Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
JSLHR
Research Article
Examining the Role of Physical Activity on
Word Learning in School-Aged Children
Madison Pruitta and Giovanna Morinia
Purpose: Previous studies show that there is increased
brain activity after exercise, leading to improved word recall
in adults. The aim of this study was to examine whether
different types of exercise (i.e., aerobic vs. anaerobic) may
also lead to improved performance during vocabulary learning
in children.
Method: A total of 48 participants (24 in Experiment 1 and
24 in Experiment 2) between the ages of 6 and 12 years
completed a word learning task. Training of words took place
in a resting and in an exercise condition using a within-subject
design. In the resting measure, children were taught names
of novel objects and then colored for 3 min before being
tested on their ability to recognize the words. In the exercise
condition, the same steps were followed, but instead of
coloring, children engaged in 3 min of either aerobic exercise
I
n order to be proficient communicators, children
must rapidly and constantly learn words to inter-
act with the world around them. Word learning may
initially be associated with infants and toddlers due to the
rapid vocabulary development that takes place early in
life. However, even older children are constantly exposed
to and engaged in learning new words (Gaskell & Ellis,
2009). The acquisition of new words facilitates interac-
tions with objects and people in everyday life and is par-
ticularly important in school-aged children. Learning
new vocabulary is crucial during this period to promote
phonological awareness, decoding skills, social commu-
nication, and reading (Duff et al., 2015; Verhoeven et al.,
2011). With this in mind, it is important to identify
which factors may facilitate vocabulary growth during
the school-age years. Furthermore, this information can
advise clinical practices for children with word learning
difficulties.
a
Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, University of
Delaware, Newark
Correspondence to Giovanna Morini: gmorini@udel.edu
Editor-in-Chief: Stephen M. Camarata
Editor: Filip Smolík
Received June 24, 2020
Revision received December 1, 2020
Accepted January 28, 2021
https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00359
1712 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research • Vol. 64 • 1712–1725 • May 2021 • Copyright © 2021 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
(i.e., swimming in Experiment 1) or anaerobic exercise (i.e., a
CrossFit-like workout in Experiment 2).
Results: In Experiment 1, accuracy of word recognition was
significantly higher for words that were trained in the aerobic
exercise compared to the resting condition. In Experiment 2,
there was no significant difference in performance between
the anaerobic exercise and resting conditions.
Conclusions: These findings suggest that previously identified
benefits of exercise on language abilities in adults also extend
to school-aged children. However, not all types of physical
activity lead to this boost in performance, as only aerobic
(but not anaerobic) exercise improved children’s ability to
acquire new word–object relations.
Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.
14462187
Previous research with adults has explored the idea
that exercise might facilitate word learning (Miles & Hardman,
1998; Schmidt-Kassow et al., 2010, 2013). Specifically, the data
suggest that, when completing tasks where participants are
asked to memorize and later recall novel words, performance
improves (i.e., the ability to recognize newly acquired words
is higher) when the encoding/learning phase involves physical
activity (e.g., walking or bicycling) compared to when learn-
ing takes place in a physically passive (no exercise) condition
(Schmidt-Kassow et al., 2010, 2013). Considering physical
activity as a way of “boosting” vocabulary acquisition is im-
portant given that it is an element that can easily be incorpo-
rated into activities targeting word learning. However, this
topic has not been widely examined in children, so it is un-
clear whether or not the same relations between exercise and
performance on language tasks that have been identified
with adults extend to this younger population. In the sections
that follow, we will (a) summarize existing work on the
effects of exercise on cognition, (b) discuss previously re-
ported findings regarding variations in physiological re-
sponses across different types of exercise, (c) outline some of
the main connections between cognitive skills and vocabu-
lary learning, and (d) provide information on previous data
connecting exercise to learning in the language domain. Fur-
thermore, we will present findings from two experiments
Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time
of publication.
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
examining the relation between exercise and word learning
in school-aged children.
Exercise and Its Influence on Cognition
and Learning
Over the years, there has been considerable work sug-
gesting that exercise can improve general cognitive processes
in a variety of ways (Tomporowski, 2003; Tomporowski
et al., 2008; Verburgh et al., 2014). Specifically, physical
activity has been linked to improvements in executive func-
tion skills (Chang et al., 2012), as well as enhanced per-
formance during memory tasks that require individuals to
encode and consolidate newly acquired information (Roig
et al., 2013, 2016).
Findings linking physical activity with enhanced cog-
nitive performance have come from studies with young
children (Álvarez-Bueno et al., 2017; Hillman et al., 2011;
Singh et al., 2019), adolescents (Mavilidi et al., 2018; Zervas
et al., 1991), and adults (Stroth et al., 2010) and have been
extended all the way to older adulthood (Bherer et al., 2013;
Paillard, 2015). Additionally, studies have shown improved
cognitive performance when participants engaged in exercise
during the learning phase (Mavilidi et al., 2016), as well as
when the physical activity was completed before or after the
memory encoding task (Coles & Tomporowski, 2008; Frith
et al., 2017; Hotting et al., 2016; Labban & Etnier, 2011;
Loprinzi et al., 2019; Sng et al., 2018). Together, these find-
ings suggest that the effect of exercise on cognition is robust
and persists across the life span.
A widely accepted account is that the cognitive per-
formance that is captured through behavioral responses
(during memory, inhibition, decision-making, and other cog-
nitive tasks) is mediated by changes at the neural level that
result from engaging in physical activity. In fact, there are
many changes that occur in the brain during exercise. Using
animal models, Vaynman et al. (2003) found that physical
exercise promotes (a) the development of new blood vessels,
(b) the formation of new synapses between neurons, and
(c) the formation of new neurons in the gyrus dentatus and
hippocampus (two structures that are largely dedicated to
memory and learning). Other studies (a combination of an-
imal models and work with human adults) indicate that
physiological changes from exercise include greater blood
flow in the brain (leading to changes in the release of neuro-
transmitters), changes in arousal levels, and changes in
the structure of the central nervous system (Cotman &
Berchtold, 2002; Gligoroska & Manchevska, 2012; Szuhany
et al., 2015). The increase in blood flow has been linked to
greater supply of “nutrients.” One of the most crucial com-
ponents correlated to learning after exercise is brain-derived
neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which is a type of molecule
used for learning and memory (Gligoroska & Manchevska,
2012; Huang et al., 2014). Exercise increases BDNF pro-
duction in the brain, specifically in the hippocampus, which
facilitates learning (Vaynman et al., 2003). In other words,
engaging in physical activity promotes neurological and
physiological arousal and supports optimal performance
during tasks that are cognitively demanding (Audiffren
et al., 2008; McMorris & Graydon, 2000).
Variations Across Different Types of Exercise
Previous work has also explored the characteristics
of various types of physical activity and whether they may
be linked to different effects when it comes to cognitive
performance. There are two types of exercise: aerobic and
anaerobic. Aerobic exercise is defined as cardiorespiratory
repetitive physical activity that increases the heart rate by
using oxygen (Hasan et al., 2016). This type of exercise can
be done for a long time and is used to improve overall car-
diovascular health (e.g., swimming, walking, bicycling). An-
aerobic exercise, on the other hand, is defined as vigorous
physical activity that occurs in short bursts and is often fast.
As a result, this type of exercise can be done without relying
on oxygen as its energy source (Patel et al., 2017) and re-
quires rest periods due to the high intensity (e.g., weight lift-
ing, calisthenics, sprinting, CrossFit).
Correlational studies and experimental randomized
controlled trials with both children and adults suggest that
aerobic activity is linked to improvements in attention,
problem-solving, and executive function (Fedewa & Ahn,
2011; Hillman et al., 2009; Loprinzi et al., 2018; Tomporowski,
2003). For example, in preadolescent children, a single bout
of moderate aerobic exercise (i.e., walking on the treadmill
for 20 min) led to (a) an increase in neural responses that
have been linked to enhanced allocation of attentional re-
sources, (b) improved scores on academic achievement mea-
sures, and (c) higher response accuracy during an executive
function (flanker) task relative to when no exercise was per-
formed (Hillman et al., 2009). Additionally, a meta-analysis
by Fedewa and Ahn (2011) found that aerobic exercise
interventions resulted in significant improvements in total
academic achievement in school-aged children (e.g., grade
point average, IQ, math achievement, reading achieve-
ment, science achievement, and English/language art
achievement).
