Physically Active Kids Score Higher in Math, Qatar Study Finds

A cross-sectional study of 126 schoolchildren in Doha, Qatar, has found that physically active children substantially outperform their less active peers in mathematics, while also showing superior physical fitness and lower body mass. The research, published in Frontiers in Cognition, examined how habitual physical activity, sedentary behavior, and health-related fitness relate to academic achievement in children aged roughly 10 to 13 years, with explicit attention to possible differences between boys and girls.

The researchers, led by Souhail Hermassi of Qatar University together with colleagues from the University of Bern in Switzerland and Nord University in Norway, recruited 126 children with a mean age of 12.2 years from a single urban school in Doha. Participants were divided into two equal groups of 63 based on self-reported moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), measured with the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form (IPAQ-SF). Children reporting at least 300 minutes of MVPA per week were classified as physically active, while those below that threshold were classified as non-active. The cutoff was chosen as a pragmatic threshold used in previous questionnaire-based pediatric research, and the authors caution that it should not be read as equivalent to meeting international guidelines, which recommend about 60 minutes of MVPA per day.

The most striking result concerned mathematics. Active boys scored an average of 90.2 percent on their official mathematics assessments, compared with 76.3 percent for non-active boys. Active girls scored 89.5 percent on average, against 77.1 percent for non-active girls. The statistical effect size for this difference was large, with Cohen’s d reaching 1.7, and the group effect was highly significant (F = 96.8, p < 0.001). Notably, no significant sex effects or group-by-sex interactions emerged for mathematics scores, meaning that the academic advantage associated with being active appeared similar for boys and girls. Mathematics was chosen as the academic outcome because it relies heavily on executive cognitive functions such as attention, working memory, and problem-solving, and because it is widely used as an achievement indicator in this research area.

Physical fitness told a consistent story. The children completed three tests: a Stork balance test measuring static postural control, a medicine ball throw assessing upper-body muscular power with a 3-kilogram ball, and a handgrip strength test using a digital dynamometer. Active children outperformed non-active children across all three measures, with significant group effects (F ≥ 3.98, p ≤ 0.048, d ≥ 0.36). Sex effects were significant for the medicine ball throw and handgrip strength, with boys generally outperforming girls, but there were no significant group-by-sex interactions. In post hoc comparisons, active boys threw the medicine ball farther than all other groups and held the Stork balance longer than non-active boys and girls, although non-active boys showed greater handgrip strength than active girls.

Anthropometric and maturation measures added nuance. Active children had significantly lower body mass than their non-active peers (boys: 47.2 versus 53.8 kilograms; girls: 50.6 versus 53.8 kilograms), with a small-to-moderate effect size. Arm span was nearly significantly shorter in active boys. However, height, body mass index, sitting height, and estimated biological maturity, calculated using Moore’s equations for predicting the age at peak height velocity, did not differ meaningfully between groups. The authors suggest that the narrow age range and the cross-sectional design may explain why growth parameters showed few differences.

The activity data revealed clear sex-specific patterns. Active boys reported the highest vigorous activity of any subgroup, averaging 1,209 MET-minutes per week, and the lowest sedentary time, at 2.6 hours per day, significantly less than all other groups. Active girls also spent less time sedentary than non-active girls (3.7 versus 5.3 hours per day). Moderate-intensity activity and walking, by contrast, did not differ significantly between groups, suggesting that the differences in overall energy expenditure and fitness were driven primarily by vigorous-intensity movement rather than routine lower-intensity activity. The authors argue that this pattern underscores the potential value of structured, high-intensity activities within school and extracurricular programs.

Correlational analysis sharpened the picture further. Sedentary time showed a moderate negative correlation with mathematics scores (r = −0.48, p < 0.001), meaning that children who sat longer tended to score lower. Total weekly physical activity volume, expressed in MET-minutes per week, showed only a trivial positive correlation with mathematics achievement (r = 0.18, p = 0.049). The authors interpret this asymmetry as indicating that overall activity volume alone is unlikely to explain academic performance, whereas reducing prolonged sitting may be more meaningfully associated with better mathematics outcomes.

The study’s authors are careful to frame these findings as associations rather than causal relationships. Because the design is cross-sectional, it cannot establish whether physical activity drives better mathematics achievement, whether academically successful children are simply more likely to be active, or whether unmeasured factors influence both. Biological maturation was estimated but not included as a statistical covariate, and confounders such as nutrition, sleep, socioeconomic status, parental education, prior academic achievement, and classroom factors were not measured. Self-reported activity data are also subject to recall and social desirability bias, and the Arabic version of the IPAQ has limited validation evidence for children in this age range. The single-school sample further limits generalizability, and the study was not powered to detect small interaction effects.

The researchers also emphasize conceptual distinctions that are often blurred in public discussion. Physical activity is a modifiable behavior, physical fitness is a physiological attribute that may result from habitual activity, and academic achievement is a multidetermined educational outcome. Physical fitness has been proposed in the literature as a potential correlate linking activity to academic outcomes, but the study did not perform a mediation analysis, so any mediating role remains hypothetical. Similarly, references to neurocognitive mechanisms such as improved executive function or cerebral blood flow draw on prior literature rather than on measurements made in this study, which did not directly assess cognitive function.

Despite these caveats, the findings carry practical weight. They align with a broad body of evidence, including meta-analyses showing small positive effects of physical activity interventions on academic performance and of resistance training on cognition in youth. The authors suggest that schools may consider providing regular opportunities for moderate-to-vigorous activity, incorporating active learning strategies, and reducing prolonged sedentary time, while ensuring that physical education programs are gender-sensitive so that girls have equitable opportunities to develop strength and power. At the policy level, collaboration between education and health authorities could support evidence-based school activity initiatives. The authors stress, however, that the present findings should not be interpreted as proof that increasing physical activity will directly improve academic achievement; establishing causality will require well-designed longitudinal and intervention studies, ideally with objective activity measurement, larger and more diverse samples, and statistical control for maturation and other confounders.

Subject of Research: Associations between physical activity, physical fitness, sedentary behavior, and mathematics achievement in school-aged children

Article Title: Associations between physical activity, physical fitness, sedentary behavior, and mathematics achievement in school-aged children: a cross-sectional study

Article References: Hermassi, S., Alshaer, A., Alneama, A., Ketelhut, S., & van den Tillaar, R. (2026). Associations between physical activity, physical fitness, sedentary behavior, and mathematics achievement in school-aged children: a cross-sectional study. Frontiers in Cognition, 5, Article 1903208. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcogn.2026.1903208

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/fcogn.2026.1903208

Keywords: physical activity, physical fitness, sedentary behavior, mathematics achievement, schoolchildren, MVPA, Qatar, cross-sectional study, executive function, pediatric health, IPAQ-SF, sex differences