Associations of physical activity dose and movement quality with executive functions in socioeconomically disadvantaged children aged 5–6 years

Background: Growing up in areas of high deprivation can negatively impact children's movement behaviours and cognitive development. Enhancing the quantity and quality of children's movement experiences is believed to enhance cognitive development. This study investigated the association of three different modes of movement assessment, movement proficiency and divergent movement ability (collectively understood as motor competence) and PA dose with executive function in a low socio-economic demographic. Demographics, motor competence, and a combination of motor competence and physical activity were hypothesized to be significantly predictor of executive functions. Method: In this cross-sectional study, 360 children aged 5–6 years from deprived areas were assessed using three movement assessments: wrist-worn accelerometery for physical activity dose, Test of Gross Motor Development-3 for movement proficiency, and divergent movement assessment. Executive function, including inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility, was measured using the NIH Toolbox on an iPad. Multiple linear regression models were designed to evaluate the independent and combined association of demographics, movement competence and physical activity variables with executive function. Results: The regression analysis, with demographic factors only, explained 12% of EF variance (r2 = 0.12 95%CI 0.06–0.18). In addition to this demographics the model with divergent movement explained 19% of EF variance (r2 = 0.19 95% CI = 0.12–0.28), the model with movement proficiency explained 16% of EF variance (r2 = 0.16 95% CI = 0.08–0.26) and the model with PA dose explained 13% of EF variance (r2 = 0.13 95% CI = 0.07–0.20). In these models both divergent movement and proficiency were significant predictors, whilst physical activity variables were not. The final models, combining motor competence and physical activity variables, explained 24% and 23% of EF variance (r2 = 0.24 CI = 0.14–0.33 and r2 = 0.23 CI = 0.14–0.32). In these models, motor competence variables were significant predictors, and only vigorous physical activity and Euclidean Norm Minus One emerged as significant PA dose predictors. Discussion: These findings emphasise that motor competence and physical activity variables better predict executive functions when they are combined. When considered individually both motor competence variables were significant predictors of executive function whilst physical activity variables were not. Importantly, among the two movement competence facets, divergent movement assessment exhibited the strongest association with executive function. Future interventions should consider how to facilitate both movement and cognitive development in children. Future interventions should consider both the interplay of movement quality and quantity and the importance of environments that invite children's exploratory movement behavior.