Furthermore, Davranche and Audiffren (2004) ex-
amined the impact of exercise on reaction time and accu-
racy measures. Experienced athletes between the ages of 20
and 25 years were asked to perform a choice reaction time
task where they operated two levers with their hands and
had to press them as quickly and accurately as possible in
response to a visual stimulus that indicated which lever to
move (e.g., flexing or stretching of the right or left lever).
The task was completed (a) at rest, (b) while cycling at 20%
of their maximal aerobic capacity, and (c) while cycling at
50% of their maximal aerobic capacity. The results indicated
that the moderate-intensity exercise (i.e., the 50% condition)
improved cognitive performance the most, with the fastest
reaction times. However, there was no significant difference
in performance during the low-intensity exercise (i.e., the
20% condition) and the rest measure. These results support
the relation between exercise and improved cognitive per-
formance but also suggest that exercise intensity might be
a contributing factor in this relation.
Pruitt & Morini: Exercise and Word Learning 1713
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
Studies that examine the role of anaerobic exercise
on cognitive abilities tell a story that is less clear. While
some have shown that high-intensity anaerobic exercise
may lead to greater cognitive benefits than aerobic exercise
in young adults (Ferris et al., 2007), several studies (with
both children and adults) that used anaerobic exercise as
part of an intervention did not find significant cognitive
benefits associated with it (Chang et al., 2012; Lambourne
& Tomporowski, 2010). Wilke et al. (2019) argue that, while
resistance training (i.e., anaerobic exercise) may be associ-
ated with some improvements in cognitive function, this
type of exercise does not appear to result in as much cog-
nitive benefits as engaging in aerobic exercise. A meta-
analysis conducted by Chang et al. (2012) indicated that
engaging in anaerobic exercise might actually result in nega-
tive effects during cognitive tasks. Additionally, Lambourne
and Tomporowski (2010) stated that performance during
information-processing tasks (e.g., simple-choice tasks) im-
proved with aerobic exercise but was negatively impacted
with anaerobic exercise; this was true for studies with chil-
dren and adults. There is evidence indicating that BDNF
production occurs differently, depending on the type of physi-
cal activity. Specifically, greater increases in BDNF levels
have been associated with aerobic exercise, whereas ana-
erobic physical activity does not appear to be as effective
at increasing the production of this molecule (Szuhany et al.,
2015).
To summarize, this physiological model suggests that
engaging in certain types of physical activity (aerobic exer-
cise in particular) can lead to an increase in BDNF, which,
in turn, results in improved cognitive functioning and learn-
ing. One question that needs to be further explored, how-
ever, is whether this “improved learning” extends to the
language domain, specifically to the acquisition of vocabu-
lary in young children.
Relation Between Broad Cognitive Skills
and Vocabulary Learning
A core area of research in language science has been
to understand how words are learned and whether this com-
plex process is accomplished via specialized mechanisms
(within the language domain) or through more general de-
velopmental mechanisms that are shared across domains.
Most of the work on this topic has come from studies with
young children and has attempted to understand not only
how words are learned but also what it actually means to
acquire new vocabulary items (Samuelson & McMurray,
2017).
Theoretical insights from the past 40 years have in-
creasingly supported the notion that simple, domain-general
cognitive skills come together to support word learning
(Aslin, 2017; McMurray et al., 2012). These skills include
(a) the ability to establish connections between specific
sound patterns (which make up the word) and a concrete
referent (the meaning) as well as (b) the ability to acquire
word–referent relations that are more symbolic and that
lead to the understanding that a label stands for a particular
1714 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research • Vol. 64 • 1712–1725 • May 2021
concept and can be used (with some flexibility) to refer to
that concept in different contexts (Stager & Werker, 1997;
Werker et al., 1998, 2002). Additionally, word learning is
believed to take place in steps: first creating the initial word–
object connection (through a process called fast mapping)
and then solidifying the information learned so that it can
be retrieved later on (Samuelson & McMurray, 2017). Fast
mapping has been defined as the ability to acquire some
notion of a word’s meaning, given brief exposure, and is a
necessary step for word learning to take place (Heibeck &
Markman, 1987). Moreover, it relies on specific cognitive
abilities, such as working memory to encode new informa-
tion (Gray, 2006; Jackson et al., 2016).
In real-world situations, children regularly encounter
many familiar and unfamiliar words that they might or might
not know the meaning of (a concept that has been referred
to as referential ambiguity; Samuelson & McMurray, 2017).
This means that, in order to learn words, children must
“reject” the objects that are familiar (already-learned items)
and focus their attention on the novel word–object pairings.
Furthermore, these associations must be generated and
stored relatively fast in order for vocabulary growth to
occur at the speed that it does (i.e., children’s vocabulary
increases rapidly, and it is not the case that children spend
months or even weeks learning a single word). Previous
work has suggested that children develop word learning heu-
ristics to limit the number of plausible referents that can be
assigned to a novel word and that the process of rejecting
competitors and identifying items to be learned relies heavily
on cognitive processes (Horst et al., 2010).
Taken together, there appears to be a clear connec-
tion between broad cognitive skills and the ability to learn
new vocabulary items. Critically, under this model, enhanc-
ing cognitive performance during learning tasks (i.e., boosting
working memory and attention) may then lead to improve-
ments in word learning.
Exercise and Vocabulary Learning
Learning new words has many benefits in everyday
life, especially for young children, which is why identifying
ways in which to enhance vocabulary learning is of great
importance. As discussed earlier, exercise leads to changes
at the neural level and improvements in the cognitive
domain—specifically linked to enhanced learning. One pos-
sibility is that exercise also contributes to learning during
language tasks more specifically.
Previous research has primarily examined this topic
with adults, and much of it has relied on tasks where par-
ticipants were taught novel words in a foreign language
(e.g., native speakers of German were taught translation
equivalents in French). Schmidt-Kassow et al. (2010) found
that bicycling for 30 min while encoding the novel word
pairs (e.g., a novel word in French paired with its correspond-
ing familiar meaning in German) was associated with better
learning of the words compared to a baseline (no exercise)
condition. In this case, “learning” was evaluated through a
vocabulary test in which participants were provided with
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
the French words they were trained on and were asked to
provide the German translation. Similar findings have been
reported in a study where Polish–German word pairs were
trained (Schmidt-Kassow et al., 2013), as well as in a study
with Chinese–English second-language learners who were
trained on picture–name pairs in English (Liu et al., 2017).
In the latter study, instead of providing pairs of words, par-
ticipants were shown a picture and taught a word that cor-
responded to that picture. Similarly though, the ability to
recall the words that corresponded to the pictures was better
when the encoding of the words took place while bicycling
compared to a no-exercise condition.
Other studies with adults have explored whether (a) the
type of exercise (aerobic, anaerobic, none) or (b) the timing
of the exercise (e.g., before or after exposure to new words)
plays a role in vocabulary learning. For example, Salis
(2013) found that engaging in vigorous physical activity
(i.e., anaerobic exercise) before and after word training
(using flash cards that contained a word on one side and
the definition on the other) resulted in improved word re-
call. Schmidt-Kassow et al. (2014), on the other hand, mea-
sured BDNF levels during learning of Polish–German word
pairs while engaging in low-intensity exercise (i.e., aerobic)
and during a rest condition. Their results indicated that light
exercise during the training of the word pairs was more
beneficial for word recall than training during rest. Lastly,
Winter et al. (2007) examined the relation between exercise,
cognitive abilities, and associative word learning. Partici-
pants saw a picture of an object and heard a corresponding
pseudoword. They were later presented with word–object
pairings (some correct and some incorrect) and were asked
to judge whether or not the pairing was accurate. Training
was completed in three different conditions: (a) rest, (b) high-
impact anaerobic sprints, and (c) low-impact aerobic running.
After the high-impact anaerobic sprints, vocabulary was
learned 20% faster compared to the other two conditions;
this was based on the increase of correct responses from
the earlier to the later blocks of the experiment (i.e., the
number of blocks required for participants to acquire the
word–object pairing).
Taken together, the previous literature with adults
supports the idea that physical activity can facilitate learning
of vocabulary items. However, this work is not very consis-
tent with regard to whether aerobic or anaerobic exercise
leads to better word learning. Furthermore, the fact that this
area has primarily been explored with adult participants
limits our ability to determine whether or not similar effects
would be present in young children.
