, participants in the exercise groups had their appropriate resistance per exercise calculated by determining 60% of a
1-repetition maximum (1-RM) performed for each exercise. The only exception to this resistance level was the body squat exercise,
where each participant’s body weight was used as the resistance. The last part of the session included having participants perform 30
practice trials on the response time apparatus for each condition tested and two practice trials on the TMT to become familiar with each
test.
Session 2 occurred on the following day. In Session 2, participants were fitted with a Polar heart monitor and sensor (Polar Fit1,
15 Grumman Road West, Bethpage, NY 11714) to determine pre- and postexercise heart rates and at what percent HRR participants
reached at the end of their respective exercise sessions. Participants then performed 30 practice trials on each response time condition
and two on the TMT to obtain truer pre-exercise baseline measurements and minimize learning effects across testing sessions 3.
Following practice trials, participants were pretested on the three response-time conditions and the TMT. The order of testing
was counterbalanced. After completing their respective exercise protocols, participants were retested at 1 min and 20 min postexercise to
determine the immediate and short-term exercise effects. Participants performed 8 trials in each response-time condition per test. High
and low scores were omitted in the data analysis, with the middle six trials averaged 3. If a participant had a mishit during one of the 8 trial
test blocks, that trial was counted as the high score and omitted from the averaging processes. No participant had more than one mishit
at any testing session. Participants performed one trial of the TMT per test session.
The RCT program consisted of the following 12 exercises sequentially performed for 40 s/exercise at a cadence of 2
s/repetition with a 14 s rest between each exercise (exercise time 11 min) in the following order: chest press, leg press, latissimus
pulldown, military press, knee extension, elbow flexion, knee flexion, elbow extension, back rows, pectoralis flies, body squat, and
abdominal crunch. For individuals engaged in the HV-RCT program, there was a 1 min rest between circuits (exercise time 23 min).
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
5 of 14
Research Article
Participants’ heart rates were recorded immediately after exercise. This value was used to determine pre- to postexercise heart rate
changes and the percentage of HRR attained from exercise.
Data Analysis
According to Martineau et al.,3 pre-exercise performance is a variable influencing the effects of acute exercise on cognitive
performance and should be considered when determining the impact of exercise regimens on cognitive performance. Therefore,
repeated measures ANOVAs incorporating pre-exercise tests were used in the analyses. To measure the aerobic effects resulting from
RCT, participants’ pre- to post-exercise heart rate changes were calculated via a 3 x 2 (Group x Heart Rate) repeated measures ANOVA.
Reaction time, MT, and RPT scores (msec) were analyzed via separate 3 x 3 (Group x Test Trial Blocks) repeated measures ANOVA.
Results on the TMT-A were subtracted from TMT-B to determine executive function and were analyzed via a 3 x 3 repeated measures
ANOVA. The Bonferroni correction factor was used to determine significant alpha levels (p < 0.05), and the Greenhouse-Geisser
correction was used to adjust for the lack of sphericity in repeated measures ANOVA. Eta square (η2) was used to determine effect size.
the Shapiro-Wilk test (W) was used to determine normal data distribution, and Levene's test was used to determine whether the
homogeneity assumption of the variance was met. Both normal data distribution (W = 0.95, p < 0.05) and homogeneity of variance
assumptions (p > 0.05) were met.
RESULTS
Heart Rate Changes
Significant group (F 2,27 = 215.84, p < 0.0001, η2 = 0.09), heart rate (F 1,27 = 1001.28, p < 0.0001, η2 = 0.10), and group x heart
rate interaction (F 2,27 = 225.86, p < 0.0001, η2 = 0.09) effects were found, with LV-RCT and HV-RCT groups displaying greater heart rate
changes attained at the culmination of their respective exercise sessions (Table 1). There were no significant differences between LV-
and HV-RCT groups. Based on the Karvonen formula 1, CON participants reached 1.92% (±1.51) HRR, LV-RCT participants reached
55.15% (±6.95) HRR, and HV-RCT participants reached 58.24% (±8.24) HRR. Therefore, both RCT routines elicited a moderate aerobic
effect 1.
Table 1. Means (M) and Standard Deviations (+SD) for post-circuit heart rates and percent of predicted heart rate reserve (percent HRR*).
Pre-Circuit HR
Post-Circuit HR
Percent HRR*
Group
M SD
M SD
M SD
Control
74.50 ±4.09
76.90 ±3.84
1.92 ±1.51
Low Volume
74.00 ±4.89
142.90 ±7.75
55.15 ±6.95
Higher Volume
75.00 ±3.79
146.10 ±8.78
58.24 ±8.23
Note: There were significant group (p < 0.0001, η2 = 0.09), heart rate (p < 0.0001, η2 = 0.010), and group x heart rate interaction effects (p < 0.0001,
η2 = 0.09). *HRR was determined using the Karvonen formula (also known as the heart rate reserve (HRR) formula), which considers a person’s resting
heart rate when calculating the heart rate maximum.
Information Processing
For the SC task, there were no between-group and within-group effects for RT (p = 0.73 and p = 0.83, respectively), MT (p =
0.99 and p = 0.56, respectively), and RPT (p = 0.86 and p = 0.90, respectively) (Table 2, Figure 3). For the MC task, there were no
between-group effects for RT (p = 0.36), but there were within-group (p < 0.01, η2 = 0.03) and interaction (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.04) effects
(Table 3, Figure 4). Post-hoc analysis indicated both RCT groups displayed decreases in RT at 1 min and 20 min postexercise, with no
differences between RCT groups. For MT, there were no between or within-group effects (p = 0.80 and p = 0.20, respectively). For RPT,
there were no between-group effects (p = 0.53), but there were within-group (p < 0.01, η2 = 0.04) and interaction (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.05)
effects. Post-hoc analysis indicated decreases in RPT at 1 min and 20 min postexercise for RCT groups at 1 min and 20 min
postexercise, with no differences between RCT groups.
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
6 of 14
Research Article
Table 2. Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) for processing time (msec) across testing times on the single-choice condition.
Processing Time (msec)
Reaction Time
Movement Time
Response Time
Group
M SD
M SD
M SD
Control
Pre-exercise
250.40 73.24
218.08 52.12
468.48 104.47
1 min Postexercise
262.00 73.68
234.36 52.99
496.36 120.05
20 min Postexercise
279.70 89.90
206.81 82.63
486.51 114.44
Low Volume
Pre-exercise
247.99 53.96
215.93 56.69
463.91 75.16
1 min Postexercise
239.90 60.27
222.04 47.19
461.94 70.78
20 min Postexercise
246.93 49.07
216.54 55.25
463.46 88.43
Higher Volume
Pre-exercise
256.49 58.22
215.74 54.98
472.23 96.36
1 min Postexercise
247.58 64.38
211.59 47.22
459.16 101.27
20 min Postexercise
240.55 49.47
223.75 49.81
464.30 93.55
Note. There were no significant group or test differences for reaction, movement, and response times.
Table 3. Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) for processing time (msec) across testing times on the multichoice condition.
Processing Time (msec)
Exercise
Reaction Time
Movement Time
Response Time
Intensity
M SD
M SD
M SD
Control
Pre-exercise
473.14 77.54
266.76 53.38
739.90 101.69
1 min Postexercise
482.41 81.07
275.74 58.09
758.15 99.99
20 min Postexercise
480.05 88.84
269.40 65.40
749.45 104.35
Low Volume
Pre-exercise
476.64 82.49
297.40 37.03
774.04 87.71
1 min Postexercise
427.38 66.96
265.53 48.46
693.50 90.07
20 min Postexercise
421.93 81.77
282.33 74.34
704.25 136.45
High Volume
Pre-exercise
459.91 90.38
283.55 67.95
743.46 122.86
1 min Postexercise
412.06 72.42
256.26 56.74
668.33 101.94
20 min Postexercise
424.56 84.88
262.39 57.70
686.95 115.05
Note: There were significant test (p < 0.01, η2 = 0.03) and group x test interaction (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.04) effects for RT and significant
test (p < 0.01, η2 = 0.04) and group x test interaction (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.05) effects for RPT.
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
7 of 14
Research Article
Figure 3. Single choice reaction, movement, and response times (msec) across measurement time blocks.
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
8 of 14
Research Article
Figure 4. Multichoice reaction, movement, and response times (msec) across measurement time blocks.
For the DT task, there were no between-group effects for RT (p = 0.17), but there were within-group (p < 0.001, η2 = 0.05) and
interaction (p < 0.01, η2 = 0.04) effects (Table 4, Figure 5). Post-hoc analysis indicated decreases in RT at 1 min and 20 min post
exercise for RCT groups, with no differences between RCT groups. For MT, there were no between or within-group effects (p = 0.90 and
p = 0.39, respectively). For RPT, there were no within-group effects (p = 0.11), but there were between-group (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.12) and
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
9 of 14
Research Article
interaction (p < 0.001, η2 = 0.10) effects. Post-hoc analysis indicated decreases in RPT at 1 min and 20 min postexercise for RCT groups,
with no differences between RCT groups.
