ABSTRACT

The effects of light physical activity (LPA) interventions on adolescents’ learning were reviewed. Learning was operationalized as academic performance and academic-performance-related cognitive functions. Using PubMed, Web of Science, ERIC, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and Cochrane Library, only English-language studies published until 19-07-2021 were included. Of the resulting 49, 34 studies posed a low risk of bias, covering: executive functions (inhibition, updating, and shifting), memory, and academic performance. The quality of evidence of each outcome was very low, mainly due to inconsistencies in results between studies. Nonetheless, most studies found positive (n = 15) or null (n = 14) effects of LPA interventions on adolescents’ learning. Negative effects of LPA interventions were only found from studies with on-task procedures (n = 5). Only two studies utilized longitudinal LPA interventions, of which one reported positive effects, and the other reported null effects. Future studies should explore the role of potential moderators, e.g. timing of LPA interventions with regard to the learning and testing phases. Overall, while introducing LPA in the classroom may be effective at breaking up prolonged sedentary behavior, more high-quality research is needed to establish its positive effect on learning.

摘要

回顾了轻体力活动 (LPA) 干预对青少年学习的影响。学习被操作化为学业成绩和与学业成绩相关的认知功能。使用 PubMed、Web of Science、ERIC、PsycINFO、PsycARTICLES、Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection 和 Cochrane 图书馆，仅包括在 19-07-2021 之前发表的英语研究。在由此产生的 49 项研究中，34 项研究的偏倚风险较低，涵盖：执行功能（抑制、更新和转移）、记忆和学业成绩。每个结果的证据质量都很低，主要是由于研究之间的结果不一致。尽管如此，大多数研究发现阳性 ( n  = 15) 或无效 ( n = 14) LPA 干预对青少年学习的影响。LPA 干预的负面影响仅从具有执行任务程序的研究中发现 ( n  = 5)。只有两项研究使用了纵向 LPA 干预，其中一项报告了积极影响，另一项报告了无效影响。未来的研究应该探索潜在调节器的作用，例如 LPA 干预在学习和测试阶段的时间安排。总体而言，虽然在课堂上引入 LPA 可能有效打破久坐不动的行为，但需要更多高质量的研究来确定其对学习的积极影响。