Background: Both physical exercise and cognitive training can effectively improve executive functions in older adults. However, whether physical activity combined with cognitive training is more effective than a single intervention remains controversial. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of combined physical and cognitive interventions on executive functions in older adults aged 65–80 years old. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of combined physical and cognitive interventions on executive functions in older adults were searched using the Web of Science, Elsevier Science, PubMed, EBSCO, Springer-Link, and NATURE databases. Data extraction and quality evaluation were done by Comprehensive Meta-Analysis, V3. Results: A total of 21 studies were included. The results showed that the combined physical and cognitive interventions produced significantly larger gains in executive functions, compared to the control group (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.14, 0.39], p < 0.01). Furthermore, the effects of the combined physical and cognitive interventions were moderated by the study quality, intervention length, and intervention frequency. No significant differences were found between the combined interventions and the physical intervention alone (SMD = 0.13, 95% CI [−0.07, 0.33], p > 0.05) or the cognitive intervention alone (SMD = 0.13, 95% CI [−0.05, 0.30], p > 0.05). Conclusions: The combined physical and cognitive interventions effectively delayed the decrease of executive functions in older adults and this effect was influenced by the length and frequency of the intervention as well as the research quality. However, the effect of the combined physical and cognitive interventions was not significantly better than that of each intervention alone.

A large number of studies have described a positive relationship between physical exercise and cognition. Physical exercise can be divided into closed-skill exercise (CSE) and open-skill exercise (OSE) based on the predictability of the performance environment. It remains unknown whether either of these types of exercise is more beneficial for cognitive function. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of OSE versus CSE on cognition. Eligible studies included cross-sectional studies and intervention studies that had a clear definition of OSE and CSE, and these were used to compare the cognitive performance differences between the two classes of exercise. A total of 15 cross-sectional studies and 4 intervention studies were included in this meta-analysis. Among the cross-sectional studies, the overall effect size for OSE versus CSE was 0.304 (95% confidence interval (CI) (−0.097, 1.213); p < 0.05). Further subgroup analysis showed that the overall effect size for OSE versus CSE was 0.247 for inhibition and 0.360 for cognitive flexibility (both p < 0.05). In contrast, no significant differences between the two exercise modes were observed in the intervention studies. In particular, there were no significant differences in visuospatial attention or in processing speed between the two exercise modes. Taken together, these results suggest that OSE is superior to CSE, especially for executive function, according to the 15 cross-sectional studies examined. However, data from the intervention studies indicate that OSE is not superior. Therefore, additional well-designed, long-term intervention studies are needed to elucidate the potential efficacy of OSE in all populations.

Background: Executive function (EF) involves a series of high-level processes, such as inhibition, switching, and updating. Aging-related cognitive decline has been shown to be strongly associated with EF worsening. The aims of this study were to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of exergaming, an emerging intervention, on EF performance in older adults and to conduct a moderator analysis of exergaming effects on EF. Methods: Randomized controlled trials examining exergaming influences on EF in older adults were collated by searching the Web of Science, Elsevier Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. Statistical data were quantified in Comprehensive Meta-analysis software. Overall EF and EF domains (inhibition, switching, and updating) were analyzed separately. Results: A total of 15 studies were included. The meta-analysis results indicated that exergaming had a significant influence on overall EF in the older adult (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.349, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.191–0.506], p < 0.001). The same effects were also found in EF domains of inhibition (SMD = 0.415, 95% CI [0.102–0.729], p = 0.009), switching (SMD = 0.243, 95% CI [0.071–0.415], p = 0.005), and updating (SMD = 0.366, 95% CI [0.140–0.592], p = 0.002). The effects of exergaming on overall EF were found to be moderated by the frequency of the intervention (Q₍₁₎ = 3.537, p = 0.06). Conclusion: Exergaming was confirmed to improve overall EF, as well as in older adults, and the effect of exergaming on EF was shown to be moderated by intervention frequency.

Providing feedback is a key instructional strategy in motor learning. Recently, interest has grown in self-controlled (SC) feedback, which allows learners to choose when to receive feedback. However, evidence on its effectiveness remains mixed, and its impact across different learning phases and populations is unclear. This meta-analysis assessed the effect of SC feedback on motor skill learning during acquisition, retention, and transfer phases, compared to passively received (PR) feedback and Yoked (YK) feedback groups. A comprehensive search of three datasets identified 29 studies comprising 1147 participants. Although SC feedback did not bring a significant advantage in the acquisition phase, it facilitated motor skill learning in both the retention and transfer phases. Moderator analyses revealed that cognitive status influenced SC feedback efficacy during the acquisition phase, with significant effects observed only in cognitively impaired individuals. Additionally, skill type moderated outcomes in the transfer phase, with series skills showing greater benefits than discrete skills, and this effect was significant only when compared to the YK group. In summary, SC feedback-enhanced motor skill learning in the retention and transfer phases, supporting its role in the consolidation and generalization of learning. Additionally, cognitively impaired individuals showed greater benefits during the acquisition phase, and series skills demonstrated more substantial gains in the transfer phase.

Background: Motor skill performance is influenced by attentional focus, and recent studies suggest that external focus, particularly a more distal external focus, may enhance performance more than an internal or a proximal external focus. However, the optimal distance for external focus and the influence of expertise level remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of attentional focus distance on motor performance across various tasks and expertise levels. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed established guidelines (PRISMA) and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42024595116). Comprehensive literature searches were performed in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Data extraction followed the PICOS framework, and analyses were conducted using Stata and Review Manager. Results: A total of 20 randomized controlled trials with 497 participants were included. The results indicated that a distal external focus significantly improved motor performance compared to both external proximal focus (standardized mean difference, S = 0.3, 95% CI [0.07–0.53], p = 0.01) and internal focus (SMD = 0.59, 95% CI [0.14–1.05], p = 0.01). However, no significant difference was observed between the distal and proximal external focus in novices. Subgroup analyses showed that skill level significantly moderated the effectiveness of attentional focus. Conclusions: A distal external focus improves motor performance in experienced although its effectiveness in novices requires further study. Future research should explore the mechanisms underlying these effects and skill-specific guidelines for optimal attentional focus distance.

Devising cooperative or competitive situations is an important teaching strategy in educational practices. Nevertheless, there is still controversy regarding which situation is better for learning. This study was conducted to explore the effects of cooperative and competitive situations on statistical learning, through the alternating serial reaction time (ASRT) task. Individual cooperative and competitive situations were devised in this study, in which individual situation served as the control condition. Ninety recruited participants were randomly assigned to a cooperative, competitive, or individual group to perform the ASRT task. For general learning, cooperative and competitive situations could indeed make learners respond faster, and there was no significant difference in the RT between the cooperative and competitive groups. Moreover, statistical learning was observed in all three groups. An additional analysis of the early stage of the experiment showed that the learning effect of the competitive group was greater than those of the cooperative and individual groups, in terms of statistical learning. However, the final learning effect was not significantly different among the three groups. Overall, the cooperative and competitive situations had a positive impact on learning and enabled the students to acquire approximately the same learning effect in a shorter time period, compared with the individual situation. Specifically, the competitive situation accelerated the statistical learning process but not the general learning process.