Efficacy trial shows virtual reality can enhance physical activity in preschoolers, suggesting potential cognitive benefits.
Background/Objectives: This study examined the efficacy of a physical activity (PA) intervention augmented by a non-immersive Virtual Reality (VR) gaming system (i.e., Virtual Reality-infused Movement and Activity Program; V-MAP) on physical activity (i.e., sedentary behavior, moderate-to-vigorous PA [MVPA], vigorous PA [VPA]) and cognitive skills (i.e., response error, movement latency and reaction time) in Head Start preschoolers. Methods: Using a repeated-measure with 1-month follow-up design, a sample of 13 Head Start preschoolers (Mage = 67.08 ± 4.32 months; 36.2% boys) engaged in a 6-week V-MAP intervention (30-min session; 8 sessions) that focused on non-immersive VR based movement integration. The Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) was used to measure cognition; school-based PA and sedentary behavior were assessed by ActiGraph accelerometer. Pedometers were used to monitor real time engagement and implementation over eight intervention sessions. Results: On average, children obtained 1105 steps during the 30-min intervention (36.85 steps/min). There was a significant increase in VPA after the V-MAP intervention, whereas no significant changes in MVPA or sedentary behavior were observed (ps > 0.05). Although we did not observe significant improvement in studied cognitive function variables (ps > 0.05) after the V-MAP intervention, some delayed effects were observed in the follow-up test (Cohen’s d ranges from −0.41 to −0.73). Conclusions: This efficacy trial provides preliminary support that implementing V-MAP in recess may help Head Start preschoolers achieve or accumulate the recommended daily 60-min MVPA guideline during preschool years. The findings also provide insights that VR-based PA for as little as 30 min per day may benefit cognitive capability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: