The effect of physical activity breaks,including motor-cognitive coordination exercises,on employees’ cognitive functions in the workplace

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The findings of the effectiveness of physical activity on adults’ cognitive abilities have not yet been transferred into corresponding fields of application.

OBJECTIVE:

The present study evaluates a motor-cognitive coordination programme in a company to improve employees’ cognitive performance in the short and medium term.

METHODS:

A total of 67 employees — 32 men and 35 women aged between 19 and 61 years — participated in this study, and 55 completed the study. The sample was randomly divided into an experimental group, which received a motor-cognitive coordination training, and a control group, which received a relaxation and mobility training. Both groups met for 15-minute sessions three times a week for eight weeks. Before and after the intervention, working memory, attention, information-processing capacity, divergent thinking, and mood were measured. In addition, acute effects regarding attention and mood were tested.

RESULTS:

The results showed that the motor-cognitive coordination break improves working memory and divergent thinking after eight weeks of intervention, whereas neither the mood nor the information processing speed improved more for the experimental group compared to the control group. The results on the acute increase in attention performance failed to reach significance.

CONCLUSION:

The new approach of this study was not only the derivation and development of targeted exercises, but also their testing and evaluation in the field of application. Motor-cognitive coordination exercise in the workplace might play an important role in both occupational health management and personnel development, especially for companies that are under highly competitive and innovative pressure.

Keywords

Exercise workplace health promotion coordination training cognition executive functions working memory divergent thinking

1 Introduction

Empirical evidence confirms the effectiveness of physical activity on adults’ cognitive abilities [1 –5]. However, the effects can vary greatly and must always be considered in relation to the type of cognitive abilities and the type, duration, and intensity of physical activity. Regarding the type of cognitive ability, primarily executive functions seem to benefit most from physical activity [3, 6]. Executive functions depend on neuronal activities in the prefrontal cortex [7] and play an important role concerning higher cognitive processes, including memory, planning, problem solving, divergent thinking, inhibition, mental flexibility, and multitasking [8]. These skills are of crucial importance in everyday working life because they enable us to formulate and plan relevant goals and to carry out the intended actions successfully [9]. Therefore, the main goal of this study is to investigate whether physical activity can improve basic cognitive abilities of adults in an office workplace.

1.1 Working conditions

Reduced physical activity and increased mental workloads are typical in the office workplace. Studies have shown that increasing mental demands such as performance pressure, as well as the increasing complexity of work contents, can lead to cognitive impairments, including problems in executive functions and memory [10]. Furthermore, stress can affect the frontal brain since this area of the brain reacts very sensitively to external stimuli. Particularly working memory and cognitive flexibility can be impaired by stress [11]. This can have both short- and long-term effects [12]. As cognitive demands and stress increase, on the one hand, physical activity levels decrease, on the other hand. This decrease might have additional negative consequences for the quality of life [13]. Furthermore, nutrition and physical activity interventions improve work-related outcomes [14]. Thus, organisations might be aware that the implementation of appropriate interventions to enhance the psychological and productive working requirements are important, however there are contradicting results [15].

1.2 Physical activity interventions to promote employees’ health

Workplace health promotion programmes are used to promote employees’ well-being and job performance. These behavioural interventions integrate physical activity because of its assumed positive effects [16]. Here, a variety of intervention approaches can be differentiated to reduce sitting times or to stimulate increased physical activity, such as the use of active workstations [17] and pedometers [18], innovative building architecture to promote stair use [19], light-intensity cycling [20], or physically active breaks from work [21]. Physical activity breaks can be effective in improving productivity and performance [22, 23]. Even the integration of short exercise-promoting interventions increase productivity and promote social contacts, which have enormous individual and organisationalbenefits [24].

As mentioned above, basic cognitive function, such as executive functions, are relevant for higher cognitive processes, which are important in everyday working life. For example, a promotion programme for executive functions should take up the basic needs formulated by Diamond and Ling [25] and the multifaceted training stimuli emphasised by Moreau and Conway [26]. This leads to the combination of motor tasks with cognitive challenges to the application of a motor-cognitive coordination training.

1.3 Motor-cognitive coordination training

Regarding the type of physical activity, it has been found that motor-cognitive coordination training such as juggling, balancing, and dancing has a beneficial effect on neuroplasticity and executive function [27 –29]. Especially easy-to-complete motor-cognitive tasks such as juggling and balancing (e.g., standing on one leg) that are easy to complete in the workplace are of high relevance in the context of work because there were no negative effects like sweating or having to change clothes. The combination of cognitive and motor tasks may further enhance those positive effects on cognition and executive function [26]. Automated movements that require additional thinking, planning, concentration, and problem-solving improved performance in executive functions in many intervention studies [30]. It is assumed that motor-cognitive coordination training, which combines, for example, balance, spatial orientation, rhythmic, and reaction time tasks, also effectively promotes brain structure and function and is thus associated with improvements in cognitive abilities and motor performance [31]. Two studies have examined motor-cognitive coordination training regarding acute cognitive effects in the workplace: First, Niederer et al. [32] concluded that a motor-cognitive workplace intervention should be adopted as an additional enhancement in terms of varied activity. Second, Jansen et al. [33] came to a similar conclusion that this type of intervention can be a useful supplement for working environments where specific cognitive function is essential.

1.4 The main goal of this study

To the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated the effects of motor-coordinative tasks on basic cognitive functions in a working environment. Therefore, it is the main goal of this study to develop and evaluate a feasible physical activity intervention in the workplace to enhance employees’ cognitive functions. As Diamond [34] points out, executive functions must be constantly challenged to produce improvements. Therefore, the developed intervention programme consists of motor tasks with cognitive challenges. This combination of cognitive and motor tasks may further enhance basic cognitive functions. As an exploratory measurement, we also measured the mood of the participants, which is related to cognition [35]. The developed intervention follows the SMART-goal approach because it was specific (elements of motor-cognitive coordination exercises), measurable (the improvement could be measured with standardised tests), attractive (a motor-cognitive coordination training is much more attractive than, for example, a running training), realistic (simple motor-coordinative exercises could be better integrated in the workplace compared to a sweetening training), and terminable (the physical activity breaks could be scheduled during the working day).

We hypothesised that the experimental group (EG), which received the motor-cognitive coordination exercises, would show greater improvement in basic cognitive functions such as working memory, attention, and divergent thinking compared to the control group (CG), which received a stretching and relaxing intervention for eight weeks. Furthermore, the acute effect on attention and mood was measured after one single intervention.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Participants

This study was carried out in a company that develops premium products in the home entertainment sector in Germany. The sample consisted of German-speaking employees from the development department, quality assurance, and technical customer service. Participants were made aware of the study via information posters, flyers, and an internal e-mail distribution list. The study was conducted according to the ethical guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration. All participants gave their written consent for participation.

