





































Emerging Perspectives 
ep.journalhosting.ucalgary.ca 

 

*Corresponding author - tiffany.beks@ucalgary.ca 

 

Working it Out: Physical Activity and Cognitive Performance Among  
School-Aged Children 

 
Tiffany Beks* 

University of Calgary 

 

A growing body of evidence suggests that modern society is facing a physical activity 

deficit of unprecedented magnitude. Furthermore, research suggests that physical 

inactivity is associated with decreased cognitive performance and diminished 

academic competence. The growing implications of physical inactivity among school-

aged children have necessitated an urgent response from health professionals and 

educators to develop innovative and timely solutions. Psychologists who work with 

school-aged children are in the position to raise awareness of the link between 

physical inactivity and cognitive development and integrate this body of knowledge 

into their practice frameworks. This article covers the role of physical activity in the 

development of cognitive skills, critical research findings in this area, and 

implications for psychologists who work with school-aged children. 

 

Keywords: Physical activity; cognitive development; school-aged children; 

psychologists; professional practice 

 

Beks, T. (2019). Working it out: Physical activity and cognitive performance among 

school-aged children. Emerging Perspectives, 3(2), 5-13. 

  

 In this age of technological revolution and knowledge-based economies, the increasingly 

prevalent use of computer technology has raised concerns about the coinciding decrease in 

physical activity among school-aged children (Hillman, Erickson, & Kramer, 2008). Physical 

inactivity is associated with poor physical health outcomes among school-aged children, including 

obesity, decreased musculoskeletal fitness, and increased risk for cardiovascular disease 

(Tremblay, Leblanc, et al., 2011). Conversely, physical activity (PA) is associated with positive 

effects on mental health, physiological functioning, cardiovascular fitness, and quality of life 

among school-aged children (Ortega, Ruiz, Castillo, & Sjöström, 2008). Furthermore, PA plays 

an important role in the development of cognitive abilities needed for youth to participate fully in 

academic, social, and vocational spheres throughout life (Booth & Lees, 2006; Ellemberg & St-

Louis-Deschênes, 2010; Vaynman & Gomez-Pinilla, 2006).  

 A complete review of the bodies of literature on cognitive development and PA is beyond 

the scope of this article. Therefore, the role of PA in the development of cognitive abilities among 

school-aged children (i.e., youth aged 5 to 17; Statistics Canada, 2015) is briefly discussed. This 

article will begin by introducing the importance of cognitive development, followed by a 

discussion of the societal changes that have occurred concurrently with decreased physical activity. 

The next section provides a review of the critical research findings elucidating the effects of PA 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  6 
 

on cognitive performance. This article will conclude with a discussion of the implications for 

psychologists who work with school-aged children. 

 

School-Aged Children and Cognitive Development 
 In the field of developmental psychology, cognitive ability refers to the capacity to 

correctly or appropriately process information in a way that leads to successful knowledge 

acquisition and manipulation (Bjorkland & Myers, 2015; Floyd, 2010). Accordingly, cognition 

includes such processes and faculties as perception, attention, memory, motor skills, language, 

visual and spatial processing, and executive functioning (Bjorkland & Myers, 2015). By extension, 

cognitive development concerns changes in the way information is represented, acquired, and 

manipulated across the lifespan (Bjorkland & Myers, 2015). For the purpose of this article, it is 

important to note that cognitive ability is distinguished from academic achievement in that variance 

in academic achievement takes into account more variables than cognitive faculties and processes 

alone, and includes such factors as learning environment, parental involvement, school 

demographics, motivation, affect, and quality of instruction (Kaufman, Reynolds, Liu, Kaufman, 

& McGrew, 2012). Thus, the literature discussed herein will focus on the constructs of cognitive 

abilities and cognitive development.  

 Psychologists who work with school-aged children have long focused on cognitive 

development because it is considered critical to problem-solving (Keen, 2011), language 

acquisition (Dodd & McIntosh, 2010), social functioning (Krogh-Jespersen, Liberman, & 

Woodward, 2015), academic success (Lu, Weber, Spinath, & Shi, 2011), and the development of 

employability skills (Broecke, Quintini, & Vandeweyer, 2015). That is, cognitive abilities are an 

important element of what enables human beings to adapt to changing environments and societal 

conditions (Heyes, 2012). In a society characterized by rapid advancements in information and 

communication technologies, cognitive abilities continue to be a vital competency across the 

lifespan (Voogt, Erstad, Dede, & Mishra, 2013). For these reasons, cognitive abilities are a 

frequent target of psychological assessments and interventions in schools (Floyd, 2010). 

 

Physical Inactivity in School-Aged Children 
 A growing body of evidence suggests that modern society is facing a PA deficit of 

unprecedented magnitude (Agatston, 2012; Kohl et al., 2012; Tremblay, 2012; World Health 

Organization [WHO], 2010). Children, who depend on PA to reach developmental milestones 

(Ellemberg & St-Louis-Deschênes, 2010), are among the most vulnerable to the ill effects of 

sedentary behaviour (WHO, 2010). In accordance with the Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines 

(CPAG), PA involves any form of aerobic exercise (Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology 

[CSEP], 2011). The CPAG (CSEP, 2011), which serves to promote and assist Canadians in being 

more physically active, recommends that children between the ages of 5 and 17 incur 

approximately 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous PA per day. This recommendation has evolved 

from years of research confirming the benefits of PA for youth (CSEP, 2011; Tremblay, 

Warburton, et al., 2011).  

 Despite the plethora of evidence highlighting the importance of PA for healthy youth 

development, school-aged children are not engaging in the recommended PA advised by the 

CPAG (Statistics Canada [SC], 2015). Specifically, only 13% of male and 6% of female school-

aged children are averaging the daily recommended 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous PA (SC, 

2015). Equally alarming is that youth between the ages of 5 and 17 spend an average of 8 hours 

and 27 minutes per day engaged in sedentary activities (SC, 2015). Research suggests that major 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  7 
 

social, economic, and political changes are largely responsible for decreased PA among school-

aged children (Engström, 2004; Sattelmair & Ratey, 2009). For instance, the significant shift from 

high levels of physical exertion to a life much less physically demanding (Bonde & ViikariJuntura, 

2013), increased reliance on the automobile (Kohl et al., 2012), and the reduced emphasis on 

physical education programs within schools in favour of academics (Sattelmair & Ratey, 2009) 

have been implicated in decreased PA among children. However, the ill effects of physical 

inactivity among school-aged children have only recently begun to surface and are associated with 

a number of serious health conditions such as heart disease, obesity, and communicable diseases 

(Kohl et al., 2012; Tremblay, Leblanc, et al., 2011). Furthermore, and of particular importance to 

psychologists, research suggests that physical inactivity is associated with decreased cognitive 

performance and diminished academic competence (Ardoy et al., 2014; Budde et al., 2010; 

Esteban-Cornejo et al., 2015; Van der Niet et al., 2015). While this body of research is in its 

infancy, it is likely that future studies will continue to illuminate the impact of physical inactivity 

on cognitive development among children.   

 

Physical Activity and the Development of Cognitive Abilities 
 While the majority of empirical research has focused on the relationship between PA and 

physical health outcomes among school-aged children, less attention has been paid to the role of 

PA in cognitive functioning in this population (Ellemberg & St-Louis-Deschênes, 2010). 

However, research suggests that improvements in cognitive abilities result from the effects of PA 

on the brain. PA increases the development of new neurons and levels of brain-derived 

neurotrophic factor, enhances cerebral blood flow and oxygen concentrations, and heightens 

synaptic plasticity (Chaddock, Pontifex, Hillman, & Kramer, 2011; Hamer & Chida, 2009; 

Hillman et al., 2008). These changes are associated with attention, information processing, storage 

and retrieval, and concentration (Eddy, Stansfield, & Green, 2014; McMorris, 2015; Wipfli, 

Landers, Nagoshi, & Ringenbach, 2011). Furthermore, because childhood and adolescence are 

periods of marked plasticity, PA may be an important stimulus to enhance cognitive abilities 

(Romeo & McEwen, 2006). For example, Van der Niet et al. (2015) found that sedentary behaviour 

was negatively associated with inhibition performance whereas moderate to vigorous PA was 

positively associated with planning speed and performance. Budde et al. (2010) found that 15 to 

16 year-old adolescents with poorer working memory profited the most from the PA intervention, 

and that moderate PA intensity was most strongly associated with working memory performance. 

Esteban-Cornejo et al. (2015) examined levels of PA among adolescents (i.e., aged 11-18), which 

were subsequently divided into three ranges of activity level: low PA (an average of 109 minutes 

per week [min/week] and 36 minutes per week among boys and girls, respectively), moderate PA 

(an average of 335 min/week and 151 min/week among boys and girls, respectively), and vigorous 

PA (an average of 767 min/week and 413 min/week among boys and girls, respectively). At the 

age of 18, cognitive performance was assessed using the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III 

(WAIS-III) short form, which measures verbal comprehension, perceptual organization, working 

memory, and processing speed (Wechsler, 1997). Adolescents categorized as moderate performed 

significantly better on the WAIS-III, whereas those who were categorized as vigorous or low 

demonstrated poorer cognitive performance (Esteban-Cornejo et al., 2015). The authors theorized 

that moderate levels of PA benefit cognitive performance, whereas low levels of PA may lack 

adequate stimulation to improve learning and high levels of PA may replace the time that would 

be devoted to learning activities thereby undermining cognitive performance (Esteban-Cornejo et 

al., 2015). However, it is evident from this study that additional research is needed to better 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  8 
 

understand the relationship between poor cognitive performance and high levels of PA. 

Nevertheless, the abovementioned studies provide early evidence of the important role of PA in 

cognitive performance and cognitive development among school-aged children. Furthermore, 

these studies suggest that PA may be an important intervention for school-aged children with 

cognitive difficulties. While a comprehensive review of the body of literature examining the 

relationship between PA and cognitive development in school-aged children is beyond the scope 

of this paper, Chaddock-Heyman, Hillman, Cohen, and Kramer (2014) provide a detailed review 

for further reading.  

 

School-Based Intervention 
 The growing implications of physical inactivity among school-aged children have 

necessitated an urgent response from health professionals to develop innovative and timely 

solutions. Schools provide an accessible conduit through which to promote PA and intervene 

against PA deficits and their subsequent effects on cognitive abilities (Ardoy et al., 2014). 

However, interventions have focused largely on reducing obesity (Dobbins, Husson, DeCorby, & 

LaRocca, 2013). To date, few school-based interventions target the relationship between PA and 

cognitive abilities, in part because of the limited research in this area.  

 The Education for Fitness (EDUFIT) program represents one program that operates within 

a naturalistic school setting in Murcia, Spain, and has focused on measuring the effects of PA on 

cognitive abilities (Ardoy et al., 2014). This program focuses specifically on increasing PA as a 

means to enhance cognitive performance among 12 to 14 year olds. The program is intended to 

increase and intensify students’ PA over and above the current physical education curriculum of 

the Murcia school, which previously adhered to the national curriculum standards in Spain. During 

the pilot stage of this program, researchers from the University of Granada conducted a group-

randomized controlled trial. Sixty-seven adolescents (43 males and 24 females) between the ages 

of 12 to 14, from three different classes participated in the study. Groups were assigned to one of 

three conditions. In the control group, adolescents received 2 x 55 minutes of physical education 

per week as mandated by law. These sessions followed the typical pedagogical practice in Spain, 