To our knowledge, only three studies have previously
explored the role of exercise on word learning in children.
Etnier et al. (2014) gave sixth graders an auditory verbal
learning task, during which participants heard lists of words
that were read to them. After listening to the lists, children
were asked to write down as many words from the list as
they could remember. Participants were randomly assigned
either to an exercise condition (which involved engaging in
aerobic exercise prior to completing the word learning task)
or to a no-treatment control condition (where no exercise
was carried out prior to being asked to memorize the words).
Data from this work indicated that learning of the words
was significantly better for children in the exercise condition,
compared to the control group. Nevertheless, this study
really provides information about the role of exercise on
memory performance, but not children’s ability to establish
novel word–object relations. In other words, during this
task, children had to retain a list of words, but they were
not tested on whether they could encode and recall the
meaning of those words.
In another study by Toumpaniari et al. (2015), 4-year-
old native speakers of Greek were taught novel words of
animals in English using flash cards. Training was conducted
using three experimental conditions: (a) physical activity
(acting out the movements of the animals and moving around
the room) plus gesturing, (b) just gesturing (with no move-
ment around the room), and (c) no movement at all. When
participants were asked to produce the English words that
were trained, accuracy was highest for the “physical activity
plus gesturing” condition. However, this study involved a
long training period (4 weeks) and did not evaluate word
learning in the children’s native language. Lastly, a more
recent study examined the ability of participants of differ-
ent ages (including a group of 12-year-olds) to learn pseudo-
words that corresponded to a German word (Amico &
Schaefer, 2020). Participants saw one word pair at a time
on a screen while standing still. The word pair then disap-
peared, and this was immediately followed by a period of
7 s in which participants either engaged in exercise (there
was a “running” group and a “running plus dribbling a
basketball” group) or did not (“standing” group). This pro-
cedure was repeated for each of the word pairs until all had
been seen. Children could recall more words when they
were trained in the running condition compared to the stand-
ing condition. Results were mixed when comparing accuracy
to the running and dribbling condition, and given that the
physical activity only took place for an extremely short time,
it is unclear whether aerobic or anaerobic systems were en-
gaged. While there is limited evidence linking physical activity
to improvements in word learning in children, additional re-
search is needed to (a) confirm prior findings and (b) extend
this work to examine whether different types of exercise might
lead to better word learning outcomes in this population.
Experiment 1
As a first step, we examined whether aerobic exercise
(swimming in this case) can facilitate word learning in
school-aged children. To evaluate this, we used a within-
subject design in which participants were asked to com-
plete a novel word learning task in two different conditions:
(a) an exercise condition, in which participants swam for
a predetermined time in between receiving training of the
novel words and being tested on their ability to recognize
the objects that corresponded to those words, and (b) a rest
condition, in which children completed a coloring sheet in
between training and testing of the words but did not engage
Pruitt & Morini: Exercise and Word Learning 1715
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
in any physical activity. The ability to correctly identify the
objects corresponding to the novel words across conditions
was evaluated. We also included a fast mapping premea-
sure to ensure that participants could successfully establish
word–object relations using the particular paradigm that we
implemented for the experimental conditions. Additional in-
formation on these various measures is provided in the sec-
tions that follow.
Method
Participants
A total of 24 participants between the ages of 6 and
12 years completed the study. Detailed descriptive informa-
tion is presented in Table 1. Participants were raised in
monolingual English-speaking homes and, based on paren-
tal report, had not been diagnosed with any disabilities.
Three of the participants had received speech-language ther-
apy when they were younger; however, none of the children
were currently receiving services. Participants were recruited
from various swim teams within the state of Delaware. As
part of the inclusionary criteria, participants had to be able
to swim for three consecutive minutes unassisted. All but three
participants indicated that they also participated in another
sport in addition to swimming, including ice hockey, gymnas-
tics, soccer, karate, motocross, flag football, running, base-
ball, basketball, and golf.
Procedure
All procedures were approved by the institutional re-
view board at the University of Delaware. Before any test-
ing took place, consent forms and questionnaires were filled
out by caregivers, and assent was provided by the partici-
pants. Children completed two testing sessions in their every-
day exercise setting (i.e., the pool they regularly attended).
Testing sessions were completed 1–3 days apart, depending
on the participant’s attendance.
During the first testing session, participants completed
a fast mapping measure, to identify if they could connect
novel words to novel objects within the particular setting
and paradigm that were implemented (i.e., to ensure that
children could complete the task). To accomplish this, a re-
searcher taught participants five nonwords corresponding
to five novel objects. Participants were shown a picture of
the novel object on a laminated sheet (one at a time) while
simultaneously hearing the word being produced by the re-
searcher. The name of each object was repeated 3 times
Table 1. Descriptive information of participants in Experiments 1 and 2.
Variable
Sample size, N
Gender (female), n
Age (years), M (SD)
Experience in the sport (years), M (SD)
Primary caregivers’ education (years), M (SD)
1716 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research • Vol. 64 • 1712–1725 • May 2021
embedded in the same carrier phrase (e.g., “This is a toopah!
This is a toopah! This is a toopah!”). See Supplemental Ma-
terial S1 for the list of nonword stimuli. The researcher re-
peated the training for each object two more times, for a
total of 3 times (i.e., nine repetitions per word–object pair).
Participants were simply asked to listen attentively. Imme-
diately after the training phase (without any delay), partici-
pants were tested on their ability to recognize these word–
object relations. To do this, the researcher produced the
trained words (one by one) and asked participants to point
to the correct object on a single sheet containing a five-object
lineup (see Figure 1). A total of five test trials (one per ob-
ject) were included. To ensure reliability, two researchers
participated in live coding and scored the number of correct
items identified. Comparisons of scores across coders indi-
cated that there was 100% agreement between coders.
On the second testing session, participants completed
two retention measures: one in the rest condition and one
in the exercise condition. The order in which the two condi-
tions were completed was counterbalanced across participants
(i.e., half of the children completed the rest condition first,
whereas the other half completed the exercise condition first).
In between the two measures, there was a 2.5-min delay. This
time period was based on the average time it takes to bring
down the heart rate and “recover” after high-intensity ex-
ercise (Martinmäki & Rusko, 2007; Ohuchi et al., 2000).
In the rest condition, participants were once again
taught the names of five novel objects, which were differ-
ent from the ones presented during Day 1. The researcher
taught the names of the objects following the exact same
procedures described for the fast mapping premeasure. Im-
mediately after, participants were given a coloring sheet
with abstract shapes (unrelated to the novel objects from
the task) and had 3 min to color on it. A stopwatch was
used by the experimenter to track time. This coloring activ-
ity was chosen because it requires minimal physical activity
but keeps children engaged. After 3 min of coloring, the
researcher tested the participant using the exact same pro-
cedure used for test trials in the fast mapping premeasure.
In the exercise condition, the procedure was identical
to the one described above. The only difference was that,
instead of coloring for 3 min, participants were asked to
engage in aerobic exercise (i.e., swimming) for the same
amount of time. The researcher instructed participants
to pick a stroke of choice, which mainly consisted of free-
style, breaststroke, or backstroke, and swim back and forth,
from one end of the pool to the other at a constant pace
(which would not lead to them being out of breath), until
Experiment 1 Experiment 2
24 24
10 8
8.96 (1.83) 9.54 (1.77)
4.13 (2.08) 3.26 (1.58)
16.33 (1.93) 16.67 (1.52)
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
Figure 1. Example of an object lineup.
told to stop. As with the rest condition, the researcher used
a stopwatch to track the time and told the participants to
stop at the 3-min mark. Immediately after, participants were
tested on their recognition of the trained words in the same
manner as described earlier for the other measures. Object
lineup sheets were put in a sheet protector to make it possi-
ble to test the children poolside.
During all testing trials, the experimenter provided
verbal feedback after the participant gave a response. The
feedback consisted of positive phrases such as “Good job!”
and “Nice work!” which were produced regardless of the
correctness of the response. In other words, the goal was
not to provide information about whether or not the child
was completing the task correctly but, rather, to encourage
participants to continue to complete the task. No feedback
was provided during the training phase.
Stimuli
A total of 15 nonwords were generated for the pur-
pose of this study. All nonwords were two syllables long
and followed English phonotactic rules (e.g., toopah, gachoo).