A total of 67 employees, including 32 men and 35 women aged between 19 and 61 years (M = 40.78; SD = 10.95), participated in this study. The sample was randomly divided into an EG (N = 36), which received a motor-cognitive coordination training, and a CG (N = 31), which received a relaxation and mobility training. The randomisation was done with the help of a random generator (https://pickerwheel.com/tools/random-team-generator/). Both groups had to complete a total of 24 training units within eight weeks. To determine the effectiveness of the exercise programmes, a 75% attendance rate was set, which corresponds to 18 active training sessions. Twelve participants (5 m/7 w) (six persons from each group) had to be excluded from the analysis. Seven participants completed only the pre-test and did not show up to the first training session, and three participants did not participate in the post-test measurement. Furthermore, the data of two participants for the pre-test were incomplete due to technical problems. This corresponds to a dropout rate of 17.9%. There were no exclusion criteria, so all members of the company who wanted to participate got the chance to do so. Participants did not know whether they were in the EG or CG.

The study includes the investigation of acute as well as medium-term effects, which means the effects after a training of eight weeks. The data of 60 test participants (29 men/31 women) could be included in the investigation of short-term effects (t2 and t3, see Fig. 1). Thirty-three participants (15 m/18 w; 41.58 years; SD = 11.4) of the EG and 27 (14 m/13 w; 38.67 years; SD = 11.1) of the CG participated in the first intervention. For the investigation of the medium-term effects (t1 and t4), the data of 55 test participants (27 m/28 w) were considered. Thirty individuals (13 m/17 w; M = 42.37 years; SD = 11.05) participated in the EG three times a week for 15 minutes. Twenty-five participants (14 m/11 w; M = 40.0 years; SD = 10.38) formed the CG. With a small-medium effect size of f = 0.20, an alpha-level of p = 0.05, a power of 1-ß= 0.9, and a correlation among repeated measurements of 0.6, a power analysis with G*power for the repeated measurement ANOVA resulted in N = 56 to detect significant differences between the EG and CG from the pre-test to post-test [36].

Fig. 1

Timetable of the procedure.

2.2 Materials

2.2.1 Attention: D2 attention test

The d2 attention test [37] determines the ability to focus on a stimulus while suppressing awareness of distracting stimuli. During this paper-and-pencil cancelation test, participants were instructed to mark all letters “d” tagged with two dashes among distractors (a “d” with more or less than two dashes, and “p” characters with any number of dashes). For each line, the participants have 20 seconds of processing time. The total test time is four minutes and 40 seconds. Dependent variables are the total number of answers (GZ), the number of all errors in relation to the total number of answers (F%), and the standardised number of correct answers minus errors of confusion (concentration-performance index, SKL). According to Brickenkamp [37], the test has high internal consistency (α= 0.95) and retest reliability (r > 0.80).

2.2.2 Affect: Positive and Negative Affect Scale

The Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) [38] is an instrument for describing the current subjective state of mood. The PANAS questionnaire consists of a total of 20 adjectives expressing different moods that can be assigned to a positive and a negative scale. Each scale includes ten adjectives that represent the positive state of mind (e.g., active, interested, excited) and the negative state of mind (e.g., worried, angry, guilty). Each of the adjectives must be rated from the respondent on a five-level scale (1: very little or not at all; 2: a little; 3: fairly; 4: considerably; 5: extremely) regarding the current mood. The values are added within the positive and negative scales. The “positive state” (PANAS pos) and the “negative state” (PANAS neg) are recorded as dependent variables. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.88 for the positive affect scale and 0.87 for the negative affect scale [39].

2.2.3 Verbal working memory: Digit-Span Test (forward and backwards)

Working memory performance was assessed with the Digit-Span Test (forward and backwards), which is part of the Hamburger– Wechsler Intelligence Test for adults (HaWIE-R) [40]. Participants had to repeat a sequence of digits read aloud by the investigator in identical order (forward version) and then in reverse order (backward version). The sequence of numbers was supplemented by one digit after each task. The investigator presents numerical sequences with a maximum of nine digits. Each task of the number span test consists of two attempts, each of which is evaluated with 0 (wrong) or 1 (right). A maximum of 14 points can be achieved. An incorrect reproduction of both number sequences within an item leads to the abortion of the first part of the test. This first part covers attention efficiency and capacity. In the second part, the presented number series must be repeated in reverse order, for example, backwards. This is an executive task particularly dependent on working memory and requires more complex operations of information processing. A total of 14 number series are presented again. The maximum length of the number series persists from eight characters. Both parts of the test are scored as one summary value. The value points are considered a dependent variable, which result from the maximum number of points of the two single (forward and backward) tasks. The split half reliability for the forward task is 0.76; for the backward task it is 0.78 [40].

2.2.4 Information processing capacity: Digit-Symbol Test

Information-processing capacity was assessed with the Digit-Symbol Test (DST) of the German version of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for adults (HaWIE-R) [40]. The DST is a paper-and-pencil test that corresponds to a coding task in which numbers and symbols are paired by an assignment key. Each participant must compare symbols with numbers according to a key and then copy the symbol into the spaces below a series of numbers. The number of correct symbols within the given time, usually 90 to 120 seconds, is the result. The procedure takes about four minutes. The maximum number of points is 93, and the evaluation is based on the correctness and speed of the assignment. The number of correct number-symbol assignments is used as a dependent variable. For the subtests, the internal consistencies [40] are between r = 0.71 and r = 0.96.

2.2.5 Divergent thinking: Phonemic verbal fluency – Regensburger Wortflüssigkeitstest

The Regensburger Wortflüssigkeitstest (RWT) [41] measures the ability to think divergently. Divergent task structures represent open problems for which as many different solutions as possible should be found [42]. The test consists of a formal lexical and a semantic task. For both tasks, participants were asked to verbally generate as many different words as possible according to given conditions. In the first test, the letter “S” was given (RWT I). The second part of the task involved the alternating recitation of words beginning with the letters, “G” and “R” (RWT II). In the follow-up measurement, the letter “K” was given for the first task and the letters “H” and “T” for the second task. Test participants worked on different test tasks at both measuring times. The formal lexical area was checked at the first test time by enumerating words with the initial letter “S". The letter “K” was used for the post-measurement. It can be assumed that the generation of words with one of the letters is generally easier. To relativise this heterogeneous requirement, the raw values were transferred to percentile ranks and considered descriptively. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) requires interval scaling. For this purpose, the determined percentile ranks were transformed into z-values for further analysis. The change of letters represents an additional requirement for reactive cognitive flexibility. The number of words correctly named within two minutes was given in the percentile ranks based on the norm sample and included in the evaluation as a dependent variable. The retest reliability over three weeks varied between rtt = 0.72 and rtt = 0.89 for the individual subtests [41].

2.2.6 Training sessions: Motor-cognitive coordination exercises (EG)

After an extensive literature review of the effect of an active break in the workplace [43] and following the study by Jansen et al. [33], the motor-cognitive coordination training was developed by Buuck [43]. In the newly developed programme, some elements of the study by Jansen et al. [33] were used and partly improved. Each active work break contains basic motor components with the possibility of cognitive components such as counting, naming, and categorising words, or perceiving visual, tactile, or acoustic signals and inhibiting or reacting accordingly. The use of different materials ensures a great number of variations. The complex learning of movements is carried out by means of versatile exercises from the field of sensory training and requires constant updating of the working memory regarding existing experiences, mental flexibility, and impulse control. The additional external stimuli perceived via the senses are processed in interaction with the muscles, which leads to motor realisation. The exercises also integrate the sensitisation of different types of perception with corresponding tasks: visual perception (e.g., different optical stimuli should lead to different answers, looking at one point and perceiving peripheral things visually, etc.; eye gymnastics, moving the eyes in different directions, closing the eyes, perceiving signs), acoustic perception (acoustic signals, rhythms and melodies), tactile perception (mostly in the form of partner exercises: touching, massaging, pressing, pushing, pulling), kinaesthetic perception (change of direction, rotational acceleration, head movements; different force doses; different widths, distances, materials), and static and dynamic perception (instability, one-legged stand, various support surfaces: soft, firm, wobble, bobble).

The following is a sample task: Two people face each other and walk on the spot. They are given the task to count to “three” alternately. Person A counts “one”, Person B counts “two”, Person A counts “three”, and then Person B counts “one”, and so on, while they walk. In the next step, the number “one” is replaced by two jumping jacks. The task starts again from scratch. But instead of Person A saying the number “one”, she/he must perform two jumping jacks. So, the person must inhibit and not say the word but express it by movement. One after the other, numbers are replaced by mov e ments and combined differently.

Progressive improvement is carried out according to methodological– didactic principles: from easy to difficult, from the known to the unknown, from simple to complex, from stable to unstable support surface, from visually controlled to visually independent movement, from standardised to variable conditions. An overview of the different tasks is presented in Table 1.

Table 1
Progressive structure and variety of the physical activity programme

Sequence/ condition task Task Motor execution Exercise Target area

1 Introduction of basic movement patterns Unilateral, bilateral, cross-coordinated movements Sitting 1.1 “Up and down” Movement experience

Standing 1.2 “Back and forth” Joy of movement

Walking 1.3 “Back and forth II” Readiness for activity

Change of direction 1.4 “Crisscross”

1.5 “Stop and go” Curiosity

Change of pace 1.6 “Jumping jack2.0”

Stabilise 1.7 “Forward - backward ball”

Throwing

Catching

2 Perception training Perceiving and processing visual and acoustic signals Sitting 2.1 “ React !” Curiosity

Standing 2.2 “Leap of faith” Reaction

Walking 2.3 “Touch and go” Attention

Change of direction 2.4 “Flying ball”

2.5 “Switch” Working memoryMental flexibility

Change of pace 2.6 “HipHop” Processing speed

Stabilise Inhibition

Throwing

Catching

(execute after signal processing)

3 Rhythm training Perceiving rhythm and implementing and maintaining it in movement Clapping 3.1 “ Jump ” Movement experience

Marching 3.2 “ Rhythm ” Joy of movement

Jumping Bouncing 3.3 “ Tempo ” 3.4 “ In & out ” Joy of being active together

3.5 “ Rhythm ball ” Rhythmisation

3.6 “ Pendulum ” Inhibition

Mental flexibility

Processing speed

Update

4 Complex motion sequences Perform basic movement patterns smoothly under conditions 2 and 3 Sequences of steps 4.1 “ Corporate dance ” Concentration

Rotary motion 4.2 “ Movement chain ” Working memory

Lateral movement 4.3 “ X ” Creativity

Movement flow 4.4 Update ” Mental flexibility

5 Reaction and inhib i tion Perform or suppress movement Perform basic motor movements or suppress and/or replace the execution 5.1 “ 1,2,3 ” Reaction

5.2 “ Stop it !” Inhibition, impulse control

Attention

6 Balance training Balance, maintaining balance under variable conditions Static, dynamic stable, unstable base One legged stand 6.1 “Balance Balance ability, concentration, body awareness

Unstable support surface 6.2 “Bar turner”

6.3 “Twister”

Intermuscular coordination 6.4 “Statico-dynamico ”

6.5 “Juggling 5”

7 Fine motor skills Execute movement purposefully with a high degree of accuracy Finger and hand games 7.1 “ Fingertip ” 7.2 “ Tip top ” Ability to differentiate

Foot gymnastics 7.3 “ Targeting ”

8 Social interaction exercises Performing movement with each other, with partner/group Simultaneous, mirrored, synchronous movements 8.1 “ Synchro time ” 8.2 “ Mirror ” Joy in moving together, Communication, intellectual flexibility

9 Juggling Learning the cascade and other tricks Pre-exercise 9.1 “Juggling 1” Working memory, mental flexibility, creativity

Practice 9.2 “Juggling 2”

Tricks 9.3 “Juggling 3”

9.4 “Juggling 4”

9.5 “Juggling 5”

2.3 Stretching and relaxation sessions (CG)

An active work break with stretching and relaxation exercises was chosen as the control programme. The participants took part in this programme three times a week for 15 minutes. Each unit had the same schedule. At the beginning of each unit, a short yoga exercise was always performed. Afterwards, different muscle groups were stretched under the supervision of the instructor. At the end, a relaxing exercise was performed. The flexibility exercises were based on the Booster Break programme from Taylor et al. [21, 44]. Each session consisted of four main phases: warm-up, stretching, cool-down, and relaxation. The focus of the session was on movement and stretching and was designed to enhance participants’ flexibility and relaxation in a socially supportive context. Each session ended with a quiet time for visualisation and self-enhancement [44].

2.4 Procedure

To assess the short-term effects, the d2 and the PANAS scale were used as a group test immediately before the first training session (t2) with the respective groups. Directly after the first unit, the participants worked on the d2 and PANAS again (t3). For the measurement of the medium test effect, each participant completed the various tests under the supervision of a test supervisor in a quiet, well-ventilated room in the company building (t1). The tests were always performed in the same order: d2 attention, Digit-Span Test, PANAS, RWT, and DST. The individual tests lasted about 40 minutes. All tests were conducted in one of two quite rooms of the company so that the environment was the same for all participants. The tests were administered by trained student assistants of the research institute. The students were carefully trained by the supervisor of the study and did not know which group the participants belonged to. At the end of the eight-week intervention phase, the participants were tested again in individual sessions (t4) (see Fig. 1).

The participants were randomly assigned to the EG and CG. Both groups took part in the interventions three times a week for 15 minutes. On Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, the programme was offered to the employees both in the morning and in the afternoon. The programme was offered several times a day (eight identical units in total). This gave employees the opportunity to spontaneously select the most suitable date from many available dates and to take the best time for their break. All exercises could be completed in normal clothes. All training sessions were taught by one female trainer who developed the tasks and had a lot of experience (15 years) in teaching physical exercises as a fitness instructor (CrossFit trainer, weightlifting coach, etc.). She was not blinded regarding the EG and CG. Possible training effects at home were not controlled for.