meaning the 55 minutes included time for physical education teachers to organize the session, for 

students to change their clothes, and for shower time at the end of the session. In the first 

experimental condition, adolescents received 4 x 55 minutes of physical education per week, all 

of which followed the same pedagogical parameters as the control group. In the second 

experimental condition, adolescents received 4 x 55 minutes of physical education per week at 

increased intensity (i.e., activities requiring a heart rate of 120 beats per minute); otherwise, all 

pedagogical parameters remained the same. Prior to beginning the intervention, all adolescent 

participants completed the Spanish Overall and Factorial Intelligence Test as a measure of overall 

cognitive abilities, as well as specific domains including non-verbal and verbal abilities, abstract 

reasoning, spatial ability, verbal reasoning, and numerical ability (Yuste-Hernández, 2001).  

Following the 4-month intervention period, performance in all cognitive domains, except 

for verbal reasoning, increased significantly among adolescents in the increased intensity physical 

education group (i.e., experimental group 2). There were no significant differences in cognitive 

improvements between experimental group one and the control group. Based on the categorization 

of activity level, these findings appear to contradict the results of Esteban-Cornejo et al.’s (2015) 

study. Cain, Sallis, Conway, Van Dyck, and Calhoon (2013) point out that the field of PA research 

employs inconsistent methods for measuring and defining activity levels among youth, thereby 

limiting the comparison of findings across studies. Thus, in order to design effective PA 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  9 
 

interventions, it is critical that this growing field of research move toward standardization of 

measuring and operationally defining PA levels (Cain et al., 2013). Nevertheless, programs like 

EDUFIT provide compelling evidence for the benefit of naturalistic, school-based interventions to 

enhance cognitive performance through PA. With few programs like EDUFIT in operation, it is 

crucial that psychologists take an active stance toward promoting the benefits of PA for cognitive 

abilities. 

 

Implications for Practice: Psychologists as Change Agents 
 In an era where physical education and physically-active play are increasingly viewed as 

expendable aspects of schooling (Simon & Childers, 2006), psychologists who work with school-

aged children are in the position to advocate for the continued need for school-based PA. The 

growing evidence suggesting a linkage between moderate levels of PA and cognitive development 

among school-aged children provides a compelling impetus for psychologists to consider PA in 

psychological service delivery (Fedewa & Clark, 2010). Psychologists are not only privy to the 

emergent research on the cognitive benefits of PA, but they are also subject to the Canadian Code 

of Ethics for Psychologists, which delineates the ethical principles, values, and standards that guide 

all Canadian psychologists (Canadian Psychological Association [CPA], 2000). Under Principle 

II: Responsible Caring, psychologists are urged to keep up-to-date on research findings and how 

they affect individuals and broader society “in order that their service or research activities and 

conclusions will benefit and not harm others” (CPA, 2000, p. 16). In addition, under Principle IV: 

Responsibility to Society, psychologists are encouraged to “provide the public with any 

psychological knowledge relevant to the public’s informed participation in the shaping of social 

policies and structures” (CPA, 2000, p. 30). Thus, psychologists have an ethical obligation to 

remain abreast of research on the interactions between PA and cognitive abilities, and when 

necessary, to integrate this information into their practice to advance the effectiveness of the 

psychological services they provide. Psychologists also have an ethical duty to promote the link 

between PA and cognitive abilities where it applies to policies or decisions that affect children 

within broader society.  

 PA has more recently emerged as a palpable treatment for severe mental health conditions, 

including major depressive disorder, postpartum depression, schizophrenia, generalized anxiety 

disorder, and bipolar disorder (Rosenbaum, Tiedemann, Ward, Curtis, & Sherrington, 2015). 

