Advances in Physical Education
2012. Vol.2, No.4, 172-178
Published Online November 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ape) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ape.2012.24030
172
The Effect of Different Movement Exercises on Cognitive
and Motor Abilities
Monika Thomas
Institute of Physiology and Anatomy, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Received June 15th, 2012 ; revised July 18th, 2012; accepted July 29th, 2012
The influence of physical activity on motor and cognitive performance has been approved in several
studies. However, it is still unclear which functions are affected, and why. It also remains unknown what
type of physical training is best suitable. The present study focuses on special movement aspects based on
the Brain Gym® program. Four groups of subjects (n = 64) participated in two experiments with pre-post
intervention design. In experiment 1, two groups of subjects were exposed to a sensorimotor adaptation
study design by executing center out pointing movements under distorted visual feedback conditions with
their dominant and non-dominant arm to test for intermanual transfer (IMT) as pre- and posttest. The in-
tervention in both groups consisted of specified movement exercises with the right and left extremities:
participants of Experimental group executed movements crossing the body midline and participants of
Control group movements without crossing the body midline. Results showed a decreased retention of
adaptation but larger IMT for Experimental group during posttest. We conclude that movements crossing
the body midline impede retention but enhance IMT of sensorimotor adaptation. A potential relationship
to an improvement of communication between the cerebral hemispheres evoked by the movement exer-
cises crossing the body midline is rather speculative. In experiment 2, two groups were exposed to the
d2-test measuring concentration and attention and a dice-test testing for visual-spatial abilities as pre- and
posttest. The interventions were similar to experiment 1. Results yielded no differences between groups
such that different effects of both interventions could not have been shown.
Keywords: Motor Learning; Sensorimotor Adaptation; Cognition; Brain Gym®
Introduction
The influence of physical activity on motor and cognitive
performance has been investigated in many studies showing
inconsistent results. Several studies could demonstrate a posi-
tive effect of physical activity on cognitive performance
(Abeele & Bock, 2001; Budde, Voelcker-Rehage, Pietra-
byk-Kendziorra, Ribeiro, & Tidow, 2008; Colcombe & Kramer,
2003; Colcombe, Kramer, Erickson, Scalf, McAuley, Cohen, et
al., 2004; Hillman, Pontifex, Raine, Castelli, Hall, & Kramer,
2009; Planinsec, 2002; Voelcker-Rehage, Godde, & Staudinger,
2011), while others fail to show facilitating effects (Blumenthal,
Emery, Madden, Schniebolk, Walsh-Riddle, George, et al.,
1991; Hill, Storandt, & Malley, 1993). However, despite of this
inconsistency, a meta-analysis of studies considering older
subjects could show that indeed physical activity lead to an
improvement of various cognitive abilities, especially executive
functions (Colcombe & Kramer, 2003). Beneath the influence
on cognitive performance a few studies investigated the influ-
ence of physical activity on motor skill acquisition and found
beneficial effects for different age groups (Hillman, Weiss,
Hagberg, & Hatfield, 2002; Mierau, Schneider, Abel, Askew,
Werner, & Struder, 2009; Richards, 1968). To date, most of the
existing studies focused on the influence of cardiovascular fit-
ness on cognitive or motor performance and learning (Col-
combe, Kramer, Erickson, Scalf, McAuley, Cohen, et al., 2004;
Hillman, Erickson, & Kramer, 2008; Hillman, Pontifex, Raine,
Castelli, Hall, & Kramer, 2009; Hillman, Weiss, Hagberg, &
Hatfield, 2002; Kramer & Erickson, 2007; Voelcker-Rehage,
Godde, & Staudinger, 2011), only a few studies considered the
influence of other activities like motor fitness or motor coordi-
nation (Budde, Voelcker-Rehage, Pietrabyk-Kendziorra, Ribeiro,
& Tidow, 2008; Planinsec, 2002; Voelcker-Rehage, Godde, &
Staudinger, 2011). Voelcker-Rehage and colleagues were able
to show that cognitive functions in old age could be improved
by both, cardiovascular and motor fitness (Voelcker-Rehage,
Godde, & Staudinger, 2010; Voelcker-Rehage, Godde, &
Staudinger, 2011). Additionally, the latter study revealed that
both interventions lead to different changes in brain activity.
Further studies which concentrated on motor coordination fo-
cused on children and young students yielding positive effects
of coordinative abilities and coordination training on different
cognitive abilities such as attention and reading comprehension
skills (Budde, Voelcker-Rehage, Pietrabyk-Kend-ziorra, Ribeiro,
& Tidow, 2008; Planinsec, 2002; Uhrich & Swalm, 2007).
These effects became obvious even for a single training period
of only 10 minutes (Budde, Voelcker-Rehage, Pietrabyk-Kend-
ziorra, Ribeiro, & Tidow, 2008). The influence of coordination
training on motor performance has not been investigated so far.
Summing up, several results suggest that not only cardio-
vascular fitness but also coordinative training showed positive
effects on cognitive functioning in older adults as well as in
children and young students. Furthermore, several motor pro-
grams were developed which are said to support cognitive and
motor performance. One program is called Brain Gym® devel-

M. THOMAS
oped by Paul Dennison in 1981. This program consists of 26
simple movement exercises. They include movements of the
extremities crossing the body midline in different ways. It is
supposed that thereby an improvement of the connectivity be-
tween the right and left cerebral hemisphere can be obtained. In
fact, due to missing evidences this idea is hardly challenged.
Indeed, bimanual movement coordination is associated with
interhemispheric communication (Andres, Mima, Schulman,
Dichgans, Hallett, & Gerloff, 1999; Serrien, 2009; Serrien &
Brown, 2002). However, it is disputable, if moving extremities
across the body midline does evoke different effects than mov-
ing in the respective hemispace of the body.
The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of dif-
ferent movement patterns on motor abilities and cognitive func-
tioning. Therefore, the influence of movement exercises cross-
ing the body midline which are a part of the Brain Gym® pro-
gram was compared to movement exercises not crossing the
body midline. In a first experiment motor abilities were inves-
tigated by a sensorimotor adaptation and intermanual transfer
task. In a second experiment cognitive abilities were measured
using a concentration and attention test and a visuo-spatial skill
test.
Experiment 1 (Motor Performance)
Methods
32 right-handed female subjects (19 to 30 years of age) par-
ticipated in this experiment. None of them had overt sensori-
motor dysfunctions except corrected vision, and none had prior
experience with adaptation research. All signed an informed
consent statement before participating in this study, which was
part of an experimental program pre-approved by the authors’
institutional Ethics Committee.
Subjects were subdivided into an experimental and a control
group. All subjects participated in a sensorimotor adaptation
test which was intermitted by a break of 7 - 10 days and an
intervention phase (Table 1). While the sensorimotor adapta-
tion test was the same for both subject groups the intervention
phase differed between groups.
Sensorimotor Adaptation Test
As shown in Figure 1, subjects were seated in front of a ta-
ble viewing a computer screen. On the right and left hand side
of the subject a joystick was positioned such that subjects could
handle it comfortably with elongated arms. Depending on the
condition subjects either used the right or the left joystick,
which position was represented as a cursor (C) on the computer
screen. Additionally eight targets (T) (red dots, 1 cm diameter),
positioned equidistantly on the circumference of a circle, were
presented on the screen in a randomized order alternating with
illumination of a starting position (St) (red dot, 1 cm diameter)
in the center of the circle (Figure 1). Subjects’ task was to
execute center out pointing movements from the starting posi-
tion to the different target positions. Subjects were instructed to
move fast and accurately. The amplitude between the starting
position and the targets was 10 cm. A target was visible for 700
ms followed by presentation of the starting position which was
illuminated until the cursor reached it triggering the illumina-
tion of the next target.
The sensorimotor adaptation test was separated into two test
phases (pretest and posttest) which were inte rrupted by a brea k
Table 1.
Procedure of the sensorimotor adap t a t i on t e s t .
Pretest Posttest
baseline ADAADAIMT
joystickrightleftrightrightleft
rotation 0˚0˚60˚60˚ 60˚
episodes3 3 3
Break
7 - 10 days Intervention 10 min
15 5
Figure 1.
Scheme of the experimental setup, with screen and joystick which can
be placed on the right and left hand side of the subject. Top right: Sub-
jects’ view under baseline condition with computer-generated targets (T)
in 8 possible directions (only one target visible at a given time) and
starting position (ST). Cursor position (C) represented joystick position.
Bottom right: Subjects view under adaptation condition and IMT where
the joystick (J) and cursor position were shifted about 60 deg.
and the intervention phase (see below) executed immediately
before the posttest. Pre- and post-test were subdivided into
episodes including 8 pointing movements each, thus one
movement to each target. The target sequence was randomized
between episodes.
The pretest consisted of 9 episodes starting with a baseline
measurement of 3 episodes using the right joystick followed by
3 episodes using the left joystick where the cursor position
matched the joystick position. The last 3 episodes were exe-
cuted with the right joystick and the cursor position was 60˚
rotated in counter-clockwise direction with respect to the joy-
stick position to induce adaptation. Again, subjects’ task was to
move the cursor to the target position implying that the joystick
had to be moved in clockwise direction.
The posttest consisted of 20 episodes starting with 15 epi-
sodes under the same condition as the last 3 episodes of the
pretest thus continuing the adaptation. During the last 5 epi-
sodes cursor position was again 60˚ rotated in counter clock-
wise direction by using the left joystick to test for intermanual
transfer of adaptation (Table 1).
Intervention
Subjects executed two different movement exercises for 10
minutes. Depending on group affinity, subjects moved their
Copyright © 2012 SciRe s . 173

M. THOMAS
limbs across the body midline (experimental group) or moved
their limbs in the ipsilateral hemispace (control group). On an
instruction video a female exercise instructor was shown who
executed the movement exercises slowly. A male voice simul-
taneously explained the exercises and instructed the subjects to
imitate.
1) Exercises of the experimental group (movements across
the body midline): The subjects practiced two different move-
ments which were part of the “midline movements” of the
Brain Gym® exercise program. At the beginning subjects were
instructed to situate comfortable in an upright position. For the
first exercise (“cross crawl”) they were instructed to move the
right elbow in direction of the left knee and simultaneously
move the knee in the direction of the elbow such that the right
elbow and the left knee touched each other at the outer edges.
After completing this movement, subjects had to bring their
limbs back into the starting position and repeat the movement
with the other side. Subjects were requested to execute 3 series
with 10 movements of each side, simultaneously with the video
counting the number. During the first series the movements
were shown on the video simultaneously. During the second
series, subjects had to fixate an X which was shown on the
video and during the third series subjects had to close their eyes
and imagine the X which they have seen before while moving.
For the second exercise (“lazy eights”) subjects were instructed
to stretch the right arm in front with the thumb up. Subjects
were requested to trace a recumbent eight in front of their body
with the center in the middle at eye level starting the trace right
above. Subjects should track their thumb with the eyes without
moving the head. Subjects executed 3 series tracing 6 recum-
bent eights. In the first series they moved with the right hand, in
the second series with the left hand and the third series with
both hands simultaneously. Movements were as well shown on
the video counting the repetitions.
2) Exercises of the control group (movements in the ipsila-
teral hemispace): Subjects of the control group practiced two
different movement exercises which were not part of the Brain
Gym® exercise program but were used as “counterparts” to the
“midline-movements”. Like in the experimental group subjects
were instructed to situate comfortable in an upright position.
For the first exercise they were instructed to move the right
elbow in direction of the right knee and simultaneously move
the knee in the direction of the elbow such that the right elbow
and the right knee touched each other. After completing the
movement, subjects had to bring their limbs back into the start-
ing position and proceed with the opposite side. Subjects were
requested to execute 3 series with 10 movements on each side.
Again, the video simultaneously counted the repetitions. During
the first series the movements were shown on the video screen.
During the second series subjects, had to fixate two parallel
lines (II) while moving and during the third series subjects had
to close their eyes and imag ine t he para lle l lines. For the se cond
exercise subjects were instructed to stretch the right arm in
front with the thumb up. Subjects were requested to trace a
circle in front of their body which was not allowed to cross the
body midline starting the trace right above. The thumb should
have been tracked with the eyes without moving the head. Sub-
jects executed 2 series tracing 9 circles. During the first series
they moved with their right hand in the right hemispace and
during the second series they moved with their left hand in the
left hemispace. Again, movements were executed on the video
counting the number.
Statistical Analyses
To quantify the performance of sensorimotor adaptation we
calculated the initial error as the angle between joystick and
target direction 150 ms after movement onset as a parameter
which is unconfounded by feedback-based corrections. Addi-
tionally, we determined end point accuracy as the distance be-
tween target position and end position of the joystick. For fur-
ther analyses, we calculated the mean values of initial error and
endpoint accuracy for each episode. Each variable was submit-
ted to analyses of variances (ANOVAs) separately for adapta-
tion phase with the right hand (ADA) and adaptation phase with
the left hand (IMT). ADA was analyzed by ANOVAs with the
within factors episode and block and the between factor group.
One block consists of 3 episodes. IMT was analyzed by
ANOVAs with the within-factor episode and the between factor
group. We additionally calculated the difference between the
last adaptation episode of pretest and the first adaptation epi-
sode of posttest for both parameters to evaluate the influence of
intervention on consolidation of adaptation and submitted the
outcome to t-tests.
Results
Figure 2 illustrates the initial error 150 ms after movement
onset averaged across subjects separately for each episode and
group for the adaptation phase (ADA) and the intermanual
transfer phase (IMT). At the beginning of adaptation phase,
subjects of both groups started with an error of about 35˚. Dur-
ing the first three episodes the error decreased gradually in both
groups. In the first episode of the posttest the experimental
group started with a distinct greater initial error than in the last
episode of the pretest while the control group reached a com-
parable level in both episodes. During the following adaptation
phase the initial error decreased in both groups reaching a
similar level of about 6˚ at the end. Accordingly, ANOVA
yielded significant effects of episode and block and the interac-
tion of both. Group effects were not significant (Table 2). The
inset of Figure 2 depicts the difference between the last adapta-
tion episode of pretest and the first adaptation episode of post
Figure 2.
Time course of initial error during the adaptation phase (ADA) of pre-
and posttest and the intermanual transfer phase (IMT) separated for
each group. Symbols represent across-subject means, and error bars
standard errors. Inset: Across-subject means of the difference between
the last adaptation episode of pretest and the first adaptation episode of
osttest. p
Copyright © 2012 SciRe s . 174

M. THOMAS
Copyright © 2012 SciRe s . 175
Table 2.
Results of analyses of variances of the adapation phase (ADA) and the intermanual transfer phase (IMT) for the parameters initial error and endpoint
accuracy.
Initial error Endpoint accuracy
ADA IMT ADA IMT
Episode F(2,58) = 59.17*** F
(4,116) = 12.08*** F (2,58) = 68.83*** F (4,116) = 9.78***
Block F(5,145) = 53.38*** - F(5,145) = 43.07*** -
Episode*block F(10,290) = 15.14*** - F(10,290) = 15.55*** -
Group F(1,29) = 0.1 F(1,29) = 0.01 F(1,29) = 1.53 F(1,29) = 4.3*
Group*episode F(2,58) = 0.51 F (4,116) = 1.73 F(2,58) = 0.45 F(2,58) = 1.14
Group*block F(5,145) = 1.1 - F(5,145) = 0.42 -
Group*episode*block F(10,290) = 0.81 - F(10,290) = 0. 8 -
onset of the intermanual transfer phase. This decrease was more
pronounced in the experimental group. The difference between
both groups persists during all 5 episodes of the intermanual
transfer phase. Accordingly, ANOVA showed a significant
effect of episode and group (Table 2).
test showing a greater difference for the experimental group
than the control group which was statistically significant (t(29) =
2.28; p < 0.05).
At the onset of the intermanual transfer phase the error in-
creased for both groups. During the following episodes, the
error decreased similar for both groups. ANOVA yielded a
significant effect of episode and no significant group effects
(Table 2). Discussion
In the present study we investigated whether special move-
ment patterns with the right and left extremities have an impact
on sensorimotor adaptation and the intermanual transfer of
adaptation from the dominant right to the left hand. Therefore,
subjects executed specified movement exercises with the right
and left extremities as intervention. Depending on group affi-
nity, subjects executed movements crossing the body midline
(experimental group) or moved only in the respective hemis-
pace without passing the midline of the body (control group).
We found no differences during the time course of adaptation
between groups for both parameters, the initial error and the
end point accuracy. Thus, different effects on the learning rate
of the different movement performances could not be shown.