Table 4. Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) for processing time (msec) across testing times on the dual-task condition.
Processing Time (msec)
Exercise
Reaction Time
Movement Time
Response Time
Intensity
M SD
M SD
M SD
Control
Pre-exercise
741.69 154.94
472.21 138.41
1213.90 113.17
1 min Postexercise
768.05 147.87
564.06 263.27
1332.11 180.37
20 min Postexercise
758.59 146.59
505.34 155.23
1263.98 105.02
Low Volume
Pre-exercise
750.25 148.51
484.55 102.21
1234.80 143.67
1 min Postexercise
653.46 174.91
482.41 127.50
1135.88 116.53
20 min Postexercise
645.53 173.02
494.83 118.47
1140.36 164.16
High Volume
Pre-exercise
694.69 116.51
521.66 181.21
1216.35 118.68
1 min Postexercise
601.91 111.08
516.50 143.41
1118.41 107.76
20 min Postexercise
611.45 135.89
502.96 159.73
1114.41 108.19
Note: There were significant test (p < 0.001, η2 = 0.05) and group x test interaction (p < 0.01, η2 = 0.04) effects for RT and significant
group (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.12) and group x test interaction (p < 0.001, η2 = 0.10) effects for RPT.
Executive Functioning
Analysis of TMT data (TMT-B [-] A) indicated that there were no between-group differences (p = 0.09), but there were within-
group (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.05) and interaction (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.06) effects, (Table 5, Figure 6). Post-hoc analysis indicated improvements in
TMT performance only in the HV-RCT group. This occurred at both 1 min and 20 min postexercise.
Table 5. Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) for completion time (sec) on the Trail Making Test across testing times.
Processing Time (sec)
Exercise
TMT Part B
TMT Part A
Part B (-) A
Intensity
M SD
M SD
M SD
Control
Pre-exercise
55.29 9.94
38.94 7.44
16.35 8.15
1 min Postexercise
55.36 9.27
37.96 5.12
17.40 6.31
20 min Postexercise
55.94 9.15
38.83 3.58
17.11 8.12
Low Volume
Pre-exercise
54.11 12.32
38.65 11.68
15.46 6.51
1 min Postexercise
42.68 10.88
32.73 6.78
9.96 7.86
20 min Postexercise
49.63 8.98
34.08 7.51
15.55 8.55
High Volume
Pre-exercise
53.31 9.01
38.63 9.05
14.68 4.88
1 min Postexercise
44.53 9.01
35.48 7.25
9.05 3.74
20 min Postexercise
46.46 8.20
36.58 7.05
9.88 5.68
Note: There were test (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.05) and group x test interaction (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.06) effects.
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
10 of 14
Research Article
Figure 5. Dual Task reaction, movement, and response times (msec) across measurement time blocks.
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
11 of 14
Research Article
Figure 6. Trail Making Test times (sec) across measurement time blocks.
DISCUSSION
The presence of statistical significance despite the low effect sizes found in this investigation requires careful interpretation.
Although statistical significance indicated that the observed results were unlikely to have occurred by chance, the low effect sizes found
in several of the results suggest that the magnitude of the relationship is small, even if statistically significant. Therefore, caution is
warranted when interpreting results at the risk of overstating the practical significance of the findings.
Results indicated that RT and RPT improved in MC and DT conditions but not in the SC condition; however, other than
response time in the dual-task condition (group η2 = 0.12 and interaction η2 = 0.10), effect sizes for RT and RPT were small, ranging from
η2 = 0.03 to η2 =0.05). Nonetheless, the statistical significance found is supported by previous investigations showing that acute aerobic 2,
resistance 5, and combined aerobic and resistance 12 exercise improve executive and non-executive functions. Moreover, dose-response
studies mostly illustrate an inverted-U-shaped relationship between aerobic and resistance exercise and information processing, with
optimal effects occurring at moderate intensity levels 8,13-16. In the present investigation, the aerobic effect at the termination of exercise
for the exercise groups (55 and 58% of HRR postexercise for LV- and HV-RCT groups, respectively) would be regarded as moderate 3,
and the resistance used in the circuit training routines (60% of 1-RM) would be regarded as moderate as well 5. The observation that low-
and higher-volume RCT regimens enhanced reaction and response times in the more complex MC and DT response-time tasks but not
in the SC response-time task aligns with previous research 3,17, suggesting that complex cognitive tasks are more likely to be affected by
acute exercise than simpler tasks.
In all stimulus-response models, information processing is seen as a process based on the accumulation of time-sensitive
information. At the central nervous system level, there are information accumulators, with every accumulator being associated with its
unique response alternative. A given response is emitted once one accumulator or the difference between multiple accumulators reaches
a predefined threshold. Reaction time is a function of the time necessary to reach this threshold and is an active process involving the
suppression of inappropriate responses during retrieval 18. Reaction time is often considered to involve suppressing inappropriate
responses during response selection and retrieval 3,18,19. Therefore, response inhibition acts as an intermediate variable, increasing
processing time during multichoice conditions and engaging cortical mechanisms not employed during single-choice conditions.
Consequently, in the SC condition, information processing mechanics are simplified, which in turn, renders the impact of
exercise on processing speed minimal compared to that encountered during the more complex MC and DT conditions. It is reasonable to
believe that delays in information processing observed in MC and DT tasks and not the SC task result from increased processing time
involved in response selection and inhibition, and the acute RCT programs decreased the time needed for these processing tasks.
Recent investigations 3,18,19 similarly found acute exercise decreases processing time during tasks involving inhibitory control, facilitating
response time speed.
Because there were no changes in MT, the motor response to the button press remained relatively constant. This, along with
reductions in RT, supports the position that the effects of the RCT routines on RPT occurred primarily through cortical mechanisms rather
than motor response mechanisms. Previous research has been mixed in this area, with research showing improvements occurring in RT
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
12 of 14
Research Article
20, RT and MT 21, or MT 22. Like Martineau et al. 3, our data indicated that increases in the speed with which the cortex processed
information were the primary reason for the observed improvements in RPT and not the improved speed in movement.
Both volumes of RCT improved participants’ information processing speed when performing MC and DT tasks; however, only
the HV-RCT improved executive functioning in participants. Results on the TMT should be interpreted cautiously, however, as effect
sizes were low (η2 = 0.05 and η2 = 0.06). Nonetheless, significance was found. One plausible explanation for the differing effects of RCT
on response time and executive functioning could be that the executive function task necessitated a greater level of cortical processing
than did the simpler response-time tasks and that participants who engaged in HV-RCT sustained a higher level of ‘physiological stress’
than participants in LV-RCT due to a greater time engaged exercising (23 min versus 11 min). It is conceivable that this additional time
was needed to promote the facilitatory effects of RCT on executive functioning. As no meaningful measures of physiological stress were
collected (e.g., cortisol levels), this rationale is reasonable but speculative.
What is most interesting regarding the results of this investigation is that participants in the HV-RCT group displayed
improvements on both DT and TMT tasks. Dual-tasking refers to the concurrent execution of two distinct tasks, whilst task-switching
involves rapidly shifting attention between two or more tasks. In the DT condition, individuals were not only engaged in dual tasking --
counting backward by 7 while performing the MC task -- they also had to task switch from counting backward to reacting to the stimulus
and executing the appropriate button press. Monsell 23 emphasized the role of cognitive control in dual-tasking and task-switching,
underscoring that the brain must disengage from one task and rapidly shift attention to another, incurring a switch cost in terms of time
and efficiency. Both dual-tasking and task-switching rely heavily on cognitive control processes that govern the ability to regulate
attention, inhibit irrelevant information, and flexibly shift between tasks 24. As the TMT is more involved in measuring task-switching and
cognitive flexibility than working memory 11, it is reasonable to observe improvements in both DT and TMT performances resulting from
RCT.
Although analyses of lactate or neurochemicals were not performed in this investigation, the literature supports the premise that
the facilitatory effects of RCT on attention and cognitive functioning are most likely due to increased levels of lactate 7, neurotrophic
factors, and/or catecholamines released during or following exercise 25-28. As a result, cognition on tasks requiring executive functioning,
task-switching, and multichoice responses were facilitated.
It is important to note that while acute exercise is purported to stimulate the release of lactate, neurotrophic factors, and/or
catecholamines, this effect is not universal. Factors such as exercise type, intensity, and individual fitness levels play significant roles in
determining whether these substances are released in response to exercise 29,30. For instance, Rojas Vega et al. 29 found that only
moderate-to-high-intensity exercise resulted in elevated BDNF levels, suggesting that low-intensity or shorter durations of exercise may
not be sufficient to stimulate this neurotrophic chemical. Additionally, individual fitness levels and baseline neurochemical states can
influence the release of these substances. Ferris et al. 30 observed that individuals with higher fitness levels experienced a greater
increase in BDNF in response to exercise compared to less fit individuals, indicating that exercise-induced neurochemical responses may
vary based on conditioning.
There were two primary limitations of this investigation. Firstly, a larger sample size is warranted to more precisely investigate
the impact of differing volume-based circuit training programs on cognition. Secondly, as the TMT primarily measures cognitive flexibility,
task-switching, task inhibition, and not working memory, additional executive function tests (e.g., Stroop Color and Word test that better
evaluates working memory) should be used to obtain a more inclusive look at executive functioning.
CONCLUSION
Aerobic and resistance exercises have been linked to improved cognition and executive functioning, albeit with potential
differences in the domains affected. For example, aerobic exercise interventions are particularly effective in enhancing cognitive functions
such as attention, processing speed, and memory, whilst resistance exercise showed greater benefits in executive functions, such as
impulse inhibition and cognitive fluidity. Combining both forms of exercise into a comprehensive fitness routine may offer synergistic
benefits. Resistance circuit training should be considered as adjuvant therapy for improved brain health and cognition and to treat age- or
disease-related cognitive declines.
REFERENCES
1. Gibson A, Wagner DR, Heyward VH (2019). Advanced fitness assessment and exercise prescription (8th Edition), Chapter 1, Physical activity,
health, and chronic disease. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2019. p. 2-27.
2. Cantelon JA, Giles GE. A review of cognitive changes during acute aerobic exercise. Front Psychol. 2021;12:65158. doi:10.3389/psyg.2021:653158
3. Martineau DR, Croce RV, Smith W. Effect of an acute bout of low-, moderate-, and high-intensity aerobic exercise on immediate and delayed
fractionated response time. Int J Motor Control Learn. 2023;5(3):1-12. doi:10.61186/ijmcl.5.3.1
4. Diamond A. Executive functions. Ann Rev Psychol. 2013;64:135-168. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
13 of 14
Research Article
5. Huang T-Y, Chen F-T, Li R-H, Hillman CH, Cline TL, Chu C-H, et al. Effects of acute resistance exercise on executive function: A systematic review
of the moderating role of intensity and executive function domain. Sports Med – Open. 2022;8:141. doi:10.1186/s40798-022-00527-7
6. Zhu Y, Sun F, Chiu MM, Siu AY-S. (2021). Effects of high-intensity interval exercise and moderate-intensity continuous exercise on executive
function of healthy young adults. Physiol Behav. 2021;239:113505. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2021.113505
7. Chen Y-C, Li R-H, Chen F-T, Wu C-H, Chen C-Y, Chang C-C, et al. Acute effect of combined exercise with aerobic and resistance exercises on
executive function. PeerJ. 2023;11: e15768. doi:10.7717/peerj.15768
8. Chow Z-S, Moreland AT, Macpherson H, Teo W-P. (2021). The Central Mechanisms of Resistance Training and Its Effects on Cognitive Function.
Sports Med. 2021;51:2483–2506. doi:10.1007/s40279-021-01535-5
9. Ramos-Campo DJ, Caravaca AL, Martínez-Rodríguez A, Rubio-Arias JÁ. Effects of resistance circuit-based training on body composition, strength
and cardiorespiratory fitness: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Biology-Basel. 2021;10(5):377. doi:10.3390/biology10050377
10. Etnier JL, Chang Y-K. The effect of physical activity on executive function: A brief commentary on definitions, measurement issues, and the current
state of the literature. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2009;31(4):469–483. doi:10.1123/jsep.31.4.469
11. Salthouse TA. What cognitive abilities are involved in trail making performance? Intelligence. 2011;39(4):222-232. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2011.03.001
12. Wen HJ, Tsai CL Effects of acute aerobic exercise combined with resistance exercise on neurocognitive performance in obese women. Brain Sci.
2020;10(11);767. doi:10.3390/brainsci10110767
13. Moreau D, Chou E. The acute effect of high-intensity exercise on executive function: A meta-analysis. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019;14(5):734-764.
doi:10.1177/1745691619850568
14. Aly M, Kojima H. Acute moderate-intensity exercise generally enhances neural resources related to perceptual and cognitive processes: A
randomized controlled ERP study. Ment Health Phys Act. 2020;19:100363. doi:10.1016/j.mhpa.2020.100363
15. McMorris T, Hale BJ. Is there an acute exercise-induced physiological/ biochemical threshold which triggers increased speed of cognitive
functioning? A meta-analytic investigation. J Sport Health Sci. 2015;4(1), 4-13. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2014.08.003
16. Wilke J, Giesche F, Klier K, Vogt L, Hermann E, Branzer W. Acute effects of exercise on cognitive function in healthy adults: A systematic review
with multilevel meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2019;49:905-916. doi:10.1007/s40279-019-01085-x
17. Chang YK, Labban JD, Gapin JI, Etnier JL. The effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance; A meta-analysis. Brain Res. 2012;1453:87-101.
doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2012.02.068
18. Burle B, Vidal F, Tandonnet C, Hasbroucq T. Physiological evidence for response inhibition in choice reaction time tasks. Brain Cogn.
2004;56(2):153–164. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.06.004
19. Kao S-C, Baumgartner N, Nagy C, Fu H-L, Yang C-T, Wang C-H. Acute effects of aerobic exercise on conflict suppression, response inhibition, and
processing efficiency underlying inhibitory control processes: An ERP and SFT study. Psychophysiol. 2022;59(8):e14032. doi:10.1111/psyp.14032
20. Ozyemisci-Taskiran O, Gunendi Z, Bolukbasi N, Beyazova M. The effect of a single session submaximal aerobic exercise on premotor fraction of
reaction time: An electromyographic study. Clin Biomech. 2008;23(2):231-235. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.08.027
21. Baylor AM, Spirduso WW. Systematic aerobic exercise and components of reaction time in older women. J Gerontol. 1988;43(5):121-126
doi:10.1093/geronj/43.5.p121
22. Audiffren M, Tomporowski PD, Zagrodnik J. Acute exercise and information processing: Energizing motor processes during a choice reaction time
task. Acta Psychologica. 2008;129(3):410-419. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.09.006
23. Monsell S. Task switching. Trends Cogn Sci. 2003;7(3):134-140. doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(03)00028-7
24. Miyake A, Friedman NP, Emerson M.J., Witzki AH, Howerter A, Wager TD. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to
complex "Frontal Lobe" tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cogn Psychol. 2000;41(1):49-100. doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
25. Tsai C-L, Pan C-Y, Tseng Y-T, Chen F-C, Chang Y-C, Wang T-C. Acute effects of high-intensity interval training and moderate-intensity continuous
exercise on BDNF and irisin levels and neurocognitive performance in late middle-aged and older adults. Behav Brain Res, 2021;413:113472.
doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2021.113472
26. McMorris T. The acute exercise-cognition interaction: From the catecholamines hypothesis to an interoception model. Int J Psychophysiol.
2021;170:75-88. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.10.005
27. Basso JC, Suzuki WA. The effects of acute exercise on mood, cognition, neurophysiology, and neurochemical pathways: A review. Brain Plast.
2017;2(2):127-152. doi:10.3223/BPL-160040
28. Fernandez-Rodriguez R, Alverez-Bueno C, Martinez-Ortega IA, Martinez-Vizcamo V, Mesas AE, Notario-Pacheco B. Immediate effect of high-
intensity exercise on brain-derived neurotrophic factor in healthy young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sport Health Sci.
2022;11(3):367-375. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2021.08.004
29. Rojas Vega S, Strüder HK, Vera Wahrmann B, Schmidt A, Bloch W, Hollmann W. Acute BDNF and cortisol response to low intensity exercise and
following ramp incremental exercise to exhaustion in humans. Brain Res. 2006;1121(1):59-65. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.105
30. Ferris LT, Williams JS, Shen C-L. The effect of acute exercise on serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels and cognitive function. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 2007;39(4):728-734. doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31802f04c7.
Citation: Croce RV, Horvat M. (2024). Acute Low- and Higher-Volume Resistance Circuit Training Improves Immediate and Short-Term Cognition in Young Adults.
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior, 18(1):e445.
BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Croce, Horvat
2024
VOL.18
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445
14 of 14
Research Article
Editor-in-chief: Dr Fabio Augusto Barbieri - São Paulo State University (UNESP), Bauru, SP, Brazil.
Associate editors: Dr José Angelo Barela - São Paulo State University (UNESP), Rio Claro, SP, Brazil; Dr Natalia Madalena Rinaldi - Federal University of Espírito Santo
(UFES), Vitória, ES, Brazil; Dr Renato de Moraes – University of São Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Copyright:© 2024 Croce and Horvat and BJMB. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No
Derivatives 4.0 International License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors and did not involve clinical trials.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v18i1.445