Additionally, PA has been implicated as a viable intervention for children and youth with executive 

functioning difficulties, including children with ADHD (Chaddock et al., 2011; Hillman et al., 

2008). While these emerging cases of PA-based interventions are encouraging, the application of 

PA in routine psychological assessments and treatment planning for cognitive skills is in its 

infancy (Fedewa & Clark, 2010; Weir, 2011). This suggests that more work is needed to increase 

awareness of the link between PA and cognitive development. Future research should focus on the 

development of evidence-based interventions that are directly applicable to psychological practice 

involving school-aged children.  

 

Conclusion 
 The purpose of this article was to elucidate the important link between PA and cognitive 

abilities among school-aged children, and to stimulate dialogue as to the role of psychologists in 

raising awareness of the PA-cognitive development relationship. PA is a vital component of 

cognitive development. Likewise, the development of cognitive abilities remains a vital 

competency needed for individuals to participate fully in all facets of life. Some of the most 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  10 
 

significant changes in cognitive abilities and functioning occur during childhood and adolescence. 

Although PA is an important contributor to cognitive developmental processes, children and 

adolescents are not engaging in adequate levels of PA. Cognitive development may be 

compromised by this deficit. PA may be a viable intervention for school-aged children with certain 

cognitive weaknesses; however, additional research is needed to support and strengthen early 

findings on this topic. In summary, psychologists who work with school-aged children may not 

only play a critical role in promoting the benefits of PA, but also play a role in critically analyzing 

research on the relationship between PA and cognitive performance.   

 

References 
 

Agatston, A. (2012). Why America is fatter and sicker than ever. Circulation, 126(1), 3-5. 

doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.098566 

Ardoy, D. N., Fernández‐Rodríguez, J. M., Jiménez‐Pavón, D., Castillo, R., Ruiz, J. R., & Ortega, 

F. B. (2014). A physical education trial improves adolescents' cognitive performance and 

academic achievement: The EDUFIT study. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science 
in Sports, 24(1), 52-61. doi:10.1111/sms.12093 

Bjorkland, D. F., & Myers, A. J. (2015). The development of cognitive abilities. In M. H. Bornstein 

& M. E. Lamb (Eds.), Developmental science: An advanced textbook (pp. 391-441). New 

York: Psychology Press. 

Bonde, J. P., & Viikari-Juntura, E. (2013). The obesity epidemic in the occupational health 

context. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 39(3), 217-219. 

doi:10.5271/sjweh.3362 

Booth, F. W., & Lees, S. J. (2006). Physically active subjects should be the control group. Medicine 

& Science in Sports & Exercise, 38(3), 405-306. 

doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000205117.11882.65 

Broecke, S., Quintini, G., & Vandeweyer, M. (2015). Wage inequality and cognitive skills: Re-

opening the debate. In Education, skills, and technical change: Implications for future US 

GDP growth. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 

Budde, H., Voelcker-Rehage, C., Pietrassyk-Kendziorra, S., Machado, S., Ribeiro, P., & Arafat, 

A. M. (2010). Steroid hormones in the saliva of adolescents after different exercise 

intensities and their influence on working memory in a school setting. 

Psychoneuroendocrinology, 35(3), 382-391. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2009.07.015 

Cain, K. L., Sallis, J. F., Conway, T. L., Van Dyck, D., & Calhoon, L. (2013). Using 

 accelerometers in youth physical activity studies: a review of methods. Journal of 

 Physical Activity and Health, 10(3), 437-450. doi:10.1123/jpah.10.3.437 

Canadian Psychological Association. (2000). Canadian code of ethics for psychologists (3rd ed.). 

 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Author.  

Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (2011). Canadian physical activity guidelines. 

