Journals / Online Türk Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2

Physical Activity and Executive Functioning In University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study Using Performance-Based and Self-Report Measures

Üniversite Öğrencilerinde Fiziksel Aktivite ve Yürütücü İşlevler: Performans Temelli ve Öz-Bildirim Ölçümleri Kullanılan Kesitsel Bir Çalışma

Merve Bulguroğlu(ANKARA MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ, FİZYOTERAPİ VE REHABİLİTASYON BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0002-5923-4720
Halil İbrahim Bulguroğlu(Ankara Medipol Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi, Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon Bölümü)0000-0002-6767-7062
Selcan Suiçmez(ANKARA MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ, FİZYOTERAPİ VE REHABİLİTASYON BÖLÜMÜ)0009-0009-0354-8630
Başak Ezgi Göktaş(ANKARA MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ, FİZYOTERAPİ VE REHABİLİTASYON BÖLÜMÜ)0009-0008-5547-2837
Pages
182–189
Publication Date
2026-06-21
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Promoting MVPA in campus settings may support both cognitive and physical health.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study investigated how varying physical activity intensities correlate with executive functions in university students by merging performance-based data with behavioral observations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: A total of 212 undergraduates (112 females, 100 males; mean age: 21.21 ± 1.91 years) participated in this cross-sectional study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Promoting MVPA in campus settings may support both cognitive and physical health.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Fiziksel aktivite · sedanter davranış · üniversite öğrencileri

Abstract

Objective: This study investigated how varying physical activity intensities correlate with executive functions in university students by merging performance-based data with behavioral observations. Materials and Methods: A total of 212 undergraduates (112 females, 100 males; mean age: 21.21 ± 1.91 years) participated in this cross-sectional study. Activity patterns were assessed using the IPAQ-SF. Executive functions were evaluated through a dual-perspective approach using the Stroop Test–TBAG Form (performance-based) and the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version (BRIEF-A) (behavioral). Data were analyzed using Pearson correlation analysis, one-way ANOVA, and hierarchical multiple regression to determine whether moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) predicted executive functioning after controlling for age and gender. Results: Higher total (r = −0.280, p = 0.001) and moderate-to-vigorous activity (r = −0.330 to −0.360, p < 0.001) were associated with superior executive functioning. MVPA correlated with lower Stroop interference (r = −0.330, p < 0.001), better Metacognition Index (r = −0.360, p < 0.001), and better Global Executive Composite scores (r = −0.340, p < 0.001). Conversely, sedentary time was linked to poorer performance (r = 0.300, p < 0.001). Regression analyses confirmed MVPA as a significant predictor. Sufficiently active students showed better Stroop, Metacognition, and Global Executive Composite scores (p < 0.001), while no group differences were found in Behavioral Regulation (p = 0.120). Conclusions: Sufficient total activity and MVPA are associated with enhanced inhibitory control and metacognition in university students, whereas sedentary behavior reduces executive efficiency. Promoting MVPA in campus settings may support both cognitive and physical health.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışma, performans verileri ile davranışsal gözlemleri birleştirerek üniversite öğrencilerinde farklı fiziksel aktivite yoğunluklarının yürütücü işlevlerle ilişkisini incelemeyi amaçlamıştır. Materyal ve Metot: Kesitsel çalışmaya 212 lisans öğrencisi (112 kadın, 100 erkek; yaş ort.: 21,21 ± 1,91) katılmıştır. Aktivite düzeyleri IPAQ-SF ile, yürütücü işlevler ise Stroop Testi–TBAG Formu ve BRIEF-A envanteri kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde Pearson korelasyonu, tek yönlü ANOVA ve yaş ile cinsiyet kontrol edilerek orta-yüksek şiddetli fiziksel aktivitenin yordayıcı etkisini belirlemek için hiyerarşik çoklu regresyon kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Yüksek toplam (r = −0,280, p = 0,001) ve orta-yüksek şiddetli aktivite (r = −0,330 ile −0,360 aralığında, p < 0,001), daha iyi yürütücü işlevlerle ilişkili bulunmuştur. Orta-yüksek şiddetli aktivite; düşük Stroop interferansı (r = −0,330, p < 0,001), daha iyi Üstbiliş İndeksi (r = −0,360, p < 0,001) ve Global Yürütücü Kompozit skorları (r = −0,340, p < 0,001) ile ilişkili bulunmuştur. Aksine, sedanter süre daha düşük yürütücü performansla ilişkilidir (r = 0,300, p < 0,001). Regresyon analizleri, orta-yüksek şiddetli aktivitenin anlamlı bir yordayıcı olduğunu doğrulamıştır. Aktif öğrenciler daha iyi Stroop ve Üstbiliş skorları sergilerken (p < 0,001), Davranışsal Düzenleme açısından anlamlı fark saptanmamıştır (p = 0,120). Sonuçlar: Üniversite öğrencilerinde yeterli düzeyde fiziksel aktivite, gelişmiş inhibitör kontrol ve üstbilişsel yeteneklerle ilişkilidir; sedanter davranış ise yürütücü verimliliğin azalmasıyla ilişkilidir. Kampüslerde fiziksel aktivitenin teşvik edilmesi bilişsel ve fiziksel sağlığı destekleyebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bulguroğlu, M., Bulguroğlu, H. İ., Suiçmez, S., Göktaş, B. E. (2026). Physical Activity and Executive Functioning In University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study Using Performance-Based and Self-Report Measures. Online Türk Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 182–189. https://doi.org/10.26453/otjhs.1858319

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. Erickson KI, Hillman C, Stillman CM, et al. Physical Activity, Cognition, and Brain Outcomes: A Review of the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019;51(6):1242-1251. doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000001936
  2. Erickson KI, Hillman CH, Kramer AF. Physical activity, brain, and cognition. Curr Opin Behav Sci.2015;4:27-32. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.01.005
  3. Stillman CM, Esteban-Cornejo I, Brown B, Bender CM, Erickson KI. Effects of exercise on brain and cognition across age groups and health states. Trends Neurosci. 2020;43(7):533-543. doi:10.1016/j.tins.2020.04.010
  4. Ludyga S, Gerber M, Pühse U, Looser VN, Kamijo K. Systematic review and meta-analysis investigating moderators of exercise effects on executive function in healthy populations. Nat Hum Behav. 2020;4(6):603–612. doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0851-7
  5. Liu L, Xin X, Zhang Y. The effects of physical exercise on cognitive function in adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2025;16:1556721. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1556721
  6. Stockwell S, Trott M, Tully M, et al. Changes in physical activity and sedentary behaviours from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns: a systematic review. Lancet Glob Health. 2021;9(5):e645–e655. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00032-X
  7. Ziaei R, Mohammadi R, Dastgiri S, Viitasara E. The prevalence and correlates of physical activity/inactivity and sedentary behaviour among high-school adolescents in Iran: a cross-sectional study. J Public Health (Berl). 2022;30(5):1121–1131. doi:10.1007/s10389-020-01385-2
  8. Zelazo PD, Carlson SM. The neurodevelopment of executive function skills: Implications for academic achievement gaps. Psychol Neurosci. 2020;13(3):273–298. doi:10.1037/pne0000208
  9. Toplak ME, West RF, Stanovich KE. Do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2013;54(2):131–143. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12001
  10. Prince SA, Adamo KB, Hamel ME, Hardt J, Connor Gorber S, Tremblay M. A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008;5:56. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-5-56
  11. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149-1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
  12. Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjöström M, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1381-1395. doi:10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB
  13. Karakaş S, Erdoğan E, Sak L, Soysal AŞ, Ulusoy T, Ulusoy İY, Alkan S. Stroop Testi TBAG Formu: Türk kültürüne standardizasyon çalışmaları, güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Klinik Psikiyatri. 1999;2(2):75–88.
  14. Roth RM, Isquith PK, Gioia GA. Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version (BRIEF-A): Manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2005.
  15. Biederman J, DiSalvo ML, Hutt Vater C, Woodworth KY, Faraone SV. Toward operationalizing executive function deficits in adults with ADHD using the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function—Adult Version (BRIEF-A). J Clin Psychiatry. 2022;83(6):21m14295. doi:10.4088/JCP.21m14295
  16. Voss MW, Soto C, Yoo S, Sodoma M, Vivar C, van Praag H. Exercise and hippocampal memory systems. Trends Cogn Sci. 2019;23(4):318–333. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2019.01.006
  17. Cai Z, Li J, Wang Y, et al. Acute exercise effects on executive function: evidence from event-related potentials. Front Psychol. 2021;12:628849. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628849
  18. de la Fuente J, Amate J, González-Torres MC, Artuch R, García-Torrecillas JM, Fadda S. Effects of levels of self-regulation and regulatory teaching on strategies for coping with academic stress in undergraduate students. Front Psychol. 2020;11:22. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00022
  19. Herold F, Müller P, Gronwald T, Müller NG. Dose–response matters! A perspective on the exercise–cognition relationship. Trends Cogn Sci. 2019;23(12):956–958. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2019.09.005
  20. Al-Wardat M, Salimei C, Alrabbaie H, et al. Exploring the links between physical activity, emotional regulation, and mental well-being in Jordanian university students. J Clin Med. 2024;13(6):1533. doi:10.3390/jcm13061533