Back

Gray matter Volume Modulates the Effect of Acute Physical Activity on Reading Comprehension and Cognitive Load in Adolescents. The Cogni-Action Project

Martinez-Flores, R.; Super, H.; Sanchez-Martinez, J.; Solis-Urra, P.; Ibanez, R.; Herold, F.; Paas, F.; Mavilidi, M.; Zou, L.; Cristi-Montero, C.

2026-04-02 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.03.31.715252 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPhysical activity has been associated with better reading comprehension and reduces cognitive load (CL), but the role of brain volume in modulating this relationship remains unclear. Therefore, this study aims to determine whether the gray matter volume in key regions modulates the effects of different physical activity modalities on reading comprehension and associated CL. MethodsThirteen male adolescents (12-13 years). Adolescents with MRI data participated in a randomized cross-over trial comparing three conditions: 1) sedentary behavior (SC, emulating a school class), 2) moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT), and 3) cooperative high-intensity interval training (C-HIIT), with physical activity conditions duration adjusted to match SC energy expenditure. Gray matter volumes were measured in the bilateral hippocampus, left pars opercularis, and the brainstem. CL was assessed via pupil dilation during reading using eye-tracking. Reading comprehension was measured through seven-question multiple-choice tests with expert-validated items. ResultsC-HIIT demonstrated superior effects on both CL and reading comprehension compared to MICT and SC, with significant brain volume modulation effects across all examined regions. Brain volume interactions with physical activity modalities systematically modified the pattern of cognitive responses, with C-HIIT consistently benefiting from these modulations, whereas the effects of MICT were generally attenuated. ConclusionThis study suggests that selecting the appropriate physical activity modality may be relevant for cognitive outcomes during reading in adolescents. C-HIIT yielded lower CL and better reading comprehension, and these effects were not explained by brain volume alone but by its interaction with exercise modality.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 5%
23.4%
2
Frontiers in Psychology
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.8%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 15%
6.6%
4
Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience
81 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
5
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
6
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.4%
7
Brain Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.8%
8
Frontiers in Nutrition
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.5%
9
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
10
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
11
The Cerebellum
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
12
Nutrients
64 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.7%
13
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
14
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
15
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
16
Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
17
The Journal of Nutrition
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
18
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
19
Brain and Behavior
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
npj Science of Learning
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
22
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
23
Behavioural Brain Research
70 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
25
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
26
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
27
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
28
Aging
69 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
29
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.5%