However, for the initial error the difference between the last
episode of pretest and the first episode of posttest was signifi-
cant lower for the control group, while there was no group dif-
ference for the end point accuracy. It is known that adaptive
improvement persists in the sensorimotor system over time
which is called consolidation (Abeele & Bock, 2001; McGaugh,
2000; Shadmehr & Holcomb, 1997). It has been shown that
subjects could recall the learned behavior even after breaks of
up to one month (Bock, Schneider, & Bloomberg, 2001). Our
results indicate consolidation of adaptation only for the control
group, where the initial error at the onset of posttest was similar
to the error at the end of the pretest. In contrast, for the experi-
mental group, the initial error at the onset of posttest was simi-
lar to the error at the onset of pretest, thus revealing no con-
solidation of the learned behavior. In relation to the studies
mentioned above, our results suggest that the movement per-
formance crossing the body midline impede consolidation,
while the ipsilateral movement pattern does not. In conjunction
with the idea that bilateral movements crossing the body mid-
line facilitate the connectivity between both brain hemispheres,
our results imply that such reorganization between the hemi-
spheres could have a negative effect on retention of the learned
Figure 3 depicts the endpoint accuracy in the same manner
as for the initial error. Adaptation course is comparable to one
shown with the initial error. Accordingly, ANOVA again
yielded significant effects of episode and block and the interac-
tion of both. Group effects were not significant (Table 2). The
inset of Figure 2 shows that the difference between the end of
adaptation of the pretest and the onset of adaptation of the
posttest was less different between groups than for the initial
error not reaching statistical significance (t(29) = 0.72; p >
0.05).
Endpoint accuracy decreased distinctly for both groups at the
Figure 3.
Time course of end distance during the adaptation phase (ADA) of pre-
and posttest and the intermanual transfer phase (IMT) separated for
each group. Symbols represent across-subject means, and error bars
standard errors. Inset: Across-subject means of the difference between
the last adaptation episode of pretest and the first adaptation episode of
posttest.

M. THOMAS
motor behavior.
For intermanual transfer the effects were different compared
to the retention of learning: group effects have been shown for
end point accuracy but were absent for the initial error. The
significant group effect indicates that movement performance
crossing the body midline has a beneficial effect on the inter-
manual transfer of the accuracy at the end of movements. Re-
ferring to the statement mentioned above, this observation sug-
gests that an enhancement of the connectivity between the
cerebral hemispheres can improve access to the adaptation in-
formation of the opposite arm.
Obviously, different parameters reveal significant group ef-
fects for retention of learning and the intermanual transfer.
Previous studies indicated that the dominant arm shows a bene-
fit in controlling the initial movement direction while the
non-dominant arm is more proficient in controlling the final
posture (Sainburg, 2002; Sainburg & Kalakanis, 2000). Relat-
ing these results to the results of our study, it may be accepted
that basically the dominant aspect of movement control of the
respective arm can be affected by the intervention. In conse-
quence, the control of initial movement trajectory should be the
affected movement aspect. For intermanual transfer, further
findings supported that opposite arm training improves the end
point accuracy of the left arm, whereas opposite arm training
improves the initial movement direction of the right arm (Sain-
burg & Wang, 2002). Therefore, it is conceivable that an im-
pact of the intervention has been found on the end point accu-
racy rather than on the initial movement direction.
To sum up, the present results refer to an impairment of re-
tention of the adaptive behavior, when preceding movement
exercises across the body midline. In contrast, the same move-
ment exercises seem to enhance intermanual transfer. A causal
relation of these results with an enhancement of the cerebral
connectivity is merely speculative.
Experiment 2 (Cognitive Performance)
Methods
Again, 32 right-handed female subjects (19 to 30 years of
age) participated in this experiment. All were naive regarding
the cognitive tests used in this experiment. All signed an in-
formed consent statement before participating in this study,
which was part of an experimental program pre-approved by
the authors’ institutional Ethics Committee.
Subjects were subdivided into an experimental and a control
group. All subjects participated in two cognitive tests as pretest
followed by a break of 7 - 10 days and an intervention phase
(Table 2) and again in the same cognitive tests as posttest. The
interventions were exactly the same as in experiment 1 (see
above).