Words were produced live by the experimenter who was a
female native speaker of American English. In addition to
the words, we selected three sets of five novel objects. These
objects were chosen to ensure that children participating in
this study would not have a preexisting label for the objects.
All objects within a set were of similar sizes and made from
a similar material (e.g., all made of plastic). The same five
colors were represented in each set (one color per object).
Pictures of all objects were presented in a white background.
Each object lineup consisted of five pictures. Each
participant saw a total of three object lineups (one for the
fast mapping premeasure, one for the rest experimental con-
dition, and one for the exercise experimental condition).
The location in which the individual objects appeared in
the lineup, the nonword label that was assigned to each ob-
ject, and which object set was matched with which condi-
tions were all counterbalanced across participants.
Data Analysis
Pointing responses provided by the participants dur-
ing test trials were analyzed for accuracy, defined as the
proportion of correct words identified across all test trials
of the same condition. Accuracy scores were then used to
(a) evaluate participants’ performance during the fast map-
ping measure (i.e., to make sure children could establish
initial word–object associations within this task) and (b) com-
pare their ability to acquire the word–object relations across
the rest and exercise retention conditions.
Results and Discussion
First, we examined children’s pointing responses dur-
ing the “fast mapping” phase to obtain a measure of how
accurately children could make associations between unfa-
miliar objects and novel words using our paradigm. As a
reminder, in this measure, there was no delay between train-
ing and test trials, and children were simply asked to iden-
tify the objects that they had been trained on immediately
after hearing the labels. The average proportion of correct
words identified for this measure was 0.73 (SD = 0.25). This
meant that, while children did not correctly connect names
to objects in every single trial, their overall performance was
still very good. A one-tailed single-sample t test indicated
that this accuracy score was reliably above chance, t(23) =
10.63, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 2.17.
Next, we examined children’s pointing responses during
the two experimental conditions. As shown in Figure 2, accu-
racy was higher for the exercise condition (M = 0.74, SD =
0.24) than for the rest condition (M = 0.61, SD = 0.34). Both
of these scores were reliably above chance: t(23) = 11.48,
p < .001, Cohen’s d = 2.34, and t(23) = 6.24, p < .001,
Cohen’s d = 1.27, respectively. Additionally, a two-tailed
paired-samples t test was used to compare mean differences
in accuracy scores across the two conditions and revealed a
significant difference, t(23) = 2.12, p = .04, Cohen’s d = 0.43.
Taken together, these findings suggest that children’s ability
to acquire novel words improved by 13% when participants
engaged in aerobic exercise between training and testing,
compared to the rest condition.
Given that a wide age range was included in this study,
we also wanted to test whether the age of the participant was
related to performance on the task. Our data indicated
that there was no significant relation between the age of
the participant and the average proportion of correct words
identified during the rest condition (r = .21, p = .32) or the
exercise condition (r = .01, p = .95).
The goal of this experiment was to examine whether
aerobic exercise can lead to improved word learning in
school-aged children. Our data suggest that incorporating
this type of exercise into a vocabulary training protocol
can boost learning of novel words. Specifically, we found
that introducing a brief period of aerobic physical activity
(immediately after training children on the word–object
relations) led to a significant increase in accuracy when
children were later asked to identify the trained words.
Pruitt & Morini: Exercise and Word Learning 1717
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination

Figure 2. Proportion of words correctly identified across the two retention conditions during Experiment 1. The darker
lines indicate that there were multiple data points that overlapped.

As a comparison, in the rest condition (which included
the same delay between training and testing), children’s
accuracy during the task was above chance but still sig-
nificantly lower compared to the condition that involved
swimming. These results align with previous findings ob-
tained in studies with adults (Schmidt-Kassow et al., 2010,
2013) and support the idea that the previously reported ben-
efits of aerobic exercise on word learning extend down to
children.
It is also worth noting that the pattern of performance
observed in this experiment supports the model of word
learning discussed in the introduction. Specifically, the fast
mapping measure would be the easiest, since there was no
delay and children were simply required to create an initial
word–object relation and recall it immediately after it was
trained. The exercise and rest conditions would be harder
since there was a delay between training and testing. How-
ever, in the case of the exercise condition, swimming likely
enhanced cognitive skills during the learning process (i.e.,
improving working memory and attention). This led to per-
formance being boosted to result in similar accuracy to the
one observed in the easier (fast mapping) measure.
In this study, swimming was used as the form of aer-
obic exercise because testing participants in swim schools
provided a familiar environment that was also convenient
for children and their families. There are underlying changes
that take place at the neural level during different kinds of
aerobic physical activity (Vaynman et al., 2003), which are
thought to contribute to improved performance in cognitive
and linguistic tasks. With this in mind, it is likely that the
benefits observed during our study (with swimming) would
extend to other forms of aerobic exercise (e.g., walking). This
is important, because walking down a hallway or around a
playground is something that could be easily implemented
during vocabulary learning in schools and clinics. Further-
more, in this study, we found benefits that were associated
with a very brief period of physical activity (3 min), which
also adds to the feasibility of adding an exercise component
during vocabulary training without major disruptions to
lesson plans or clinic procedures.
While findings from this first experiment are encour-
aging, it is important to understand whether or not differ-
ent types of exercise (i.e., aerobic vs. anaerobic) might lead
to similar benefits in children’s vocabulary learning. Previous

1718 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research • Vol. 64 • 1712–1725 • May 2021
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
findings with adults indicate that there is conflicting evi-
dence regarding the role that anaerobic exercise might play
on performance during language tasks. To our knowledge,
there are no published studies with children that evaluate
how more vigorous physical activity (which is centered on
strengthening or resistance) might contribute to performance
on language measures.
Experiment 2
As a next step, we examined whether anaerobic physi-
cal activity (CrossFit exercises in this case) can also boost
word learning in school-aged children. CrossFit combines
aspects from gymnastics, weight lifting, bodyweight training
(such as squats and pull-ups), and endurance training (such
as jumping and climbing ropes). CrossFit programs for
children are popular both as a stand-alone activity and in
combination with other sports to help with physical strength-
ening. We used a within-subject design identical to the one
described in Experiment 1. The only difference was that, in
the exercise condition, instead of swimming, participants
engaged in an anaerobic physical strengthening workout. The
ability to correctly identify the objects corresponding to the
novel words across the exercise and rest conditions was once
again evaluated. As with the first experiment, we included a
fast mapping premeasure to ensure that participants could
successfully establish word–object relations using our partic-
ular paradigm.
Method
Participants
A new group of 24 children between the ages of 6 and
12 years was included in the study. Detailed descriptive in-
formation for this group is also included in Table 1. There
were no significant differences in age, t(46) = 1.12, p = .27,
Cohen’s d = 0.16, or primary caregivers’ education, t(46) =
0.67, p = .51, Cohen’s d = 0.10, between participants in Ex-
periments 1 and 2. Only the amount of experience practicing
the sport was marginally different between the two groups,
t(46) = 1.94, p = .06, Cohen’s d = 0.28. Additionally, a
chi-square test was performed to examine the relation be-
tween gender and group (Experiment 1 vs. Experiment 2).
This test indicated that there was no significant association
between the two variables, χ2(1, N = 48) = 0.36, p = .77.
According to parental report, participants in this second
experiment were also being raised in monolingual English-
speaking homes and had not been diagnosed with any dis-
abilities. Five of the participants had received speech-language
therapy when they were younger; however, none of the children
were currently receiving services. As part of the inclusionary
criteria, children had to have participated in CrossFit activ-
ities and be able to exercise for three consecutive minutes.
All but four participants indicated that they practiced another
sport, including ice hockey, gymnastics, soccer, karate, moto-
cross, flag football, running, baseball, basketball, and golf.
Procedure
All procedures were approved by the institutional re-
view board at the University of Delaware. As in the previous
experiment, children completed two testing sessions in an en-
vironment that was familiar to them and where they usually
exercised (i.e., the gym they were attending or their home).
The procedure was identical to the one implemented in Ex-
periment 1. The only difference was the type of physical ac-
tivity the children completed during the exercise condition.