Retrieved from http://www.csep.ca/en/guidelines/24-hour-movement-guidelines 

Chaddock, L., Pontifex, M. B., Hillman, C. H., & Kramer, A. F. (2011). A review of the relation 

of aerobic fitness and physical activity to brain structure and function in children. Journal 

of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17(6), 975-985. 

doi:10.1017/S1355617711000567 

Chaddock‐Heyman, L., Hillman, C. H., Cohen, N. J., & Kramer, A. F. (2014). The importance of 

physical activity and aerobic fitness for cognitive control and memory in children. 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  11 
 

Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 79(4), 25-50. 

doi:10.1111/mono.12129 

Dobbins, M., Husson, H., DeCorby, K., & LaRocca, R. L. (2013). School-based physical activity 

programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 

18. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2(2), 1-250. 

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007651.pub2 

Dodd, B., & McIntosh, B. (2010). Two-year-old phonology: Impact of input, motor, and cognitive 

abilities on development. Journal of Child Language, 37(5), 1027-1046. 

doi:10.1017/S0305000909990171 

Eddy, M. C., Stansfield, K. J., & Green, J. T. (2014). Voluntary exercise improves performance of 

a discrimination task through effects on the striatal dopamine system. Learning & 

Memory, 21(7), 334-337. doi:10.1101/lm.034462.114 

Ellemberg, D., & St-Louis-Deschênes, M. (2010). The effect of acute physical exercise on 

cognitive function during development. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 11(2), 122-126. 

doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.09.006 

Engström, L. M. (2004). Social change and physical activity. Scandinavian Journal of 

Nutrition, 48(3), 108-113. doi:10.1080/16513860410017674 

Esteban-Cornejo, I., Hallal, P. C., Mielke, G. I., Menezes, A. M., Gonçalves, H., Wehrmeister, F., 

. . . & Rombaldi, A. J. (2015). Physical activity throughout adolescence and cognitive 

performance at 18 years of age. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 47(12), 2552-

2557. doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000000706 

Fedewa, A. L., & Clark, T. P. (2010). Let's move! School psychologists as change agents in the 

domain of school-based physical activity. Communique, 38(6), 19-22. Retrieved from 

http://www.nasponline.org/publications/cq/cqmain.aspx 

Floyd, R. (2010). Assessment of cognitive abilities and cognitive processes. In G. Peacock, R. 

Ervin, E. Daly, & K. Merrell (Eds.), Practical handbook of school psychology: Effective 

practices for the 21st century (pp. 48-66). New York: Guilford Press. 

Hamer, M., & Chida, Y. (2009). Physical activity and risk of neurodegenerative disease: a 

systematic review of prospective evidence. Psychological Medicine, 39(01), 3-11. 

doi:10.1017/S0033291708003681 

Heyes, C. (2012). New thinking: The evolution of human cognition. Philosophical Transactions 

of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 367, 2091-2096. 

doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0111 

Hillman, C. H., Erickson, K. I., & Kramer, A. F. (2008). Be smart, exercise your heart: Exercise 

effects on brain and cognition. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 9(1), 58-65. 

doi:10.1038/nrn2298 

Kaufman, S. B., Reynolds, M. R., Liu, X., Kaufman, A. S., & McGrew, K. S. (2012). Are cognitive 

g and academic achievement g one and the same g? An exploration on the Woodcock–

Johnson and Kaufman tests. Intelligence, 40(2), 123-138. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2012.01.009 

Keen, R. (2011). The development of problem solving in young children: A critical cognitive 

skill. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 1-21. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.031809.130730 

Kohl, H. W., Craig, C. L., Lambert, E. V., Inoue, S., Alkandari, J. R., Leetongin, G., & Kahlmeier, 

S. (2012). The pandemic of physical inactivity: Global action for public health. The 

Lancet, 380(9838), 294-305. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60898-8 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  12 
 

Krogh‐Jespersen, S., Liberman, Z., & Woodward, A. L. (2015). Think fast! The relationship 

between goal prediction speed and social competence in infants. Developmental 

Science, 18(5), 815-823. doi:10.1111/desc.12249 

Lu, L., Weber, H. S., Spinath, F. M., & Shi, J. (2011). Predicting school achievement from 

cognitive and non-cognitive variables in a Chinese sample of elementary school 

children. Intelligence, 39(2), 130-140. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2011.02.002 

McMorris, T. (2015). Exercise-cognition interaction: Neuroscience perspectives. San Diego, CA: 

Academic Press.  