2.5 Statistical analysis

Regarding short-term and medium-term effects, which means after the 8 weeks training, this study had a pre– post design with two different groups, an EG and a CG. Statistical data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 23. A 2×2 mixed factor ANOVA was used to test for differences between pre- and post-test (within factor TIME) and differences between the EG and the CG (between factor GROUP). The dependent variables were represented by the dependent test variables of the respective test procedures. All analyses were performed after checking the underlying assumptions (variance homogeneity, normal distribution) for parametric testing. The application prerequisite for variance analyses is therefore given. For all analyses performed, the significance level was set at p < = 0.5. The effect sizes are determined by means of variance analysis and classified into small (η²≥0.01), medium (η²≥0.10), and strong effects η² (≥0.25). Partial eta square was presented.

3 Results

3.1 Results on short-term effects

The descriptive values for each group and each measurement point are given in Table 1.

3.1.1 Attention

Two participants had to be excluded from the analysis of the d2 attention test because pre-test data were missing. The analysis revealed a significant main effect of the factor TIME for the variable GZ of the d2 attention test (F(1,56) = 144.91, p < 0.001, η²= 0.72). Both groups showed an improved working speed, but the interaction effect between TIME and GROUP was not significant (F(1,56) = 1.14, p = 0.29, η²= 0.02). The main effect of GROUP also was not significant (F(1,56) = 0.229, p = 0.634, η²= 0.004).

For the measurement of the number of all errors in relation to the total number of answers (F%), both groups worked more carefully and are less prone to errors (F(1,56) = 23.91, p < 0.001, η²= 0.29). However, neither the group effect (F(1,56) = 0.229, p = 0.634, η²= 0.004) nor the interaction effect between TIME×GROUP became significant (F(1,56) = 3.33, p = 0.07, η²= 0.05).

Regarding the concentration performance score, SKL, there was a main effect of TIME (F(1,56) = 296.41, p < 0.001, η²= 0.84) but not of GROUP (F(1,56) = 1.12, p < 0.001, η²= 0.02). However, the interaction between TIME×GROUP was significant (F(1,56) = 7.20, p = 0.01, η²= 0.11). The SKL increased in the EG from M = 104.19 (SD = 6.16) to M = 112.72 (SD = 7.50), and in the CG it increased from M = 103.5 (SD = 6.16) to M = 109.73 (SD = 7.50).

3.1.2 Mood

PANAS pos. There was a main effect of TIME (F(1,58) = 179.17, p = 0.000, η²= 0.76) but no significant main effect of GROUP (F(1,58) = 2.64, p = 0.10, η²= 0.04). However, the interaction between TIME×GROUP was significant (F(1.58) = 4.55, p = 0.04, η²= 0.70). The interaction was due to the fact that both groups did not differ in the pre-test (t(58) = 0.34; p = 0.73) but in the post-test (t(58) = 2.98; p = 0.004). The EG improved more (M = 6.33; SD = 1.08) than the CG (M = 4.60; SD = 1.15).

PANAS neg. The observation of the mean values shows an improvement from pre- to post-measurement for both groups, which was confirmed by the main effect of the factor TIME (F(1,58) = 49.62, p < 0.001, η²= 0.46). The interaction effect between TIME×GROUP was not significant (F(1,58) = 0.103, p = 0.75, η²= 0.002). There was no significant result for the group comparison (F(1,58) = 0.47, p = 0.49, η²= 0.008).

3.2 Results on medium-term effects

The descriptive values for each group and each measurement point are given in Table 2.

Table 2
Means and standard deviation of the pre- and post-test for the d2 and PANAS test score for each group (short-term effects)

Measure Pre-test M (SD) Post-test M (SD)

EG CG EG CG

Attention (d2)

SKL 104.19 (7.57) 103.50 (6.16) 112.72 (7.50) 109.73 (5.14)

GZ 480.96 (52.48) 538.38 (63.74) 526.31 (59.67)

F% 3.91 (3.08) 3.57 (3.67) 1.71 (1.23) 2.57(2.02)

Affect (PANAS)

PANAS pos 29.67 (3.90) 29.33 (3.55) 36.00 (2.82) 33.93 (2.48)

PANAS neg 13.76 (3.33) 13.26 (3.09) 11.36 (1.74) 11.07 (1.23)

Measure	Pre-test M (SD)	Post-test M (SD)
Attention (d2)
SKL	104.19 (7.57)	103.50 (6.16)	112.72 (7.50)	109.73 (5.14)
GZ		480.96 (52.48)	538.38 (63.74)	526.31 (59.67)
F%	3.91 (3.08)	3.57 (3.67)	1.71 (1.23)	2.57(2.02)
Affect (PANAS)
PANAS pos	29.67 (3.90)	29.33 (3.55)	36.00 (2.82)	33.93 (2.48)
PANAS neg	13.76 (3.33)	13.26 (3.09)	11.36 (1.74)	11.07 (1.23)

Notes: M = means, SD = standard deviation, SKL = the standardised value of the number of correct responses minus errors of confusion, GZ = total number of responses, F% = the number of errors related to the total number of responses.

3.2.1 Attention

The analysis revealed a significant main effect for the factor TIME for the variables GZ (F (1,53) = 71.78, p < 0.001, η²= 0.57), F% (F (1, 53) = 14.29, p < 0.001, η²= 0.21), and SKL (F (1,53) = 77.18, p < 0.001, η²= 0.59), pointing to improved performance in working speed and concentration performance. Both groups work more carefully and were less prone to errors from pre- to post-test. For the factor GROUP, however, the inferential statistical analysis showed no significant effect for any variable (p > 0.05). Furthermore, the analyses showed no interaction between the factors TIME×GROUP for GZ (F (1,53) = 0.015, p = 0.903, η²< 0.001), F%, (F (1,53) = 0.025, p = 0.874, η²< 0.001), and SKL (F (1,53) = 2.44, p = .124, η²= 0.044).

3.2.2 Mood

PANAS pos. The mean values of the variable PANAS pos. remain approximately unchanged for both groups over the intervention period. Accordingly, there was no main effect for the factor TIME (F(1,53) = 1.97, p = 0.17, η²= 0.036). There was no main effect of the factor GROUP (F(1,53) = 0.54, p = 0.46, η²= 0.010), and the interaction between TIME×GROUP (F(1,53) = 0.12, p = 0.72, η²= 0.002) showed no significant effects.

