Introduction This study investigated the effects of different acute exercise modalities on attention–related cognitive performance and explored the applicability of the Non–parametric Cognitive Diagnosis Model (NPCD) for classifying relative cognitive attribute mastery patterns. Methods Sixty healthy 18-year-old male high school students were assigned to one of four groups: Agility Exercise (GE), Resistance Exercise (RE), Aerobic Exercise (AE), and No Exercise Control (NE), with 15 participants in each group. Participants completed the Stroop Color-Word Test (SCWT) under static, mobile, and complex attention conditions before and after the intervention. Post-test performance was analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), with baseline scores entered as covariates. NPCD analysis, combined with a Q-matrix framework, was used to classify relative cognitive mastery patterns in an exploratory manner. Results After controlling for baseline performance, significant group effects were observed for static attention, F (3,55) = 84.389, p < .001, η ² = .822; mobile attention, F (3,55) = 28.466, p < .001, η ² = .608; and complex attention, F (3,55) = 44.886, p < .001, η ² = .710. Large effect sizes were observed across all attention conditions ( η ² = .608-.822). GE demonstrated superior performance in static and mobile attention, whereas AE showed the greatest improvement in complex attention. NPCD analysis further identified distinct relative cognitive mastery patterns across participants, providing exploratory information regarding individual cognitive attributes. Discussion The findings indicate that acute exercise modalities may exert distinct effects on attentional performance, with agility exercise showing greater benefits for static and mobile attention and aerobic exercise for complex attention. The integration of NPCD with a Q-matrix may provide a supplementary exploratory approach for examining individual cognitive attribute patterns beyond group-level performance. Given the homogeneous male adolescent sample and exploratory nature of the NPCD classifications, these findings should be validated in larger and more diverse populations function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: