Does type of active workstation matter? A randomized comparison of cognitive and typing performance between rest, cycling, and treadmill active workstations.

Abstract

Active workstations are associated with improved health outcomes, but differences in cognitive and typing outcomes between the types of active workstations are unclear. We addressed two main questions: (1) Are there differences in cognitive and typing performance between seated and active workstations? (2) Are there differences in cognitive and typing performance between cycling and treadmill workstations, specifically? Participants included 137 healthy young adults (74 female, mean age = 20.8 years) who completed two sessions. At session one (baseline), all participants completed cognitive and typing tests including the Rey-Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test, a typing test, and a flanker task while sitting at rest. At session two, participants were randomized to an active workstation group (treadmill or cycling desk) during which they performed the tests listed above in a randomized fashion, using alternate versions when available. Participants showed significantly better attention and cognitive control scores during the active session as compared to the seated session, but worse verbal memory scores during the active session. Participants were faster and more accurate at typing during the active session relative to the seated session. There were no significant differences between cycling or treadmill workstations on any cognitive or typing outcomes. Improvements during active sessions may be influenced by practice effects, although alternate forms were used when possible. We conclude that active workstations do not seem to largely impact cognitive abilities, with the exception of a slight decrease in verbal memory performance. Findings suggest active workstations, whether walking or cycling, are useful to improve physical activity, particularly when completing tasks that do not require verbal memory recall.