Table 3
Means and standard deviation of the pre- and post-test for the RWT, d2, PANAS, DS, and DST test score for each group (medium-term effects)

Measure Pre-test M (SD) Post-test M (SD)

EG CG EG CG

Verbal fluency

RWT I 21.9 (5.47) 21.2 (5.23) 24.1 (6.30) 21.64 (5.23)

RWT II 20.67 (4.93) 19.88 (5.28) 23.07 (4.63) 19.84 (4.54)

Attention (d2)

SKL 98.03 (7.72) 97.20 (10.72) 109.03 (10.72) 104.88 (9.14)

GZ 423.50 (79.85) 416.28 (67.18) 493.13 (102.08) 487.96 (75.28)

F% 6.32 (7.89) 5.28 (3.45) 4.70 (7.94) 3.79 (3.66)

Affect (PANAS)

PANAS pos 32.73 (5.31) 32.04 (4.39) 33.80 (5.25) 32.68 (5.09)

PANAS neg 17.13 (4.35) 16.48 (4.30) 13.33 (3.15) 13.16 (2.89)

Verbal working memory (DS)

Digit span (DS) 10.23 (1.69) 10.08 (2.32) 11.70 (1.66) 10.84 (1.72)

Information-processing c a pacity

Digit Symbol Test (DST) 12.20 (2.68) 14.30 (3.15) 11.68 (1.88) 12.96 (2.38)

Measure	Pre-test M (SD)	Post-test M (SD)
Verbal fluency
RWT I	21.9 (5.47)	21.2 (5.23)	24.1 (6.30)	21.64 (5.23)
RWT II	20.67 (4.93)	19.88 (5.28)	23.07 (4.63)	19.84 (4.54)
Attention (d2)
SKL	98.03 (7.72)	97.20 (10.72)	109.03 (10.72)	104.88 (9.14)
GZ	423.50 (79.85)	416.28 (67.18)	493.13 (102.08)	487.96 (75.28)
F%	6.32 (7.89)	5.28 (3.45)	4.70 (7.94)	3.79 (3.66)
Affect (PANAS)
PANAS pos	32.73 (5.31)	32.04 (4.39)	33.80 (5.25)	32.68 (5.09)
PANAS neg	17.13 (4.35)	16.48 (4.30)	13.33 (3.15)	13.16 (2.89)
Verbal working memory (DS)
Digit span (DS)	10.23 (1.69)	10.08 (2.32)	11.70 (1.66)	10.84 (1.72)
Information-processing c a pacity
Digit Symbol Test (DST)	12.20 (2.68)	14.30 (3.15)	11.68 (1.88)	12.96 (2.38)

PANAS neg. The observation of the mean values showed an improvement from pre- to post-measurement for both groups for the factor TIME (F(1,53) = 46.36, p < 0.001, η²= 0.47). The interaction effect between TIME×GROUP was not significant (F(1,53) = 0.21, p = 0.65, η²= 0.004). There was also no significant result for the factor GROUP (F(1,53) = 0.28, p = 0.64, η²= 0.004).

3.2.3 Verbal working memory

The overall ANOVA showed a main effect for the factor TIME (F(1,53) = 52.67 p < 0.001, η²= 0.49), indicating that the participants improved from pre- to post-test. There was no main effect of the factor GROUP (F(1,53) = 1.12, p = 0.294, η²= 0.021). Moreover, there was a significant interaction between the factors TIME×GROUP (F(1,53) = 5.30, p = 0.02, η²= 0.09), which can be attributed to the greater improvement in the EG compared to the improvement in the CG (see Fig. 2). Both groups did not differ in the pre-test (t(53) = 0.34; p = 0.77), but they almost differed significantly in the post-test (t(58) = 1.88; p = 0.06).

Fig. 2

Performance improvements (mean, standard error) in the Digit-Span Test (DS) from pre- to post-test for the experimental group (EG) and the control group (CG).

3.2.4 Information-processing capacity

The analysis revealed a significant main effect for the factor TIME (F(1,53) = 74.77, p < 0.001, η²= 0.59), indicating that participants improved from pre- to post-test. However, no interaction between TIME×GROUP (F(1,53) = 0.480, p = 0.491, η²= 0.009) and no effect of GROUP (F(1,53) = 1.14, p = 0.291, η²= 0.021) could be detected.

3.2.5 Divergent thinking

First of all, there were no significant group differences (t(53) = 0.48; p = 0.31) for the first test (t(53) = 0.57; p = 0.28) nor for the second task “letter change” at the first measurement time, and thus there was a homogeneous starting point for bothgroups.

Table 4
Mean values of the RWT for the experimental and control groups (z values)

Measure Pre-test M (SD) Post-test M (SD)

EG CG EG CG

Z-value (RWT I)

RWT I –0.33 (0.79) –0.38 (0.76) –0.11 (0.77) –0.38 (0.74)

RWT II –0.44 (0.89) –0.55 (0.91) –0.18 (0.75) –0.72 (0.82)

Measure	Pre-test M (SD)	Post-test M (SD)
Z-value (RWT I)
RWT I	–0.33 (0.79)	–0.38 (0.76)	–0.11 (0.77)	–0.38 (0.74)
RWT II	–0.44 (0.89)	–0.55 (0.91)	–0.18 (0.75)	–0.72 (0.82)

Notes: M = means, SD = standard deviation.

There were no main effects for TIME or GROUP for both tests (all p > 0.13). Whereas the interaction effect TIME×GROUP is not significant for RWT I (F(1,53) = 1.35, p = 0.25, η²= 0.025), a significant interaction effect for the factors TIME×GROUP (F(1,53) = 5.57, p = 0.02, η²= 0.095) was shown for RWT II. Both groups did not differ in the pre-test (t(53) = 0.45; p = 0.65) but in the post-test (t(53) = 2.51; p = 0.01). The EG improved more than the CG (t(53) = 2.52; p = 0.015) (see Fig. 3).

Fig. 3

Performance improvements in % ranking (mean, standard error) of RWTII from pre- to post-test for the experimental group (EG) and the control group (CG).

4 Discussion

The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of motor-cognitive coordination training on cognitive abilities in the workplace of one company in a field experiment. The results showed that the motor-cognitive coordination break improves working memory and divergent thinking after eight weeks of intervention, whereas neither the mood nor the information processing speed improved more for the experimental group compared to the control group. The participants in the study were employees who completed the intervention programme directly in their workplace. The results on the acute increase in attention performance failed to reach significance.

4.1 Physical activity breaks

The results showed that the format of the physical activity break with motor-cognitive exercises is feasible in the workplace and can promote aspects of cognitive performance. In general, the active work break concept has also been proven in other studies regarding increasing physical activity [23, 45] and could be confirmed as an effective method for increasing work performance and productivity [22, 24]. Compared to other intervention strategies in the form of standing or dynamic workplaces, which are effective on the physical level because they are a change from predominantly sedentary behaviour [25], the motor-cognitive coordination programme in this study is particularly effective in terms of work-relevant abilities. In general, dynamic workplaces (e.g., integrated bicycle or treadmill solutions) may be associated with performance losses and may, for example, restrict working memory, attention, and motor skills (e.g., mouse handling and typing speed and errors) [16, 20]. Therefore, the motor-cognitive coordination programme introduced here might be a purposeful practical concept for physical recovery and mental reorientation since the work activity is interrupted only for a short time. This enables cognitive distancing and emotional deactivation in the sense of the recovery and activation functions from the preliminary examination of this work, so that the work process can be resumed afterwards with a new focus and new energy. However, it should be emphasised that precisely this aspect is often criticised in research on work breaks [46]. A break always interrupts a productive work step and requires additional effort to resume and continue it. To avoid this, the motor-cognitive coordination programme was offered several times a day (eight identical units in total). A creative and productive phase did not have to be interrupted, as the opportunity to participate was offered again later.

Some of the test participants worked in customer service. Work performance does not only refer to speed and quantity. Rather, the aspects of satisfaction and friendliness are important in the emotional area, but also in the cognitive area, involving the quick comprehension of customer inquiries regarding technical problems. Therefore, we assume that physical activity breaks in general at work can be used not only as a physical compensation measure (as regularly used to improve workers’ health), but also for personnel development. However, this assumption must be investigated in more detail. The short-term effects showed that the positive mood increased, but only after a single bout of the motor-cognitive coordination intervention. To summarise, employees benefit from the motor-cognitive coordination programme in some different areas depending on their work setting.

4.2 Effects on basic cognitive functions

The significant improvement in the Digit-Span Test and in the divergent thinking test suggests that active work breaks including motor-cognitive coordination exercises can improve employees’ working memory and divergent thinking. The results are in line with other studies [31 , 48], as well as the study by Hötting and Röder [49], who were able to show that coordinative exercises can be equally effective on cognitive functions as cardiovascular training. Similar interventions often include exercises from the Life Kinetics programme, which also combines motor and cognitive tasks [33, 50] or juggling exercises [51, 52]. Further intervention studies investigating coordinative exercises, like balance or dance training, also confirm positive effects on executive functions and memory performance [30 , 54].

Regarding the results of a single bout of the motor-cognitive coordination intervention, participants of the EG showed greater acute improvements in concentration performance compared to the CG. This is in line with the results of the meta-analysis by Chang et al. [55], who confirm that short physical activities lead to positive and immediate effects on cognition. Concerning the type of activity, this is comparable to studies by Wollseiffen et al. [56] and Mullane et al. [57], who report acute positive effects of coordination exercise on concentration.

The positive influence of the motor-cognitive coordination training on divergent thinking can be seen as partly comparable to the results found by Frith and Loprinzi [58], who pointed out that physical activity in general induces the synaptic release of neurotransmitters such as dopamine, which, in turn, affect mood and arousal. According to Frith and Loprinzki [58], the modulation of the dopaminergic systems associated with physical activity in general can partially promote creative abilities. This area is equally important for goal-oriented planning and problem-solving thinking at work. Since working conditions have changed and stress in organisations is a growing phenomenon, with severe economic consequences, more emphasis should be placed on the cognitive abilities of employees. However, the specific effect of a motor-cognitive coordination training in comparison to a stretching training, which also includes physical activity, must be investigated in more detail.

4.3 Limitations

In this study, stretching and relaxation exercises were examined in addition to motor-coordinative cognitive exercises. The study lacks a group that is inactive or complete a work break without physical activity to differentiate that the effects of physical activity can be effective on cognitive functions. Future studies should include other measures, such as mindfulness exercises or other work break activities, in addition to the various movement activities to better demonstrate the effectiveness. In addition, even though the motor-coordinative training was not exhaustive, it might be worth registering the physical activity level and the “liking” of sportive activity of all participants to exclude, for example, motivational effects. In addition, to emphasise the field character of the study, no exclusion criteria beside chronic diseases, were applied and the groups were not blinded because an exchange during work could not be prevented. Also, the study did not control for diurnal variations of physical activity in the intervention as well as the CG and diet. Furthermore, availability sampling was used, which reduces the claim of generalisation, and a sociability and reactivity bias is possible. In line with this, preregistration should be applied in further studies in this area.

5 Conclusion

This study was able to show that physical activity breaks, which focus on motor-cognitive coordination exercises, can be established in the workplace but can also be used for personal cognitive development. The new approach of this study was not only the derivation and development of targeted exercises, but also their testing and evaluation in the field of application. Motor-cognitive coordination exercise in the workplace might play an important role in both occupational health management and personnel development, especially for companies that are under highly competitive and innovative pressure. So far, however, very little experimental creativity research has been conducted in relation to different types of physical activity as a potential predictor and the underlying mechanism, although there is significantly more research on the effects of exercise on other cognitive functions. A corresponding focus of future research on this relationship is therefore desirable, as well as the examination of video-based physical activity breaks [45].

Ethical approval

The experiment was conducted according to the ethical guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval for this study was not required in accordance with the conditions outlined by the German Psychological Society, where research that carries no additional risk beyond daily activities does not require research ethics board approval. We communicated all considerations necessary to assess the question of the ethical legitimacy of the study.

Informed consent

All participants gave their written consent for participation.

Conflict of interest

None to report.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the employees of the company that develops premium products in the home entertainment sector in Germany for participating in this study.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Angevaren

, Aufdemkampe

, Verhaar

, Aleman

, Vanhees

. Physical activity and enhanced fitness to improve cognitive function in older people without known cognitive impairment [Internet], Angevaren

, editor. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008.

Basso

, Shang

, Elman

, Karmouta

, Suzuki

. Acute exercise improves prefrontal cortex but not hippocampal function in healthy adults. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2015;21(10):791–801.

Hillman

, Erickson

, Kramer

. Be smart, exercise your heart: exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008;9(1):58–65.

Mandolesi

, Polverino

, Montuori

, Foti

, Ferraioli

, Sorrentino

, et al. Effects of physical exercise on cognitive functioning and wellbeing: Biological and psychological benefits. Front Psychol. 2018;9:509.

Smith

, Blumenthal

, Hoffman

, Cooper

, Strauman

, Welsh-Bohmer

, et al. Aerobic exercise and neurocognitive performance: a meta-analytic review of randomized controlled trials. Psychosom Med. 2010;72(3):239–52.

Erickson

, Hillman

, Kramer

. Physical activity, brain, and cognition. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2015;4:27–32.

Miyake

, Friedman

, Emerson

, Witzki

, Howerter

, Wager

. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex ”Frontal Lobe“ tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cogn Psychol. 2000;41(1):49–100.

Cristofori

, Cohen-Zimerman

, Grafman

. Executive functions. Handb Clin Neurol. 2019;163:197–219.

Bailey

. Cognitive accuracy and intelligent executive function in the brain and in business. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007;1118(1):122–41.

10.

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Second European survey of enterprises on new and emerging risks (ESENER-2): Overview report: managing safety and health at work [Special issue]. 2016.

11.

Schoofs

, Preuss

, Wolf

. Psychosocial stress induces working memory impairments in an n-back paradigm. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2008;33(5):643–53.

12.

Ludyga

. Sportaktivität, Stress und das Gehirn. In: Handbuch Stressregulation und Sport. Berlin, Heidelberg:Springer Berlin Heidelberg;2017.S.1–22.

13.

Bize

, Johnson

, Plotnikoff

. Physical activity level and health-related quality of life in the general adult population: a systematic review. Prev Med. 2007;45(6):401–15.

14.

Grimani

, Aboagye

, Kwak

. The effectiveness of workplace nutrition and physical activity interventions in improving productivity, work performance and workability: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1676.

15.

Shaikh, A, Mohapatra, S, Chandrasekaran, B. Occupational sitting kills; but who cares?": Quantitative analysis of barriers and facilitators of sedentary behavior in Indian white-collar workers. Arch Occup Environ Health. 2022;77(2):96–108.

16.

Shrestha

, Kukkonen-Harjula

, Verbeek

, Ijaz

, Hermans

, Pedisic

. Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;12(12):CD010912.

17.

Commissaris

, Huysmans

, Mathiassen

, Srinivasan

, Koppes

LLJ

, Hendriksen

IJM

. Interventions to reduce sedentary behavior and increase physical activity during productive work: a systematic review. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2016. 2016;42(3):181–91.

18.

Freak-Poli

, Cumpston

, Albarqouni

, Clemes

, Peeters

. Workplace pedometer interventions for increasing physical activity. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;7(7):CD009209.

19.

Nicoll

, Zimring

. Effect of innovative building design on physical activity. J Public Health Policy. 2009;30(Suppl 1)(S1):S111–23.

20.

Commissaris

DACM

, Könemann

, Hiemstra-van Mastrigt

, Burford

E-M

, Botter

, Douwes

, et al. Effects of a standing and three dynamic workstations on computer task performance and cognitive function tests. Appl Ergon. 2014;45(6):1570–8.

21.

Taylor

, Paxton

, Shegog

, Coan

, Dubin

, Page

, et al. Impact of booster breaks and computer prompts on physical activity and sedentary behavior among desk-based workers: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. Prev Chronic Dis . 2016;13(160231):E155.

22.

Nakphet

, Chaikumarn

, Janwantanakul

. Effect of different types of rest-break interventions on neck and shoulder muscle activity, perceived discomfort and productivity in symptomatic VDU operators: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2014;20(2):339–53.

23.

Taylor

, King

, Shegog

, Paxton

, Evans-Hudnall

, Rempel

, et al. Booster Breaks in the workplace: participants’ perspectives on health-promoting work breaks. Health Educ Res. 2013;28(3):414–25.

24.

Barr-Anderson

, AuYoung

, Whitt-Glover

, Glenn

, Yancey

. Integration of short bouts of physical activity into organizational routine: a systematic review of the literature. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(1):76–93.

25.

Diamond

, Ling

. Conclusions about interventions, programs, and approaches for improving executive functions that appear justified and those that, despite much hype, do not. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2016;18:34–48.

26.

Moreau

, Conway

ARA

. The case for an ecological approach to cognitive training. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014;18(7):334–6.

27.

Kattenstroth

J-C

, Kalisch

, Holt

, Tegenthoff

, Dinse

. Six months of dance intervention enhances postural, sensorimotor, and cognitive performance in elderly without affecting cardio-respiratory functions. Front Aging Neurosci. 2013;5:5.

28.

Rogge

A-K

, Röder

, Zech

, Nagel

, Hollander

, Braumann

K-M

, et al. Balance training improves memory and spatial cognition in healthy adults. Sci Re. 2017;7(1):5661.

29.

Voelcker-Rehage

, Godde

, Staudinger

. Cardiovascular and coordination training differentially improve cognitive performance and neural processing in older adults. Front Hum Neurosci. 2011;5:26.

30.

Moreau

, Morrison

, Conway

ARA

. An ecological approach to cognitive enhancement: Complex motor training. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2015;157:44–55.

31.

Voelcker-Rehage

, Niemann

. Structural and functional brain changes related to different types of physical activity across the life span. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013;37(9 Pt B):2268–95.

32.

Niederer

, Engeroff

, Wallner

, Plaumann

, Banzer

. The acute physical and cognitive effects of a classical workplace physical activity program versus a motor-cognitive coordination workplace program: A randomized crossover trial: A randomized crossover trial. J Occup Environ Med. 2018;60(10):936–42.

33.

Jansen

, Fraunhofer

, Pietsch

. Cognitive motor coordination training and the improvement of visual-spatial cognition in office work. Int J Train Dev. 2018;22(3):233–8.

34.

Diamond

. Want to optimize executive functions and academic outcomes?: Simple, just nourish the human spirit. Minn Symp Child Psychol. 2014;37:205–32.

35.

Basso

, Suzuki

. The effects of acute exercise on mood, cognition, neurophysiology, and neurochemical pathways: A review. Brain Plast. 2017;2(2):127–52.

36.

Faul

, Erdfelder

, Lang

, Buchner

. G*power A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175–91.

37.

Brickenkamp

. Aufmerksamkeits-Belastungs-Test. 9th Aufl Göttingen:Hogrefe;2002.

38.

Krohne

, Egloff

, Kohlmann

, Tausch

. Untersuchungen mit einer deutschen Version der “Positive and Negative Affect Schedule” (PANAS). Diagnostica. 1996;42:139–56.

39.

Watson

, Clark

, Tellegen

. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;54(6):1063–70.

40.

Rauchfleisch

. Kinderpsychologische Tests: Ein Kompendium für Kinderärzte. 3. Aufl. Rauchfleisch

, Herausgeber. Stuttgart: Thieme;2000.

41.

Aschenbrenner

, Tucha

, Lange

. Regensburger Wortflüssigkeits-Test: RWT. Bern, Toronto, Seattle:Göttingen;2000.

42.

Schellig

, Drechsler

, Heinemann

, Sturm

, Herausgeber . Handbuch neuropsychologischer Testverfahren: Band 1: Aufmerksamkeit, Gedächtnis, exekutive Funktionen. 1. Aufl Göttingen Hogrefe Verlag;2009.

43.

Buuck

. Bewegende Pause. Der Einfluss einer Bewegungsintervention auf die kognitive Leistungsfähigkeit im Arbeitskontext.Bamberg:University of Bamberg Press:2020.

44.

Taylor

, Shegog

, Chen

, Rempel

, Baun

, Bush

, et al. The Booster Break program: description and feasibility test of a worksite physical activity daily practice. Work. 2010;37(4):433–43.

45.

Bramante

, King

, Story

, Whitt-Glover

, Barr-Anderson

. Worksite physical activity breaks: Perspectives on feasibility of implementation. Work. 2018;59(4):491–9.

46.

Fritz

, Ellis

, Demsky

, Lin

, Guros

. Embracing work breaks. Organ Dyn. 2013;42(4):274–80.

47.

Johann

, Stenger

, Kersten

, Karbach

. Effects of motor-cognitive coordination training and cardiovascular training on motor coordination and cognitive functions. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2016;24:118–27.

48.

Niemann

, Godde

, Voelcker-Rehage

. Not only cardiovascular, but also coordinative exercise increases hippocampal volume in older adults. Front Aging Neurosci. 2014;6:170.

49.

Hötting

, Röder

. Beneficial effects of physical exercise on neuroplasticity and cognition. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013;37(9 Pt B):2243–57.

50.

Demirakca

, Cardinale

, Dehn

, Ruf

, Ende

. The exercising brain: Changes in functional connectivity induced by an integrated multimodal cognitive and whole-body coordination training. Neural Plast. 2016;20168240894.

51.

Draganski

, Gaser

, Busch

, Schuierer

, Bogdahn

, May

. Neuroplasticity: changes in grey matter induced by training: Neuroplasticity. Nature. 2004;427(6972):311–2.

52.

Scholz

, Klein

, Behrens

TEJ

, Johansen-Berg

. Training induces changes in white-matter architecture. Nat Neurosci. 2009;12(11):1370–1.

53.

Kattenstroth

J-C

, Kalisch

, Holt

, Tegenthoff

, Dinse

. Six months of dance intervention enhances postural, sensorimotor, and cognitive performance in elderly without affecting cardio-respiratory functions. Front Aging Neurosci. 2013;5:5.

54.

Rogge

A-K

, Röder

, Zech

, Nagel

, Hollander

, Braumann

K-M

, et al. Balance training improves memory and spatial cognition in healthy adults. Sci Re. 2017;7(1):5661.

55.

Chang

Y-K

, Pesce

, Chiang

Y-T

, Kuo

C-Y

, Fong

D-Y

. Antecedent acute cycling exercise affects attention control: an ERP study using attention network test. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9:156.

56.

Wollseiffen

, Ghadiri

, Scholz

, Strüder

, Herpers

, Peters

, et al. Short bouts of intensive exercise during the workday have a positive effect on neuro-cognitive performance: Neuroexercise. Stress Health. 2016;32(5):514–23.

57.

Mullane

, Buman

, Zeigler

, Crespo

, Gaesser

. Acute effects on cognitive performance following bouts of standing and light-intensity physical activity in a simulated workplace environment. J Sci Med Sport. 2017;20(5):489–93.

58.

Frith

, Loprinzi

. Experimental effects of acute exercise and music listening on cognitive creativity. Physiol Behav. 2018;191:21–8.

Sequence/ condition task		Task	Motor execution	Exercise	Target area
1	Introduction of basic movement patterns	Unilateral, bilateral, cross-coordinated movements	Sitting	1.1 “Up and down”	Movement experience
			Standing	1.2 “Back and forth”	Joy of movement
			Walking	1.3 “Back and forth II”	Readiness for activity
			Change of direction	1.4 “Crisscross”
				1.5 “Stop and go”	Curiosity
			Change of pace	1.6 “Jumping jack2.0”
			Stabilise	1.7 “Forward - backward ball”
			Throwing
			Catching
2	Perception training	Perceiving and processing visual and acoustic signals	Sitting	2.1 “ React !”	Curiosity
			Standing	2.2 “Leap of faith”	Reaction
			Walking	2.3 “Touch and go”	Attention
			Change of direction	2.4 “Flying ball”
				2.5 “Switch”	Working memoryMental flexibility
			Change of pace	2.6 “HipHop”	Processing speed
			Stabilise		Inhibition
			Throwing
			Catching
			(execute after signal processing)
3	Rhythm training	Perceiving rhythm and implementing and maintaining it in movement	Clapping	3.1 “ Jump ”	Movement experience
			Marching	3.2 “ Rhythm ”	Joy of movement
			Jumping Bouncing	3.3 “ Tempo ” 3.4 “ In & out ”	Joy of being active together
				3.5 “ Rhythm ball ”	Rhythmisation
				3.6 “ Pendulum ”	Inhibition
					Mental flexibility
					Processing speed
					Update
4	Complex motion sequences	Perform basic movement patterns smoothly under conditions 2 and 3	Sequences of steps	4.1 “ Corporate dance ”	Concentration
			Rotary motion	4.2 “ Movement chain ”	Working memory
			Lateral movement	4.3 “ X ”	Creativity
			Movement flow	4.4 Update ”	Mental flexibility
5	Reaction and inhib i tion	Perform or suppress movement	Perform basic motor movements or suppress and/or replace the execution	5.1 “ 1,2,3 ”	Reaction
				5.2 “ Stop it !”	Inhibition, impulse control
					Attention
6	Balance training	Balance, maintaining balance under variable conditions Static, dynamic stable, unstable base	One legged stand	6.1 “Balance	Balance ability, concentration, body awareness
			Unstable support surface	6.2 “Bar turner”
				6.3 “Twister”
			Intermuscular coordination	6.4 “Statico-dynamico ”
				6.5 “Juggling 5”
7	Fine motor skills	Execute movement purposefully with a high degree of accuracy	Finger and hand games	7.1 “ Fingertip ” 7.2 “ Tip top ”	Ability to differentiate
			Foot gymnastics	7.3 “ Targeting ”
8	Social interaction exercises	Performing movement with each other, with partner/group	Simultaneous, mirrored, synchronous movements	8.1 “ Synchro time ” 8.2 “ Mirror ”	Joy in moving together, Communication, intellectual flexibility
9	Juggling	Learning the cascade and other tricks	Pre-exercise	9.1 “Juggling 1”	Working memory, mental flexibility, creativity
			Practice	9.2 “Juggling 2”
			Tricks	9.3 “Juggling 3”
				9.4 “Juggling 4”
				9.5 “Juggling 5”

The effect of physical activity breaks,including motor-cognitive coordination exercises,on employees’ cognitive functions in the workplace

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVE:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSION:

Keywords

1 Introduction

1.1 Working conditions

1.2 Physical activity interventions to promote employees’ health

1.3 Motor-cognitive coordination training

1.4 The main goal of this study

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Participants

2.2.1 Attention: D2 attention test

2.2.2 Affect: Positive and Negative Affect Scale

2.2.3 Verbal working memory: Digit-Span Test (forward and backwards)

2.2.4 Information processing capacity: Digit-Symbol Test

2.2.5 Divergent thinking: Phonemic verbal fluency – Regensburger Wortflüssigkeitstest

2.2.6 Training sessions: Motor-cognitive coordination exercises (EG)

2.4 Procedure

2.5 Statistical analysis

3 Results

3.1 Results on short-term effects

3.1.1 Attention

3.1.2 Mood

3.2 Results on medium-term effects

3.2.2 Mood

3.2.5 Divergent thinking

Table 4 Mean values of the RWT for the experimental and control groups (z values) Measure Pre-test M (SD) Post-test M (SD) EG CG EG CG Z-value (RWT I) RWT I –0.33 (0.79) –0.38 (0.76) –0.11 (0.77) –0.38 (0.74) RWT II –0.44 (0.89) –0.55 (0.91) –0.18 (0.75) –0.72 (0.82)

4.1 Physical activity breaks

4.2 Effects on basic cognitive functions

4.3 Limitations

5 Conclusion

Ethical approval

Informed consent

Conflict of interest

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Funding

References

Table 4
Mean values of the RWT for the experimental and control groups (z values)

Measure Pre-test M (SD) Post-test M (SD)

EG CG EG CG

Z-value (RWT I)

RWT I –0.33 (0.79) –0.38 (0.76) –0.11 (0.77) –0.38 (0.74)

RWT II –0.44 (0.89) –0.55 (0.91) –0.18 (0.75) –0.72 (0.82)