Here, the experimenter guided participants through a short
workout that included completing as many rounds of 10 push
presses followed by 10 burpees until told to stop (as fast as
possible). To relieve the cognitive load for the participants,
the experimenter counted the repetitions aloud. The experi-
menter used a stopwatch to track time and told participants
when the period of exercise was over. After 3 min of Cross-
Fit activity, the researcher tested recognition of the trained
words in the same manner that was described in the first ex-
periment. To ensure reliability, two researchers participated
in live coding and scored the number of correct items identi-
fied. Comparisons of scores across coders once again indi-
cated that there was 100% agreement between coders.
Stimuli and Data Analysis
All stimuli and data analysis procedures were identi-
cal to the ones described in Experiment 1.
Results and Discussion
We first examined children’s pointing responses dur-
ing the “fast mapping” phase, where participants were sim-
ply asked to identify the objects that they had been trained
on immediately after being familiarized with the labels. The
average proportion of correct words identified for this mea-
sure was 0.80 (SD = 0.25). A one-tailed single-sample t test
indicated that this accuracy score was reliably above chance,
t(23) = 8.01, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 1.64, which meant that
children’s overall ability to learn the words and their mean-
ings was good.
Next, we examined children’s pointing responses dur-
ing the two experimental conditions. As shown in Figure 3,
accuracy was comparable for the exercise (M = 0.67, SD =
0.29) and rest (M = 0.68, SD = 0.30) conditions. In fact, a
two-tailed paired-samples t test indicated that the mean dif-
ferences in accuracy scores across the two conditions were
not significant, t(23) = 0.24, p = .81, Cohen’s d = 0.05. Per-
formance on both the exercise and rest conditions was reli-
ably above chance: t(23) = 8.22, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 1.68,
and t(23) = 8.17, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 1.68, respectively.
Taken together, these findings suggest that, while children’s
ability to acquire novel words was not negatively affected
by anaerobic exercise (i.e., they were still able to acquire
word–object relations), this type of exercise did not lead
to an improvement in performance (i.e., accuracy was the
same when participants engaged in anaerobic exercise
Pruitt & Morini: Exercise and Word Learning 1719
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination

Figure 3. Proportion of words correctly identified across the two retention conditions during Experiment 2. The darker
lines indicate that there were multiple data points that overlapped.

between training and testing and when they completed
the task in the rest condition).
As in the first experiment, we also tested whether there
was a relation between age and performance on the task.
Once again, we found no significant relation between the
age of the participant and the average proportion of correct
words identified during the rest condition (r = .30, p = .15)
or the exercise condition (r = .27, p = .21).
The goal of Experiment 2 was to examine whether
anaerobic exercise might lead to benefits during word learn-
ing similar to the ones identified with aerobic exercise (in
Experiment 1). Data from this second experiment suggest
that this is not the case and that all forms of exercise might
not facilitate word learning in children. In fact, we do not
see the enhanced cognitive skills during learning that were
documented in the swimming condition of Experiment 1.
Here, accuracy is high for the easiest (fast mapping) mea-
sure and equally low in the two experimental conditions.
These findings are consistent with prior research with adults,
which suggests that (a) there is a greater increase in BDNF
levels with aerobic compared to anaerobic exercise (Szuhany
et al., 2015) and (b) the production of BDNF after ana-
erobic exercise is not enough to lead to improvements in
“learning.” Additionally, our findings are in conflict with
previous studies, which claim that anaerobic exercise may actu-
ally lead to negative effects (Chang et al., 2012; Lambourne
& Tomporowski, 2010). In our study, the anaerobic exercise
condition did not lead to a significant difference in perfor-
mance compared to the resting condition, which suggests
that while this type of physical activity did not improve
word learning in children, it also did not hinder it.
General Discussion
This work serves as a critical first step in evaluating
the relation between physical activity and performance on
language-related tasks. Specifically, this work examined
whether aerobic (Experiment 1) and anaerobic (Experi-
ment 2) exercise might facilitate word learning in school-
aged children. Previous work on this topic has primarily been
conducted with adults (Liu et al., 2017; Schmidt-Kassow

1720 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research • Vol. 64 • 1712–1725 • May 2021
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
et al., 2013, 2014; Winter et al., 2007). The present data ex-
pand this work to a pediatric population and suggest that,
while certain types of physical activity might help boost
children’s ability to establish word–object relations, not all
types of exercise lead to the same advantage.
Studies with adults have provided mixed results, es-
pecially when it comes to the role of anaerobic physical ac-
tivity. There are data that link both aerobic (Schmidt-
Kassow et al., 2014) and anaerobic (Salis, 2013) exercise
to improved encoding and learning of words as well as find-
ings that suggest that aerobic, but not anaerobic, physical
activity might lead to learning advantages (Chang et al.,
2012). Prior to our work, it was unclear whether a rela-
tion between exercise and vocabulary learning could also
be observed with children and whether the type of exercise
might lead to different effects in this younger population.
This work suggests that, while anaerobic exercise did
not facilitate or harm word learning, incorporating aerobic
exercise during the word learning task did result in better
vocabulary acquisition. Specifically, participants in Experi-
ment 1 were significantly better at recognizing words that
were trained in the condition that included a brief period
of aerobic exercise (swimming), compared to the rest con-
dition. On the other hand, children in Experiment 2 identi-
fied approximately the same number of words when trained
in the anaerobic exercise (CrossFit workout) and rest condi-
tions. Taken together, findings from these two experiments
provide important insight into the role of physical activity
on word learning skills in children. They suggest that incor-
porating short bouts of aerobic exercise (e.g., swimming,
walking, or using a static bicycle) can aid the process by
which children acquire new vocabulary items. This has im-
portant implications for speech-language pathologists,
caregivers, and educators, as it offers a strategy that can
facilitate word learning in school-aged children and poten-
tially help keep children engaged in learning. Additionally,
this work can be expanded to examine different measure-
ments of word learning. Specifically, it could be extended to
study differences in spoken word productions, variations in
the ability to learn word definitions, and word spelling abili-
ties that may be influenced by different types of exercise.
Furthermore, extensions that focus on comparisons across
age groups would also be extremely relevant.
There are, however, limitations associated with this
study that need to be acknowledged and that should be ad-
dressed in future work. Word retention was only tested after
a short amount of time (i.e., 3 min). In reality, incorporating
a longer delay between training and testing (e.g., completing
test trials a day or a week after training) would provide addi-
tional evidence about vocabulary retention. In order to use
newly acquired words in “the real world,” children must re-
member them not just a few minutes after they were taught
but for days after. In the current study, we were concerned
about dropout rates, which motivated our decision to pro-
ceed with the short time frame, as a starting point. Neverthe-
less, future work should focus on implementing longitudinal
studies that provide additional information about the word
learning and retention process and how it relates to the
identified benefits that result from aerobic physical activ-
ity. Related to this point, we also found that the short
delay between training and testing resulted in the task being
too easy for some children in the first experiment (i.e., five
of the 24 participants performed at ceiling; see Figure 2).
Increasing the delay could also help address this.
Second, in this study, we only taught children five
word–object pairings at a time. Initially, this may not seem
like many words, especially when working with school-aged
children. However, targeting small sets of words (e.g., 10–
12 words per week) is a common practice in clinical settings
and as part of school curricula (Biemiller, 2004; Biemiller
& Boote, 2006). Nevertheless, there is room for future work
to examine whether the number of vocabulary items that
are trained during a single session might interact with the
observed benefits of aerobic exercise. In other words, it is
possible that, in the aerobic exercise condition, children might
be able to correctly acquire (and later identify) a greater num-
ber of word–object pairs, compared to the resting condition.
Another important element to consider is whether
the 3-min period of exercise (a relatively short duration)
was sufficient to generate enough physiological differences
between the two types of exercise that were implemented.
Although the participants’ heart rates were not tracked, the
researchers (a) gave different instructions to participants
across the two experiments and (b) monitored the pacing
of each participant. During the aerobic exercise measure
(Experiment 1), children were asked to swim at a “constant
pace that would not lead to them being out of breath.” Dur-
ing the anaerobic exercise measure (Experiment 2), the par-
ticipants were asked to go as fast as possible. After 3 min of
anaerobic exercise, the participants’ rate of breathing was
visibly higher (based on notes from informal observations
made by the experimenter), compared to what was observed
with the aerobic group in the first experiment. This sug-
gested that (at least based on breathing patterns) there were
physiological differences between participants in the two
groups. There has not been consistent documentation in-
dicating the exact minimum duration of exercise needed
for BDNF or neurotransmitter levels to increase. In fact,
improved task performance linked to physical activity has
been reported in studies that have used widely varying time
periods of exercise, including durations considerably shorter
than the 3 min implemented in this work (e.g., Amico &
Schaefer, 2020).
One last consideration related to the study design is
the duration of the break that participants took in between
completing the two experimental conditions. One possibil-
ity is that when children completed the exercise condition
first, the 2.5-min break did not provide sufficient time for
exercise-induced arousal to subside; this could have led to
spillover effects that could have influenced performance dur-
ing the rest condition that followed. This time period was
chosen based on research with both adults (Martinmäki &
Rusko, 2007) and children (Ohuchi et al., 2000), which sug-
gests that heart rate recovery consistently happens 1–2 min
after exercise. In this work, the order in which the experi-
mental conditions were completed (i.e., whether the exercise
Pruitt & Morini: Exercise and Word Learning 1721
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
or the rest condition was first) was counterbalanced across
participants within each experiment. This meant that any
spillover effects would have washed out.
There are also limitations associated with the partici-
pants that were included in this work. First, children in the
two experiments were all typically developing (based on
parental report), which makes it difficult to generalize the
results to clinical populations (e.g., children with word
learning difficulties). It is possible that the findings would
vary, depending on a given diagnosis or disorder (and the
characteristics that go along with a particular clinical group).
For example, in children with developmental language dis-
order, there are associated comorbidities (in addition to the
difficulties with vocabulary learning), which include deficits
in attention, motor skills, and social skills (Webster et al.,
2006). There is evidence suggesting that aerobic exercise can
lead to improvements in attention, problem-solving, and
executive function (Fedewa & Ahn, 2011; Hillman et al.,
2011; Tomporowski, 2003), and so, this type of physical
activity could potentially contribute to improvements in both
attention and vocabulary learning in children with develop-
mental language disorder. On the other hand, it is possible
that introducing exercise as part of an intervention with this
population may increase cognitive load and end up being
more distracting, especially if children have motor deficits.
Some work with children who have been diagnosed with
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder suggests that exercise
can lead to a decreased amount of disruptive behaviors and
more sustained attention in this population (Bustamante
et al., 2016; Medina et al., 2010). There have also been stud-
ies showing that exercise may have a positive effect on behav-
ior (e.g., decreased aggression, stereotypy) in individuals
with autism spectrum disorder (Lang et al., 2010; Sowa &
Meulenbroek, 2012). While these lines of research suggest
that physical activity can lead to benefits in some areas for
children with clinical diagnoses, many questions remain spe-
cifically regarding the role of exercise on language outcomes.
Another limitation was the lack of a direct measure
of participants’ language and literacy abilities. While none
of the children who completed the study were currently re-
ceiving speech-language therapy, based on parental report,
eight participants (n = 3 in Experiment 1 and n = 5 in Ex-
periment 2) had received services in the past. Specifically,
therapy had been provided for articulation issues (n = 5), flu-
ency problems (n = 2), and feeding as an infant (n = 1), but
not for language disorders. Nevertheless, there is evidence
suggesting that caregivers sometimes may be unaware
of their child’s language ability (Hendricks et al., 2019;
Wittke & Spaulding, 2018) and that children with an early
history of speech-language therapy are more likely to have
later language and literacy impairments (Adlof & Hogan,
2019). Hence, future work should include direct measures
of children’s language abilities to better understand whether
linguistic skills might interact with the ability to benefit
from physical activity during vocabulary learning.
Additionally, based on parental education, the majority
of participants came from homes of mid-to-high socioeco-
nomic status (SES). There is extensive research suggesting
1722 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research • Vol. 64 • 1712–1725 • May 2021
that there is a vocabulary gap between children from low-
SES households and children from high-SES homes, with
children from high-SES families typically having more ex-
tensive vocabulary skills (Burkam & Lee, 2002; Golinkoff
et al., 2019; Ridge et al., 2015; Rowe & Goldin-Meadow,
2009). Furthermore, children from lower SES families have
greater difficulty relying on known vocabulary to derive
the meanings of unknown words, which suggests that they
are less “effective” at using strategies that can typically help
with vocabulary learning (Maguire et al., 2018). If some-
thing as simple as aerobic exercise could facilitate word
learning in children from low-SES communities, it might
be a key component in closing the language gap. To fur-
ther explore this topic, future research should include a
more diverse sample.
One last point to consider is that children in this work
had varying levels of experience practicing the sports; this
included a range of 6 months to 8 years of swimming for
children in Experiment 1 and 6 months to 7 years of com-
pleting CrossFit-like workouts for children in Experiment 2.
However, we found no indication that there was a rela-
tion between the number of years the participants had been
swimming and their performance during the exercise condi-
tion (r = .08, p = .71). The same was true for the CrossFit
condition in Experiment 2 (r = .21, p = .33). This would
suggest that the pattern of results we observed was not
dependent on the amount of experience the children have
had with the sport and that the word learning benefits as-
sociated with aerobic exercise would be generalizable to
children with various degrees of experience with the type
of physical activity.
In conclusion, findings from the two experiments pre-
sented here indicate that benefits of exercise on language
abilities that have been previously identified with adults also
extend to school-aged children. Critically, only aerobic (but
not anaerobic) exercise improved children’s ability to ac-
quire new word–object relations. This information provides
a potential strategy that parents, teachers, and speech-
language pathologists can incorporate when targeting
word learning to improve vocabulary outcomes.
Acknowledgments
This work was funded by start-up funds from the University
of Delaware. The work in this article was part of a master’s cap-
stone project for the first author. We particularly thank the fami-
lies who participated and who made this work possible. We also
thank the following individuals for helpful discussions regarding
the project and for assistance in testing and coding of participants:
Emily Fritzson, Aurora Reible-Gunter, Katherine Richard, Mackensie
Blair, Ben Cushman, Silpa Annavarapu, Katrina Conner, Mariann
Angela Agapito, Sophia Emery, Brianna Postorino, Sarah Blum,
Aashaka Desai, Kat Filliben, Chaithra Reddy, Sarah Dombroski,
and Lauren Mellor.
References
Adlof, S. M., & Hogan, T. P. (2019). If we don’t look, we won’t see:
Measuring language development to inform literacy instruction.
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(2),
210–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732219839075
Álvarez-Bueno, C., Pesce, C., Cavero-Redondo, I., Sanchez-Lopez, M.,
Garrido-Miguel, M., & Martinez-Vizcaino, V. (2017). Aca-
demic achievement and physical activity: A meta-analysis.
Pediatrics, 140(6), e1498. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-
1498
Amico, G., & Schaefer, S. (2020). Running during encoding im-
proves word learning for children. Frontiers in Psychology, 11,
684. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00684
Aslin, R. N. (2017). Statistical learning: A powerful mechanism
that operates by mere exposure. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:
Cognitive Science, 8(1–2), e1373. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1373
Audiffren, M., Tomporowski, P. D., & Zagrodnik, J. (2008). Acute
aerobic exercise and information processing: Energizing motor
processes during a choice reaction time task. Acta Psychologica,
129(3), 410–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.09.006
Bherer, L., Erickson, K. I., & Liu-Ambrose, T. (2013). A review of
the effects of physical activity and exercise on cognitive and
brain functions in older adults. Journal of Aging Research, 2013,
Article 657508. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/657508
Biemiller, A. (2004). Teaching vocabulary in the primary grades: Vo-
cabulary instruction needed. In J. F. Baumann & E. J. Kame’enui
(Eds.), Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice (2nd ed.,
pp. 28–40). Guilford Press.
Biemiller, A., & Boote, C. (2006). An effective method for building
meaning vocabulary in primary grades. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98(1), 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.44
Burkam, D. T., & Lee, V. E. (2002). Inequality at the starting gate:
Social background differences in achievement as children begin
school. Economic Policy Institute.
Bustamante, E. E., Davis, C. L., Frazier, S. L., Rusch, D., Fogg,
L. F., Atkins, M. S., & Marquez, D. X. (2016). Randomized
controlled trial of exercise for ADHD and disruptive behavior
disorders. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 48(7),
1397–1407. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000891
Chang, Y. K., Labban, J. D., Gapin, J. I., & Etnier, J. L. (2012).
The effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance: A meta-
analysis. Brain Research, 1453, 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
brainres.2012.02.068
Coles, K., & Tomporowski, P. D. (2008). Effects of acute exercise
on executive processing, short-term and long-term memory. Jour-
nal of Sports Sciences, 26(3), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02640410701591417
Cotman, C. W., & Berchtold, N. C. (2002). Exercise: A behavioral
intervention to enhance brain health and plasticity. Trends in
Neurosciences, 25(6), 295–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-
2236(02)02143-4
Davranche, K., & Audiffren, M. (2004). Facilitating effects of exer-
cise on information processing. Journal of Sports Sciences, 22(5),
419–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410410001675289
Duff, F. J., Reen, G., Plunkett, K., & Nation, K. (2015). Do infant
vocabulary skills predict school-age language and literacy out-
comes? The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(8),
848–856. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12378
Etnier, J., Labban, J. D., Piepmeier, A., Davis, M. E., & Henning,
D. A. (2014). Effects of an acute bout of exercise on memory
in 6th grade children. Pediatric Exercise Science, 26(3), 250–258.
https://doi.org/10.1123/pes.2013-0141
Fedewa, A. L., & Ahn, S. (2011). The effects of physical activity
and physical fitness on children’s achievement and cognitive
outcomes: A meta-analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise
and Sport, 82(3), 521–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.
2011.10599785
Ferris, L. T., Williams, J. S., & Shen, C. L. (2007). The effect of
acute exercise on serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels
and cognitive function. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise,
39(4), 728–734. https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0b013e31802f04c7
Frith, E., Sng, E., & Loprinzi, P. D. (2017). Randomized controlled
trial evaluating the temporal effects of high-intensity exercise
on learning, short-term and long-term memory, and prospective
memory. European Journal of Neuroscience, 46(10), 2557–2564.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13719
Gaskell, M. G., & Ellis, A. W. (2009). Word learning and lexical
development across the lifespan. Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1536), 3607–3615.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0213
Gligoroska, J. P., & Manchevska, S. (2012). The effect of physical
activity on cognition—Physiological mechanisms. Materia Socio-
Medica, 24(3), 198–202. https://doi.org/10.5455/msm.2012.24.
198-202
Golinkoff, R. M., Hoff, E., Rowe, M. L., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S.,
& Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2019). Language matters: Denying the ex-
istence of the 30-million-word gap has serious consequences.
Child Development, 90(3), 958–992. https://doi.org/10.1111/
cdev.13128
Gray, S. (2006). The relationship between phonological memory,
receptive vocabulary, and fast mapping in young children with
specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language,
and Hearing Research, 49(5), 955–969. https://doi.org/10.1044/
1092-4388(2006/069)
Hasan, S. M., Rancourt, S. N., Austin, M. W., & Ploughman, M.
(2016). Defining optimal aerobic exercise parameters to affect
complex motor and cognitive outcomes after stroke: A system-
atic review and synthesis. Neural Plasticity, 2016, Article 2961573.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2961573
Heibeck, T. H., & Markman, E. M. (1987). Word learning in chil-
dren: An examination of fast mapping. Child Development,
58(4), 1021–1034. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130543
Hendricks, A. E., Adlof, S. M., Alonzo, C. N., Fox, A. B., & Hogan,
T. P. (2019). Identifying children at risk for developmental lan-
guage disorder using a brief, whole-classroom screen. Journal
of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(4), 896–908.
https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-18-0093
Hillman, C. H., Kamijo, K., & Scudder, M. (2011). A review of
chronic and acute physical activity participation on neuroelec-
tric measures of brain health and cognition during childhood.
Preventive Medicine, 52(Suppl. 1),, S21–S28. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ypmed.2011.01.024
Hillman, C. H., Pontifex, M. B., Raine, L. B., Castelli, D. M., Hall,
E. E., & Kramer, A. F. (2009). The effect of acute treadmill
walking on cognitive control and academic achievement in pre-
adolescent children. Neuroscience, 159(3), 1044–1054. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.01.057
Horst, J. S., Scott, E. J., & Pollard, J. A. (2010). The role of com-
petition in word learning via referent selection. Developmental
Science, 13(5), 706–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.
2009.00926.x
Hotting, K., Schickert, N., Kaiser, J., Roder, B., & Schmidt-Kassow,
M. (2016). The effects of acute physical exercise on memory,
peripheral BDNF, and cortisol in young adults. Neural
Plasticity, 2016, Article 6860573. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/
6860573
Huang, T., Larsen, K. T., Ried-Larsen, M., Moller, N. C., &
Andersen, L. B. (2014). The effects of physical activity and ex-
ercise on brain-derived neurotrophic factor in healthy humans:
A review. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports,
24(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12069
Pruitt & Morini: Exercise and Word Learning 1723
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
Jackson, E., Leitao, S., & Claessen, M. (2016). The relationship
between phonological short-term memory, receptive vocabulary,
and fast mapping in children with specific language impairment.
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders,
51(1), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12185
Labban, J. D., & Etnier, J. L. (2011). Effects of acute exercise on
long-term memory. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
82(4), 712–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2011.10599808
Lambourne, K., & Tomporowski, P. (2010). The effect of exercise-
induced arousal on cognitive task performance: A meta-regression
analysis. Brain Research, 1341, 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
brainres.2010.03.091
Lang, R., Koegel, L. K., Ashbaugh, K., Regester, A., Ence, W., &
Smith, W. (2010). Physical exercise and individuals with autism
spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Research in Autism
Spectrum Disorders, 4(4), 565–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rasd.2010.01.006
Liu, F., Sulpizio, S., Kornpetpanee, S., & Job, R. (2017). It takes
biking to learn: Physical activity improves learning a second
language. PLOS ONE, 12(5), Article e0177624. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0177624
Loprinzi, P. D., Blough, J., Crawford, L., Ryu, S., Zou, L., & Li, H.
(2019). The temporal effects of acute exercise on episodic mem-
ory function: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Brain Sci-
ences, 9(4), Article 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci9040087
Loprinzi, P. D., Frith, E., & Edwards, M. K. (2018). Resistance
exercise and episodic memory function: A systematic review.
Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging, 38(6), 923–929.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12507
Maguire, M. J., Schneider, J. M., Middleton, A. E., Ralph, Y.,
Lopez, M., Ackerman, R. A., & Abel, A. D. (2018). Vocabu-
lary knowledge mediates the link between socioeconomic status
and word learning in grade school. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 166, 679–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.
2017.10.003
Martinmäki, K., & Rusko, H. (2007). Time-frequency analysis of
heart rate variability during immediate recovery from low and
high intensity exercise. European Journal of Applied Physiology,
102(3), 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-007-0594-5
Mavilidi, M. F., Okely, A. D., Chandler, P., & Paas, F. (2016).
Infusing physical activities into the classroom: Effects on pre-
school children’s geography learning. Mind, Brain, and Edu-
cation, 10(4), 256–263. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12131
Mavilidi, M. F., Ruiter, M., Schmidt, M., Okely, A. D., Loyens, S.,
Chandler, P., & Paas, F. (2018). A narrative review of school-
based physical activity for enhancing cognition and learning:
The importance of relevancy and integration. Frontiers in
Psychology, 9, 2079. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02079
McMorris, T., & Graydon, J. (2000). The effect of incremental ex-
ercise on cognitive performance. International Journal of Sport
Psychology, 31(1), 66–81.
McMurray, B., Horst, J. S., & Samuelson, L. K. (2012). Word learn-
ing emerges from the interaction of online referent selection and
slow associative learning. Psychological Review, 119(4), 831–877.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029872.supp
Medina, J. A., Netto, T. L., Muszkat, M., Medina, A. C., Botter, D.,
Orbetelli, R., Scaramuzza, L. F. C., Sinnes, E. G., Vilela, M., &
Miranda, M. C. (2010). Exercise impact on sustained attention
of ADHD children, methylphenidate effects. ADHD Attention
Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders, 2(1), 49–58. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12402-009-0018-y
Miles, C., & Hardman, E. (1998). State-dependent memory pro-
duced by aerobic exercise. Ergonomics, 41(1), 20–28. https://
doi.org/10.1080/001401398187297
1724 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research • Vol. 64 • 1712–1725 • May 2021
Ohuchi, H., Suzuki, H., Yasuda, K., Arakaki, Y., Echigo, S., &
Kamiya, T. (2000). Heart rate recovery after exercise and car-
diac autonomic nervous activity in children. Pediatric Research,
47(3), 329–335. https://doi.org/10.1203/00006450-200003000-00008
Paillard, T. (2015). Preventive effects of regular physical exercise
against cognitive decline and the risk of dementia with age ad-
vancement. Sports Medicine - Open, 1(1), Article 20. https://
doi.org/10.1186/s40798-015-0016-x
Patel, H., Alkhawam, H., Madanieh, R., Shah, N., Kosmas, C. E.,
& Vittorio, T. J. (2017). Aerobic vs anaerobic exercise training
effects on the cardiovascular system. World Journal of Cardiology,
9(2), 134–138. https://doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.134
Ridge, K. E., Weisberg, D. S., Ilgaz, H., Hirsh-Pasek, K. A., &
Golinkoff, R. M. (2015). Supermarket speak: Increasing talk
among low-socioeconomic status families. Mind, Brain, and
Education, 9(3), 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12081
Roig, M., Nordbrandt, S., Geertsen, S. S., & Nielsen, J. B. (2013).
The effects of cardiovascular exercise on human memory: A
review with meta-analysis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews,
37(8), 1645–1666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.06.012
Roig, M., Thomas, R., Mang, C. S., Snow, N. J., Ostadan, F.,
Boyd, L. A., & Lundbye-Jensen, J. (2016). Time-dependent
effects of cardiovascular exercise on memory. Exercise and
Sport Sciences Reviews, 44(2), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1249/
JES.0000000000000078
Rowe, M. L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2009). Differences in early
gesture explain SES disparities in child vocabulary size at school
entry. Science, 323(5916), 951–953. https://doi.org/10.1126/
science.1167025
Salis, A. S. (2013). Proactive and reactive effects of vigorous exer-
cise on learning and vocabulary comprehension. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 116(3), 918–928. https://doi.org/10.2466/29.22.
PMS.116.3.918-928
Samuelson, L. K., & McMurray, B. (2017). What does it take to
learn a word? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science,
8(1–2), e1421. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1421
Schmidt-Kassow, M., Deusser, M., Thiel, C., Otterbein, S., Montag,
C., Reuter, M., Banzer, W., & Kaiser, J. (2013). Physical exer-
cise during encoding improves vocabulary learning in young
female adults: A neuroendocrinological study. PLOS ONE, 8(5),
Article e64172. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064172
Schmidt-Kassow, M., Kulka, A., Gunter, T. C., Rothermich, K., &
Kotz, S. A. (2010). Exercising during learning improves vocabu-
lary acquisition: Behavioral and ERP evidence. Neuroscience
Letters, 482(1), 40–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2010.06.089
Schmidt-Kassow, M., Zink, N., Mock, J., Thiel, C., Vogt, L., Abel,
C., & Kaiser, J. (2014). Treadmill walking during vocabulary
encoding improves verbal long-term memory. Behavioral and
Brain Functions, 10(1), Article 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-
9081-10-24
Singh, A. S., Saliasi, E., van den Berg, V., Uijtdewilligen, L.,
de Groot, R. H. M., Jolles, J., Andersen, L. B., Bailey, R.,
Chang, Y.-K., Diamond, A., Ericsson, I., Etnier, J. L., Fedewa,
A. L., Hillman, C. H., McMorris, T., Pesce, C., Pühse, U.,
Tomporowski, P. D., & Chinapaw, M. J. M. (2019). Effects of
physical activity interventions on cognitive and academic perfor-
mance in children and adolescents: A novel combination of a
systematic review and recommendations from an expert panel.
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53(10), 640–647. https://doi.
org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098136
Sng, E., Frith, E., & Loprinzi, P. D. (2018). Experimental effects
of acute exercise on episodic memory acquisition: Decomposi-
tion of multi-trial gains and losses. Physiology & Behavior, 186,
82–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2018.01.014
 Complimentary Author PDF: Not for Broad Dissemination
Sowa, M., & Meulenbroek, R. (2012). Effects of physical exercise
on autism spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis. Research in
Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rasd.2011.09.001
Stager, C. L., & Werker, J. F. (1997). Infants listen for more
phonetic detail in speech perception than in word-learning
tasks. Nature, 388(6640), 381–382. https://doi.org/10.1038/
41102
Stroth, S., Reinhardt, R. K., Thone, J., Hille, K., Schneider, M.,
Hartel, S., Weidemann, W., Bos, K., & Spitzer, M. (2010). Im-
pact of aerobic exercise training on cognitive functions and af-
fect associated to the COMT polymorphism in young adults.
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 94(3), 364–372. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2010.08.003
Szuhany, K. L., Bugatti, M., & Otto, M. W. (2015). A meta-
analytic review of the effects of exercise on brain-derived neuro-
trophic factor. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 60, 56–64. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.10.003
Tomporowski, P. D. (2003). Effects of acute bouts of exercise on
cognition. Acta Psychologica, 112(3), 297–324. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0001-6918(02)00134-8
Tomporowski, P. D., Davis, C. L., Miller, P. H., & Naglieri, J. A.
(2008). Exercise and children’s intelligence, cognition, and aca-
demic achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), Arti-
cle 111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9057-0
Toumpaniari, K., Loyens, S., Mavilidi, M. F., & Paas, F. (2015).
Preschool children’s foreign language vocabulary learning by
embodying words through physical activity and gesturing.
Educational Psychology Review, 27(3), 445–456. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10648-015-9316-4
Vaynman, S., Ying, Z., & Gomez-Pinilla, F. (2003). Interplay be-
tween brain-derived neurotrophic factor and signal transduc-
tion modulators in the regulation of the effects of exercise on
synaptic-plasticity. Neuroscience, 122(3), 647–657. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2003.08.001
Verburgh, L., Konigs, M., Scherder, E. J., & Oosterlaan, J. (2014).
Physical exercise and executive functions in preadolescent chil-
dren, adolescents and young adults: A meta-analysis. British
Journal of Sports Medicine, 48(12), 973–979. https://doi.org/10.
1136/bjsports-2012-091441
Verhoeven, L., van Leeuwe, J., & Vermeer, A. (2011). Vocabulary
growth and reading development across the elementary school
years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(1), 8–25. https://doi.org/
10.1080/10888438.2011.536125
Webster, R. I., Erdos, C., Evans, K., Majnemer, A., Kehayia, E.,
Thordardottir, E., Evans, A., & Shevell, M. I. (2006). The clini-
cal spectrum of developmental language impairment in school-
aged children: Language, cognitive, and motor findings.
Pediatrics, 118(5), e1541–e1549. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.
2005-2761
Werker, J. F., Cohen, L. B., Lloyd, V. L., Casasola, M., & Stager,
C. L. (1998). Acquisition of word–object associations by
14-month-old infants. Developmental Psychology, 34(6),
1289–1309. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.34.6.1289
Werker, J. F., Fennell, C. T., Corcoran, K. M., & Stager, C. L.
(2002). Infants’ ability to learn phonetically similar words: Effects
of age and vocabulary size. Infancy, 3(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/
10.1207/S15327078IN0301_1
Wilke, J., Giesche, F., Klier, K., Vogt, L., Herrmann, E., & Banzer,
W. (2019). Acute effects of resistance exercise on cognitive func-
tion in healthy adults: A systematic review with multilevel
meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 49(6), 905–916. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s40279-019-01085-x
Winter, B., Breitenstein, C., Mooren, F. C., Voelker, K., Fobker, M.,
Lechtermann, A., Krueger, K., Fromme, A., Korsukewitz, C.,
Floel, A., & Knecht, S. (2007). High impact running improves
learning. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 87(4), 597–609.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2006.11.003
Wittke, K., & Spaulding, T. J. (2018). Which preschool children with
specific language impairment receive language intervention?
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 49(1), 59–71.
https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_LSHSS-17-0024
Zervas, Y., Danis, A., & Klissouras, V. (1991). Influence of physi-
cal exertion on mental performance with reference to training.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72(3), 1215–1221. https://doi.org/
10.2466/pms.1991.72.3c.1215
Pruitt & Morini: Exercise and Word Learning 1725