Cognitive Tests
To test subjects’ cognitive performance two neuropsy-
chological tests were used in a pre-post design including the
domains attention and concentration using the d2-attention-test
(Brickenkamp, 2002) and visuo-constructive skills by the
dice-subtest of the I-S-T 2000R (Liepmann et al., 2007). The
d2-attention-test is a paper-pencil test implicating a letter can-
cellation task. It consists of 14 lines of 47 randomly mixed “d”
and “p” each. The letters are arranged with different numbers of
dashes (min. 0 dashes—max. 4 dashes). Subjects were in-
structed to score out every “d” which was arranged with two
dashes, either individually or in pairs. The time for each line
was limited to 20 s. The whole test lasted 4.67 min. The
test-retest reliability of the d2-test of attention has been indi-
cated with 0.95 - 0.98. For the dice-test 5 different dices with 6
different patterns each were presented on a paper while three
patterns were visible. Additionally, 10 dices where presented
which show one of the given 5 dices in a modified position.
Subjects´ task was to find out the appropriate given dice for
each of the 10 dices. This task was repeated once with 5 other
given dices. Overall, the task lasted 9 min. The test-retest reli-
ability has not been evaluated.
Statistical Analyses
For the d2-attention-test the number of correct responses
minus errors of confusion (KL) was calculated for each subject
separately for the pre- and posttest. The KL -value is de fined as
an objective measure of concentration (Brickenkamp, 2002).
For the dice-test the number of correct responses has been
transformed into standard values (SV) according to norm
groups. The outcomes of both were submitted to analyses of
variance with the between factor group and the within-factor
time (pre/post).
Results
Figure 4(a) shows the KL values of the d2-test averaged
across subjects of the experimental group and the control group
in the pre- and posttest. Both groups improved their perform-
ance, thus ANOVA yielded a significant effect of time (F(1,30) =
72.98; p = 0.000). Group effect and the interaction between
group and time were not significant (group: F(1,30) = 0.02; p =
0.888; group *time: F(1,30) = 0.01; p = 0.926).
Figure 4(b) shows the SV values of the dice-test averaged
across subjects of experimental group and control group in the
pre- and post-test. Again, both groups improved their perfor-
mance yielding a significant effect of time (F(1,30) = 15.52; p =
0.000). The factor group and the interaction of group and time
were not significant (group: F(1,30) = 0.18; p = 0.671; group
*time: F(1,30) = 1.96; p = 0.171).
Discussion
The aim of the second experiment was to investigate whether
movement exercises crossing the body midline have a different
effect on attention, concentration and visual-spatial skills than
moving extremities in the ipsilateral hemispace of the body. For
both, the d2-test (concentration and attention) and the dice-test
(visuo-spatial skills), group differences were not statistically
significant. Hence, different influences of the respective
movement patterns could not be confirmed. However, the post-
test results reveal a significant increase of performance for both
tests. This lets suggest, that both movement patterns were
equally effective. For the d2-test strong learning effects are not
likely because the test-retest reliability is extraordinarily high
(see Methods). For the dice-test the test-retest reliability has not
been verified such that a learning effect cannot be excluded so
far. In conclusion, a benefit of movements across the body mid-
line over movements in the ipsilateral hemispace for the abili-
ties of concentration, attention and visuo-spatial skill cannot be
confirmed. In fact, it seems that the movement patterns of both
Copyright © 2012 SciRe s . 176

M. THOMAS
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.
(a) Concentration level (KL) of the d2-attention test of the pre- and
post-test for experimental group (EXP) and control group (CTR).
Symbols represent across-subject means, and error bars standard errors;
(b) Standard values of the dice-test separated for each group.
groups improve concentration and attention in an equal manner,
while for the visuo-spatial abilities the situation is ambiguous.