Ortega, F. B., Ruiz, J. R., Castillo, M. J., & Sjöström, M. (2008). Physical fitness in childhood and 

adolescence: A powerful marker of health. International Journal of Obesity, 32(1), 1-11. 

doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803774 

Romeo, R. D., & McEwen, B. S. (2006). Stress and the adolescent brain. Annals of the New York 

Academy of Sciences, 1094(1), 202-214. doi:10.1196/annals.1376.022 

Rosenbaum, S., Tiedemann, A., Ward, P. B., Curtis, J., & Sherrington, C. (2015). Physical activity 

interventions: An essential component in recovery from mental illness. British Journal of 

Sports Medicine, 49(24), 1544-1545. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2014-094314 

Sattelmair, J., & Ratey, J. J. (2009). Physically active play and cognition: An academic 

matter? American Journal of Play, 1(3), 365-374. Retrieved from 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1068997.pdf 

Simon, J. B., & Childers, H. (2006). Principals' perceptions of school recess: Sources of 

information, benefits, and drawbacks. Research in the Schools, 13(2), 37-46. Retrieved 

from http://www.msera.org/old-site/rits.htm 

Statistics Canada. (2015). Health fact sheets: Directly measured physical activity of children and 

youth, 2012 and 2013 (No. 82-625-X). Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-

625-x/2015001/article/14136-eng.htm  

Tremblay, M. S. (2012). Major initiatives related to childhood obesity and physical inactivity in 

Canada: The year in review. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 103(3), 164-169. 

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41967441 

Tremblay, M. S., LeBlanc, A. G., Janssen, I., Kho, M. E., Hicks, A., Murumets, K., . . . & Duggan, 

M. (2011). Canadian sedentary behaviour guidelines for children and youth. Applied 

Physiology, Nutrition, & Metabolism, 36(1), 59-64. doi:10.1139/H11-012 

Tremblay, M. S., Warburton, D. E., Janssen, I., Paterson, D., Latimer, A. E., Rhodes, R. E., . . . & 

Murumets, K. (2011). New Canadian physical activity guidelines. Applied Physiology, 

 Nutrition, & Metabolism, 36(1), 36-46. doi:10.1139/H11-009 

Van der Niet, A. G., Smith, J., Scherder, E. J., Oosterlaan, J., Hartman, E., & Visscher, C. (2015). 

Associations between daily physical activity and executive functioning in primary school-

aged children. Journal of Science & Medicine in Sport, 18(6), 673-677. 

doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2014.09.006 

Vaynman, S., & Gomez‐Pinilla, F. (2006). Revenge of the “sit”: How lifestyle impacts neuronal 

and cognitive health through molecular systems that interface energy metabolism with 

neuronal plasticity. Journal of Neuroscience Research, 84(4), 699-715. 

doi:10.1002/jnr.20979 

Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the 

digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 

403-413. doi:10.1111/jcal.12029 



Beks/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 5-13  13 
 

Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd edn.). San Antonio, TX: 

Psychological Corporation. 

Weir, K. (2011). The exercise effect. Monitor in Psychology, 42(11), 48-49. Retrieved from 

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2011/12/exercise.aspx 

Wipfli, B., Landers, D., Nagoshi, C., & Ringenbach, S. (2011). An examination of serotonin and 

psychological variables in the relationship between exercise and mental health.  

 Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 21(3), 474-481. 

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.01049.x 

World Health Organization. (2010). Childhood overweight and obesity. Retrieved from 

http://www. who.int/dietphysicalactivity/childhood/en 

Yuste-Hernández, C. (2001). Inteligencia general y factorial-IGF. Madrid: TEA Ediciones. 

 

 

 