General Discussion
The aim of the study was to present a first overview on new
aspects concerning the influence of physical activity on motor
and cognitive abilities, investigating special features of move-
ment performance using exercises from the Brain Gym® pro-
gram. As mentioned in the introduction, Brain Gym® is based
on the idea that movements crossing the body midline enhance
the communication of the cerebral hemispheres. Indeed, for the
sensorimotor adaptation task movements across the body mid-
line affect adaptation and intermanual transfer in a different
way than movement performance in the ipsilateral hemispace of
the body. This difference could not be confirmed for the tested
cognitive abilities (concentration, attention and visuo-spatial
abilities). Nevertheless, for several cognitive abilities, such as
executive functions, interhemispheric communication plays an
important role (Sauseng, Klimesch, Schabus, & Doppelmayr,
2005; Shibata, Shimoyama, Ito, Abla, Iwasa, Koseki, et al.,
1997; Shibata, Shimoyama, Ito, Abla, Iwasa, Koseki, et al.,
1998). Beside numerous intrahemispheric connections, visuo-
spatial abilities tested by mental rotation tasks, require inter-
hemispheric associations as well (Bhattacharya, Petsche,
Feldmann, & Rescher, 2001); the neural processes associated
with attention are rather ambiguous. It is debatable, whether
long-time interventions could possibly result in different effects
of both interventions even for cognitive abilities and lead to
stronger effects at all. However, this study is limited in the fact
that sound arguments for the differences in influencing motor
performance and cognitive abilities cannot be concluded.
Summing up, a positive effect of the Brain Gym® exercises in
contrast to the ipsilateral movement patterns cannot be con-
firmed entirely, although serious differences become obvious.
This issue requires further empirical study.
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to Dipl.-Ing. (FH) L. Geisen for software de-
velopment and L. Bock, N. Feidt and S. Bethke for data collec-
tion and analysis. Responsibility for the contents rests with the
author.
REFERENCES
Abeele, S., & Bock, O. (2001). Mechanisms for sensorimotor adapta-
tion to rotated visual input. Experimental Brain Research, 139, 248-
253. doi:10.1007/s002210100768
Andres, F. G., Mima, T., Schulman, A. E., Dichgans, J., Hallett, M., &
Gerloff, C. (1999). Functional coupling of human cortical sensori-
motor areas during bimanual ski ll acquisition. Brain, 122, 855-870.
doi:10.1093/brain/122.5.855
Bhattacharya, J., Petsche, H., Feldmann, U., & Rescher, B. (2001). Eeg
gamma-band phase synchronization between posterior and frontal
cortex during mental rotation in humans. Neuroscience Letters, 311,
29-32. doi:10.1016/S0304-3940(01)02133-4
Blumenthal, J. A., Emery, C. F., Madden, D. J., Schniebolk, S.,
Walsh-Riddle, M., George, L. K., et al. (1991). Long-term effects of
exercise on psychological functioning in older men and women.
Journals of Gerontology, 46 , 352-361.
Bock, O., Schneider, S., & Bloomberg, J. (2001). Conditions for inter-
ference versus facilitation during sequential sensorimotor adaptation.
Experimental Brain Re se ar ch, 138, 359-365.
doi:10.1007/s002210100704
Brickenkamp, K. (2002). Test d2 aufmerksamkeits-belastungs-test,
manual (The d2 test of attention). Göttingen-Bern-Toronto-Seattle:
Hogrefe, Ltd.
Budde, H., Voelcker-Rehage, C., Pietrabyk-Kendziorra, S., Ribeiro, P.,
& Tidow, G. (2008). Acute Coordinative Exercise Improves Atten-
tional Performance in Adolescents. Neuroscience Letters, 441, 219-
223. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2008.06.024
Colcombe, S., & Kramer, A. F. (2003). Fitness effects on the cognitive
function of older adults: A meta-analytic study. Psychological Sci-
ence, 14, 125-130. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.t01-1-01430
Colcombe, S. J., Kra mer, A. F., Erick son, K. I., Scalf , P., McAu ley, E.,
Cohen, N. J., et al. (2004). Cardiovascular fitness, cortical plasticity,
and aging. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
USA, 101, 3316-3321. doi:10.1073/pnas.0400266101
Hill, R. D., Storandt, M., & Malley, M. (1993). The impact of long-
term exercise training on psychological function in older adults.
Journals of Gerontology, 48 , 12-17.
Hillman, C. H., Erickson, K. I., & Kramer, A. F. (2008). Be smart,
exercise your heart: Exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nature
Reviews Neuroscience, 9, 58-65. doi:10.1038/nrn2298
Hillman, C. H., Pon tifex, 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 preadolescent chil-
dren. Neuroscience, 159, 1044-1054.
doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.01.057
Copyright © 2012 SciRe s . 177

M. THOMAS
Copyright © 2012 SciRe s . 178
Hillman, C. H., Weiss, E. P., Hagberg, J. M., & Hatfield, B. D. (2002).
The relationship of age and cardiovascular fitness to cognitive and
motor processes. Psychophysiology, 39, 303-312.
doi:10.1017/S0048577201393058
Kramer, A. F., & Erickson, K. I. (2007). Capitalizing on cortical plas-
ticity: Influence of Physical activity on cognition and brain function.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 342-348.
doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.06.009
Liepmann, D., Beauducel, A., Brocke, B., Amthauer, R. (2007). Intel-
ligenz-struktur-test 2000R, manual (intelligence-structure-test). Göt-
tingen-Bern-Toronto-Seattle: Hogrefe, Ltd.
McGaugh, J. L. (2000). Memory—A century of consolidation. Science,
287, 248-251. doi:10.1126/science.287.5451.248
Mierau, A., Sch neider, S., Abel, T., Aske w, C., Werner, S., & St ruder,
H. K. (2009). Improved sensorimotor adaptation after exhaustive ex-
ercise is accompanied by altered brain activity. Physiology & Be-
havior, 96, 115-121. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2008.09.002
Planinsec, J. (2002). Relations between the motor and cognitive dimen-
sions of preschool girls and boys. Percept Mot Skills, 94, 415-423.
doi:10.2466/pms.2002.94.2.415
Richards, D. K. (1968). A two-factor theory of the warm-up effect in
jumping performance. Research Quarterly, 39, 668-673.
Sainburg, R. L. (2002). Evidence for a dynamic-dominance hypothesis
of handedness. Exper i m e n t a l Brain Research, 1 4 2 , 241-258.
doi:10.1007/s00221-001-0913-8
Sainburg, R. L., & Kalakanis, D. (2000). Differences in control of limb
dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching. Journal
of Neurophysiology, 83, 2661-2675.
Sainburg, R. L., & Wang, J. (2002). Interlimb transfer of visuomotor
rotations: Independence of direction and final position information.
Experimental Brain Re se ar ch, 145, 437-447.
doi:10.1007/s00221-002-1140-7
Sauseng, P., Klimesch, W., Schabus, M., & Doppelmayr, M. (2005).
Fronto-parietal eeg coherence in theta and upper alpha reflect Central
executive functions of working memory. International Journal of
Psychophysiology, 5 7, 97-103. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.03.018
Serrien, D. J. (2009). Bimanual information processing and the impact
of conflict during mirror drawing. Behavioural Brain Research, 205,
391-395. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2009.07.015
Serrien, D. J., & Brown, P. (2002). The functional role of interhemi-
spheric synchronization in the control of bimanual timing tasks.
Experimental Brain Re se ar ch, 147, 268-272.
doi:10.1007/s00221-002-1253-z
Shadmehr, R., & Holcomb, H. H. (1997). Neural Correlates of Motor
Memory Consolidation. Science, 277, 821-825.
doi:10.1126/science.277.5327.821
Shibata, T., Shimoyama, I., Ito, T., Abla, D., Iwasa, H., Koseki, K., et
al. (1997). The time course of interhemispheric eeg coherence during
a go/no-go task in humans. Neuroscience Letters, 233, 117-120.
doi:10.1016/S0304-3940(97)00652-6
Shibata, T., Shimoyama, I., Ito, T., Abla, D., Iwasa, H., Koseki, K., et
al. (1998). The synchronization between brain areas under motor in-
hibition process in humans estimated by event-related eeg coherence.
Neuroscience Research, 31, 265-271.
doi:10.1016/S0168-0102(98)00046-7
Uhrich, T. A., & Swalm, R. L. (2007). A pilot study of a possible effect
from a motor task on reading performance. Perceptual & Motor
Skills Percept Mot Skills, 104, 1035-1041.
doi:10.2466/pms.104.3.1035-1041
Voelcker-Rehage, C., Godde, B., & Staudinger, U. M. (2010). Physical
and motor fitness are both related to cognition in old age. European
Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 167-176.
doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.07014.x
Voelcker-Rehage, C., Godde, B., & Staudinger, U. M. (2011). Cardio-
vascular and coordination training differentially improve cognitive
performance and neural processing in older adults. Frontiers in Hu-
man Neuroscience, 5, 26. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2011.00026