Open Journal of Epidemiology, 2013, 3, 4-11 OJEpi

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojepi.2013.31002 Published Online February 2013 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojepi/)

The relationship between physical activity, body mass

index, and academic performance and college-age students*
Douglas D. Franz1, Shingairai A. Feresu2,3#
1
University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, USA
2
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health-Bloomington, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA
3
School of Health Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Walden University, Minneapolis, USA
Email: dfranz@unmc.edu, #sferesu@indiana.edu

Received 11 December 2012; revised 11 January 2013; accepted 21 January 2013

ABSTRACT to intensify interventions focused on reducing and

preventing obesity among school-age populace.
Background: The purpose of this study was to deter-
mine if a relationship exists between physical activity
Keywords: Physical Activity; BMI; Overweight;
or Body Mass Index (BMI) and academic perform-
Academic Performance; GPA; ACT
ance in college-age students. Both physical activity
and BMI have shown to impact academic perform-
ance in younger students, but data for college-age stu- 1. INTRODUCTION
dents is limited. Methods: Between October and De-
With the growing obesity epidemic in the United States,
cember 2006, data were collected from 98 biochemis-
physical activity has become a topic of great interest to
try students at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
researchers. The literature has demonstrated that regard-
Analysis was performed on 77 students who had com-
less of age, ethnicity, or present state of health, virtually
plete outcome data. Physical activity measures were
all individuals will benefit from regular physical activity
categorized to reflect those who met and those who
did not meet the Centers for Disease Control and Pre- [1]. In fact, the advantages of engaging in regular physi-
vention (CDC) and American College of Sports Me- cal activity with regards to physical and mental health
dicine (ACSM) recommendations for physical activity are tantamount. Regular, moderate physical activity is as-
[1]. BMI was calculated from each student’s height sociated with a substantial decrease in all-cause mortality,
and weight recordings. Academic performance was a lesser risk of ischemic heart disease, obesity, hyperlip-
determined by each student’s cumulative college idemia, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, cerebral vas-
Grade Point Average (GPA) and score on the ACT cular disease, type 2 diabetes, the metabolic syndrome,
examination. The means were compared using test and a reduced reactivity to stress [2,3]. Also, a review of
for two groups and general linear models. Where sta- the literature by Calfas et al., 1994, shows improvements
tistically significant results existed, groups were com- in self esteem, self-concept, and depressive/anxiety symp-
pared using the Tukey multi-test procedure. A one- toms [4]. Additionally, regular physical activity has been
sample comparison of means was conducted for fit- shown to improve muscle function, cardiovascular func-
ness between our sample and the age-matched Ame- tion and physical performance [1].
rican population as stated by the Healthy People 2010 Researchers have focused on several links between
Report [1]. Results: Students in the normal BMI ca- mind and body that may aid learning. Some postulate
tegory had significantly higher GPA and ACT scores that increased academic achievement may be due to an
than students in the overweight category. Juniors had increase in neurotransmitters related to exercise, such as
significantly higher GPA and ACT scores than sen- serotonin [5]. Other potential mechanisms which may aid
iors. Our findings did not differ between our sample learning include: accelerated psychomotor development,
and the American population with regards to recom- increased cerebral blood flow, heightened arousal, chan-
mendations for fitness by the CDC and ACSM. Con- ges in hormone levels, changes in body build, and in-
clusions This study demonstrated that normal weight creased self esteem [3,6]. A review of adult studies con-
individuals, had higher GPA and ACT scores than ducted by Sallis, J.F. et al., 1999, found that physical
their overweight counterparts, underscoring the need activity was associated with selected advantages in cog-
*
Competing interests: We declare that we have no competing interests.
nitive function, specifically: math, acuity, and reaction
#
Corresponding author. time [7]. Whatever the mechanism, it is clear that regular

OPEN ACCESS
 D. D. Franz, S. A. Feresu / Open Journal of Epidemiology 3 (2013) 4-11 5

physical activity poses no harm and may be associated (BIOS 431) at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln.
with better academic performance. The questionnaire assessed: sex, age (in years), height (in
Despite the known benefits, only 25% of American inches, later converted to meters by multiplying the re-
adults engage in physical activity required for health corded value by 0.0254) and weight (in pounds, later
benefit, and only 15% reach levels required for improve- converted to kilograms by multiplying the recorded value
ment or maintenance of physical fitness. Alarmingly, by 0.454) to calculate BMI (kg/m²). Grade was defined
29% of adults engage in no leisure time physical activity as junior, senior, or graduate student and major as bio-
at all [8,9]. In line with these statistics, and the docu- logical sciences or other. Cumulative college Grade Point
mented benefits of physical activity, promoting physical Average (GPA) was scored between 0 and 4.0, ACT scores
activity is now a major health concern [10]. To respond, were between 1 and 36. Frequency of exercise was on a
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) scale of 0 to 7 days per week, duration of exercise ses-
and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) sion was categorized in 20 minute ranges (0 - 20, 20 - 40,
have made, and are actively promoting, physical activity 40 - 60, and 60+ minutes per session), and intensity by
recommendations for the general population [1,9]. Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) with a range of 6 to
Unfortunately, the CDC and ACSM have met strong 20 as determined by the Borg RPE scale. The Borg scale
opposition in implementing these recommendations in was used to measure intensity because it is a measure of
school-age children [7]. This is especially troubling con- exertion that allows all individuals to subjectively rate
sidering that physical inactivity in the adolescence has the intensity of physical effort relative to the individual’s
been shown, to either perpetuate or initiate the develop- physical fitness [15]. The scale correlates with heart rate,
ment of obesity into adulthood [11]. Alternatively, a phy- blood lactate, and oxygen consumption [9]. Completed
surveys were collected by the primary investigator and
sically active lifestyle developed early in life may con-
entered into Microsoft Office Excel 2003. Of the 98 stu-
tinue into adulthood [1]. Unfortunately, it has also been
dents who took part in this study, 77 had complete out-
shown that physical activity rates decline consistently dur-
come, which was thus used for this analysis. All partici-
ing the adolescent years in previous studies [12,13] and
pants were given and signed an informed consent form
that the number of physically active students declines by
approved by the University of Nebraska Institutional Re-
about 50% between the ages of 10 and 18 years.
view Board.
The opposition to the CDC and ACSM recommenda-
tions comes from local school leaders and stakeholders. 2.2. Measures
Administrators fear that hours wasted on required physi-
cal education courses may jeopardize a child’s overall The CDC and ACSM have published qualifications for
academic performance [3,13]. The reality, fortunately, is physical activity adequate for maintaining a healthy life-
quite the opposite. No clear evidence has been published style [1,9]. The three factors imperative to determining
indicating significant harm posed on academic perform- adequate physical activity as defined by the CDC and
ance due to increased time devoted to physical education ACSM are: duration, frequency, and intensity of activity.
for elementary, middle, or high school-age students [14]. An individual may meet these qualifications in one of
Conversely, there is limited literature exploring this two ways. By the new criterion (Fitness 1), presented in
phenomenon in college-age students. This may be due to the CDC’s Healthy People 2010 report, a person must
a variety of factors inhibiting the feasibility of any such engage in vigorous-intensity physical activity for at least
study, including: a highly variable population, differences 20 minutes per day on 3 or more days per week (vigor-
in course background, compliance, funding, and applica- ous-intensity physical activity is defined as a perceived
bility. The CDC has put little effort or funding in this age exertion of 15 or more on the Borg RPE scale; equivalent
bracket due in part to insufficient evidence supporting to the effort put forth in a jog or by swimming several
health education courses for college-age students [8]. As laps). Alternatively, the old criterion (Fitness 2) may be
one may expect, there is limited data supporting or refut- met by engaging in moderate-intensity physical activity
ing an association between physical activity or Body Mass for about 30 minutes per day on 5 or more days per week
Index (BMI) and academic performance in this age group. (moderate-intensity is defined by a perceived exertion of
Therefore, the main objective of this study was to deter- 11 - 14 on the Borg scale, roughly equivalent to a brisk
mine the relationship between physical activity and/or walk or a flat-terrain bike ride) [1,9]. We grouped toge-
BMI and academic performance in college-age students. ther students who met either Fitness 1 or Fitness 2 crite-
ria into a third category, Fitness 3, essentially separating
2. METHODS those students who met the CDC and ACSM recommen-
dations from those who did not.
2.1. Data Collection
2.3. Academic Performance
A short demographic questionnaire was distributed to re-
search volunteers from a senior-level biochemistry course Academic performance was compared among individuals

Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS

6 D. D. Franz, S. A. Feresu / Open Journal of Epidemiology 3 (2013) 4-11

by recording their cumulative GPA (0 - 4.0) and ACT (1 - of continuous variables for these 77 students. The mean
36). In addition, information on majors and grade level age for the population was 21.7 years (SD = 2.5), mean
were collected to check for significance of curriculum height 1.7 meters (SD = 0.1), mean weight 72.1 kg (SD =
difficulty as a confounding factor. Information on age 18.1), and the mean BMI was 24.1 kg/m² (SD = 4.4). The
was also collected because it has been shown to be asso- average frequency was 2.9 days/week (SD = 1.7) and the
ciated with BMI [16]. Additionally, there is evidence mean intensity score was 13.2 (SD = 2.8). The mean
supporting a relationship between non-traditional stu- GPA was 3.6 (SD = 0.3) and the mean ACT score was
dents (age 25 or older) and GPA [17]. 28.7 (SD = 3.1).
The Distribution demographic characteristics and phy-
2.4. Comparisons sical activity indices are shown in Table 2. There were a
In order to determine what factors affected the students’ slightly larger number of females, 45, compared to males,
GPA or ACT scores we compared the means of sex, age, 32. Most of the students (92.2%) were aged between 17
grade, BMI, major, duration, frequency, intensity, Fitness and 24 years. When BMI was categorized into three
1, Fitness 2, and Fitness 3 to GPA and ACT. The out- groups, the majority of the students (61%) were of nor-
comes of interest were GPA, ACT, BMI, and fitness. mal weight, nearly 30% were overweight, and only 9.1%
Categorization for fitness used the CDC/ACSM criteria were obese. The majority of the class (58.4%) was made
[1,9]. The Fitness 1 group met all of the following quali- up of seniors (grade 16), 37.7% were juniors (grade 15),
fications: a frequency ≥3 days per week, an intensity ≥15, and only 3.9% were graduate students (grade 17). Most
and a duration of exercise ≥20 - 40 minutes per session. of the students had a major in the biological sciences
The Fitness 2 group met the alternative qualifications: a (80.5%). Notably, 77.9% of the students met the qualifi-
frequency ≥5 days per week, an intensity ≥11, and a du- cation for duration (≥20 minutes), 53.2% met the mini-
ration of exercise ≥20 - 40 minutes per session. BMI was mum standard for frequency (participating in physical
categorized into 3 groups based upon the normal stan- activity ≥ 3 times per week), and a vast majority (85.7%),
dards: normal weight (≥18.5 - <25 kg/m2), overweight of the students, met the minimum requirement for inten-
(≥25 - <30 kg/m2), and obese (≥30 kg/m2). There were sity (≥11). Fitness 1 criterion was met by 29.9% of the
no students who were underweight (<18.5 kg/m2) in this students, Fitness 2 criterion was met by 16.9% of the stu-
population. dents, and Fitness 3 criterion (the union of Fitness 1 and
Fitness 2) was met by 33.8% of the students.
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3.2. Relationship between GPA, ACT and
Data was entered into Microsoft excel, and preliminary Socio-Demographic Characteristics
analysis was done with, SPSS version 14 database (SPSS
Inc., Chicago IL). Data was then analyzed using SAS No significant correlations were demonstrated between
version 9.1 (SAS, Cary NC). The means and standard de- GPA and BMI or age or between ACT and BMI or age
viations were calculated for continuous variables, includ- (Table 3). Positive relationships between GPA and ACT
ing: age, height, weight, BMI, frequency, intensity, GPA, and between BMI and age were demonstrated. The Pear-
and ACT. Frequency distributions were calculated for ca-
tegorical variables. The mean distribution of GPA and Table 1. Distribution of continuous variables for 77 students
from university of Nebraska-Lincoln November, 2006.
ACT by: sex, age, BMI, grade, major, duration, and fit-
ness were also calculated. The means were compared us- Variable Mean SD
ing test for two groups, and general linear models (GLM).
Age (years) 21.7 2.5
Where statistically significant results existed, groups were
compared using the Tukey multi-test procedure. Finally, Height (m) 1.7 0.1
a one-sample comparison of means was conducted for Weight (kg) 72.1 18.1
Fitness 1 and Fitness 2 against age-matched categories
BMI* 24.1 4.4
and the total adult population as stated by the Healthy
†
People 2010 report (CDC, 2000). Data for Fitness 3 was Frequency 2.9 1.7
unavailable for comparison. Intensity‡
13.2 2.8
GPA (0 - 4.0) 3.6 0.3
3. RESULTS
ACT (4 - 36) 28.7 3.1
3.1. Distribution of Social Demographic * †
BMI was calculated as weight (in kg)/height (in meters²). Frequency de-
Characteristics notes the number of times per week the individual participates in physical
activity. ‡Intensity denotes indicated measure of intensity on Borg RPE
Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations (SD) scale.

Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS

 D. D. Franz, S. A. Feresu / Open Journal of Epidemiology 3 (2013) 4-11 7

Table 2. Distribution demographic characteristics and physical son Coefficient between GPA and ACT was 0.66 with a
activity indices for the 77 students. p-value < 0.0001. The Pearson Coefficient between BMI
Variable n % and age was 0.32 with a p-value = 0.0048.
Sex There was no mean differences for GPA or ACT by
Male 32 41.6
sex, age, BMI, major, duration, duration dichotomized,
Female 45 58.4
frequency, intensity, Fitness 1, Fitness 2, or Fitness 3
Age
(Table 4). However, when we categorized BMI into three
17 - 24 years 71 92.2
categories: normal weight (≥18.5 - <25 kg/m²), over-
25 - 33 years 6 7.8
weight (≥25 - <30 kg/m²), and obese (≥30 kg/m²), stu-
BMI categories * dents in the normal category had significantly better GPA
≥18.5 - <25 47 61.0
and ACT scores than the overweight category (mean dif-
≥25 - <30 23 29.9
ferences for GPA of 0.24 (p < 0.01) and a mean differ-
≥30 7 9.1
ences for ACT of 2.4 (p < 0.008)). There was also a sta-
Grade
tistically significant mean differences in GPA and ACT
for grades 15 (juniors) and 16 (seniors). The GPA mean
15 29 37.7
differences was 0.227 (p < 0.01) and ACT mean differ-
16 45 58.4
ences was 1.917 (p < 0.02), with juniors demonstrating
17 3 3.9
higher scores in both categories.
Major†
Biological sciences 62 80.5
3.3. Comparison of a Sample of Fitness to
Other 15 19.5
American Population
Duration‡
0 - 20 17 22.1 Finally, the one-sample comparison of means showed no
20 - 40 26 33.8 evidence of significant differences for the mean relative
40 - 60 23 29.8 proportion of students in our sample meeting Fitness 1
>60 11 14.3 and Fitness 2 criteria, 29.9% and 16.9% respectively, and
Duration dichotomized that of the adult American population, 23% and 15%,
0 - 20 17 22.1 respectively (Table 5). When the same test was done
≥20 - 40 60 77.9 comparing our sample to age brackets closely matching
Frequency our population that were reported by the CDC (18 - 24
<3 36 46.8 years and 25 - 44 years), no statistical differences were
≥3 41 53.2 observed. Data for Fitness 3 criterion was not contained
Intensity in this report (CDC, 2000).
<11 11 14.3
≥11 66 85.7
4. DISCUSSION
Fitness 1§ There were three main findings from this study. First,
Fit 23 29.9 students in the normal BMI category (≥18.5 kg/m2 - <25
Unfit 54 70.1
Table 3. Correlations between age, BMI and GPA and ACT for
Fitness 2ǁ
the 77 students.
Fit 13 16.9
Unfit 64 83.1 Pearson Correlation Coefficients, N = 77, Prob > |r| under H0: Rho = 0
¶
Fitness 3 GPA ACT BMI AGE
Fit 26 33.8 GPA 1.00000 0.65578 *
−0.17778 −0.13891
Unfit 51 66.2
<0.0001 0.12 19 0.2283
*
BMI of ≥18.5 - <25 is normal, ≥25 - <30 is overweight, and ≥30 is obese ACT
(there was no one underweight, <18.5). †Biological Sciences included the 1.00000 −0.14158 −0.04648
following majors: biology, biochemistry, psychology, biomedical science,
veterinary science, animal science, and insect science. Other included: ma- 0.2194 0.6881
thematics, nutrition, textiles, clothing, and design, business, English, spanish,
anthropology, agronomy, environmental studies, engineering, and chemistry. BMI 1.00000 0.31827†
‡
Duration refers to the number of minutes the individual engages in activity
0.0048
per session. §Fitness 1 was categorized as having a duration ≥20 - 40 min-
utes per session, a frequency ≥3 days per week, and an intensity ≥15. ǁFitness AGE 1.00000
2 was categorized as having a duration ≥20 - 40 minutes per session, a fre-
quency ≥5 days per week, and an intensity ≥11. ¶Fitness 3 includes students *
GPA is correlated to ACT, Pearson Coefficient = 0.66, p-value < 0.0001.
meeting either the criteria for Fitness 1 or the criteria for Fitness 2. †
BMI is correlated to Age, Pearson Coefficient = 0.32, p-value = 0.0048.

Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS

8 D. D. Franz, S. A. Feresu / Open Journal of Epidemiology 3 (2013) 4-11

Table 4. Distribution of demographic characteristics by GPA Table 5. CDC/ACSM fitness standards compared to the pro-
and ACT for the 77 students. portion of the American population by age.
GPA ACT Group Fitness 1* p-value† Fitness 2* p-value†
Variable
n mean SD* p-value mean SD* p-value
Americans 18 - 24 years‡ 0.32 0.686 0.17 0.978
Sex
‡
Male 32 3.58 0.29 0.52 29.19 2.89 0.26 Americans 25 - 44 years 0.27 0.586 0.15 0.662
Female 45 3.53 0.36 28.38 3.24 ‡
All Adult Americans 0.23 0.195 0.15 0.662
Age
17 - 24 years 71 3.58 0.34 0.85 28.72 3.18 0.97 UNL Students 0.29 0.17
25 - 33 years 6 3.53 0.33 28.67 2.25 *
Proportion of individuals meeting criterion. †p-value determined by one-
BMI† sample comparison of means. ‡Age brackets represent those reported in the
18.5 - <25 (normal) 47 3.64 0.29 <0.01 29.49 2.98 <0.008 Healthy People 2010 Report (CDC, 2000). §Data for Fitness 3 was not avai-
lable from the Healthy People 2010 Report (CDC, 2000).
≥25 - <30 23 3.40 0.36 27.09 2.99
(overweight) ≥30 (obese) 7 3.52 0.33 28.86 2.54
kg/m2) had significantly better GPAs and ACT scores
Grade than students in the overweight category (≥25 kg/m2 -
15 29 3.69 0.29 <0.01 29.83 3.34 <0.02 <30 kg/m2), indicating better academic performance.
16 &17 48 3.47 0.33 28.04 2.78 Second, junior students had better GPAs and ACT scores.
Major‡ Third, in terms of fitness our student population, was a
Biological sciences 62 3.54 0.35 0.56 28.73 3.19 0.95 valid representation of both the age-matched and the
Other 15 3.60 0.26 28.67 2.79 total adult American population, as reported by the Heal-
Duration§ thy People 2010 report [1], indicating that it is possible
0 - 20 17 3.56 0.42 0.39 28.12 3.66 0.36 to conduct studies of this nature on college students de-
20 - 40 26 3.58 0.29 29.42 2.74 spite all the accompanying difficulties in measuring this
40 - 60 23 3.47 0.33 28.09 3.22 population. Also, as expected, there was a positive asso-
>60 11 3.67 0.26 29.27 2.69 ciation between BMI and age, as this is a well demon-
Duration strated phenomenon [16].
Dichotomized§ 17 3.56 0.42 0.93 28.12 3.66 0.37 The mean differences of 0.24 for GPA and 2.4 for ACT
0 - 20 60 3.55 0.31 28.89 2.95 scores between higher-achieving normal and lower-
≥20 - 40 achieving overweight students, was a very interesting
Frequency finding. What this data suggests is that, individuals who
<3 36 3.58 0.37 0.49 28.75 3.73 0.93 are in the normal body weight category, have a greater
≥3 41 3.53 0.29 28.68 2.48 opportunity for academic success, as defined by GPA and
Intensity ACT scores, than individuals in the overweight category.
<11 11 3.45 0.48 0.26 27.27 4.00 0.09 This finding supports several recent studies showing a
≥11 66 3.57 0.30 28.95 2.90 similar relationship in school-age children. In a study of
Fitness 1ǁ young adolescents (grades 7 - 9), it was shown that an
Fit 23 3.57 0.26 0.70 28.96 2.49 0.66 increase in BMI was associated with a greater risk of
Unfit 54 3.55 0.36 28.61 3.35 having a low mean GPA [18]. Another study by demon-
Fitness 2¶ strated a significant decrease in scholastic achievement
Fit 13 3.66 0.29 0.20 28.62 3.04 0.90 by overweight middle school students [19]. Further stud-
Unfit 64 3.53 0.34 28.73 3.14 ies confirm that overweight children have lower grades
Fitness 3** and, as expected, lower levels of physical activity than
Fit 26 3.68 0.29 0.21 28.70 3.16 0.99 their normal weight peers [19-22]. However, no other
Unfit 51 3.54 0.33 28.72 3.12 study in the literature linking BMI to academic success
*
SD = standard deviation. †BMI of ≥18.5 - <25 is normal, ≥25 - <30 is
in college students has been reported.
overweight, and ≥30 is obese (there was no one underweight, <18.5). There were no statistically significant differences in
‡
Biological Sciences included the following majors: biology, biochemistry, the mean GPA or ACT scores of students in groups Fit-
psychology, biomedical science, veterinary science, animal science, and in-
sect science. Other included: mathematics, nutrition, textiles, clothing, and ness 1, Fitness 2, or their union, Fitness 3. This finding
design, business, English, Spanish, anthropology, agronomy, environmental was unexpected. We hypothesized that the results in col-
studies, engineering, and chemistry. §Duration refers to the number of min- lege-age students would be similar to those shown in
utes the individual engages in activity per session. ǁFitness 1 was catego-
rized as having a duration ≥20 - 40 minutes per session, a frequency ≥3 days high school-age and younger students. Numerous studies
per week, and an intensity ≥15. ¶Fitness 2 was categorized as having a dura- have shown positive relationships between academic per-
tion ≥20 - 40 minutes per session, a frequency ≥5 days per week, and an
intensity ≥11. **Fitness 3 includes students meeting either the criteria for
formance and physical activity in elementary, middle,
Fitness 1 or the criteria for Fitness 2. and high school students [3,7,13,14]. In addition, stu-

Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS

 D. D. Franz, S. A. Feresu / Open Journal of Epidemiology 3 (2013) 4-11 9

dents who participate in physical activity have lower has revealed many influential determinants of physical
incidences of depression, frequency of cigarette use, bet- activity, with specific attitudes and beliefs being associ-
ter dietary practices, stress management and relations ated with a lack of physical activity [31]. Several studies
with parents [4,5,13]. Further, a recent study has shown a have concluded that “not having enough time” is the
positive relationship between working memory capacity most important barrier for not participating in physical
and level of physical activity in young adults [6]. This activity [12].
would be of likely benefit for the physically active col-
lege student. Strengths and Limitations
Also, it is well established that reduced physical activ-
One major limitation of this study was the small sample
ity is a potentially important risk factor for the onset of
size, diminishing power to detect differences among
overweight and obesity as reported by previous studies
groups. If numbers had been larger for all fitness groups
[10-11,21,24-26]. In a recent study, Sharpe, P.A. et al.
and BMI categories, more significant results could have
(2004) reported that overweight and obese populations
been possible, as would for relationships between obese
may be only 33% - 50% as likely to be meeting the CDC
students and GPA and ACT. Secondly, as with any cross-
and ACSM requirements for physical activity necessary
sectional studies, reported values may be a snap shot and
to maintain a healthy lifestyle compared to the normal
not represent the full experience of this population. Cau-
and underweight population [25]. Thus, the expectation
tion should be taken when interpreting our findings, since
was that a relationship between BMI and GPA or ACT,
it is well established that, individuals tend to over-report
would coexist with a relationship between physical ac-
their height and under-report their weight, causing mis-
tivity and GPA/ACT, was not evident in our study, pro-
classification of BMI status, by 22% in males and 18% in
bably due a small sample size.
females [25]. Additionally, individuals tend to over-re-
The significant relationship between grade level and
port their physical activity [28]. This tendency is most
GPA seems difficult to explain because one may expect
prevalent in the overweight persons [21,29], and this
older students to have greater academic maturity, and
could have affected our results. Another consideration to
thus, higher GPA [17]. However, it is logical to suggest
take into account is that the mean ACT score of this class
that juniors who take a rigorous senior level course a (28.7) is well above the national average of all test-takers
year early may show, on the average, greater academic in 2004, 20.9, (when most students probably took the
prowess. Also, as expected, ACT and GPA demonstrated exam) indicating a selective intelligent group [30]. Also,
a positive relationship in this intelligent class as reported the class reported an average BMI of 24.1, is also unusu-
by a previous study [27]. Thus, it is no surprise that the ally low for Americans in this age group (the average
class with the higher ACT scores, had also the higher BMI for Americans 20 - 29 years old is 26.6) [16]. Yet,
GPA. one may find it interesting to note that our group had
Finally, the seemingly subtle finding that our sample above-average mean GPA and ACT scores coinciding
showed no evidence of difference from the age-matched with a below-average mean BMI.
and the total adult American population in terms of the Nonetheless, a notable strength of our study was the
proportion of individuals meeting the CDC and ACSM cost-efficiency, all student volunteers participated in the
fitness standards is extremely important. There are many study without reimbursement or merit. Another strength
confounding factors that may have prevented previous of this study was that we were able to find a student po-
studies to demonstrate our findings; most notably, the pulation with a statistically insignificant variance in aca-
presupposition that it would be impossible to gather a re- demic background and in conjunction with a wide vari-
presentative sample in such a variable population. Yet, ability in age, BMI and fitness indices as well as a fairly
we have shown that this may not be the case, and that re- equal distribution between males and females. This eli-
plicate studies could be conducted on a larger scale for minated many potentially confounding factors inherent
consistency. in the college population, making our results more mea-
It is apparent that we are in the midst of what may just ningful. Additionally, the trends in our data tend to re-
be the beginning of a protracted fight against obesity and, flect those of studies on other samples in the literature,
sadly, this epidemic seems to be worsening with the av-
giving the results further validity. Finally, our study is the
erage American gaining 0.45 - 0.90 kg per year [24]. Ad-
first to demonstrate a relationship between BMI and aca-
ditionally, a sedentary lifestyle is an important risk factor
demic performance in college-age students.
for the development of obesity as reported by other stud-
ies [10-11,23-26]. Further, the evidence suggests that the
5. CONCLUSIONS
transition from adolescence to adulthood may be espe-
cially important as the amount of habitual physical activ- In order to convince the population to engage in physical
ity decreases significantly during this time [29]. Research activity beneficial for its health, there is a need to change

Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS

10 D. D. Franz, S. A. Feresu / Open Journal of Epidemiology 3 (2013) 4-11

attitudes. Most importantly, we must demonstrate con- memory capacity and physical activity rates in young
vincingly that time devoted to physical activity is not adults. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 5, 149-
153.
time wasted.
Research showed beneficial relationships to active life- [7] Sallis, J.F., McKenzie, T.L., Kolody, B., Lewis, M., Mar-
shal, S. and Rosengard, P. (1990) Effects of health-re-
styles may be pivotal for future, health-related actions.
lated physical education on academic achievement: Pro-
Albeit, this study, is among the first in attempting to de- ject SPARK. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
termine the relationship between physical activity and 70, 127-134.
BMI and academic performance in college-age students. [8] Task Force on Community Preventive Services (2000)
It is hoped that this study will serve as a probe for future, Recommendations to increase physical activity in com-
more exhaustive studies on this subject so that their re- munities. HSTAT: Guide to clinical preventive services.
sults may give the CDC the evidence it needs to distrib- 3rd Edition, Recommendations and Systematic Evidence
ute the necessary resources to this endeavour. Reviews, Guide to Community Preventive Services.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?call=bv.View
..ShowSection&rid=hstat3
6. AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS
[9] Pollock, M.L., Gaesser, G.A., Butcher, J.D., Despres,
Please see sample text in the instructions for authors. DF; J.-P., Dishman, R.K., Franklin, B.A. and Garber, C.E.
planned the study, participated in its design and coordi- (1998) ACSM position stand: The recommended quantity
nation; SF & DF; participated in its design and coordina- and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining
tion and writing the article; SF & DF; performed statisti- cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness, and flexibility in
healthy adults. Med and Science in Sports and Exercise,
cal analysis, DF; collected data and literature. All authors
30, 975-991. doi:10.1097/00005768-199806000-00032
read and approved the final manuscript.
[10] Bernstein, M.S., Costanza, M.C. and Morabia, A. (2004)
Association of physical activity intensity levels with over-
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS weight and obesity in a population-based sample of adults.
This study originated from work done for an honors thesis at the Uni- Preventive Medicine, 38, 94-104.
doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.032
versity of Nebraska in Lincoln in 2006. We would like to thank Dr.
Joseph Baryki, Associate Professor of Biochemistry, and Dr. Melanie [11] Pietilӓinen, K.H., Kaprio, J., Borg, P., Plasqui, G., Yki-
Järvinen, H., Kujala, U.M., Rose, R.J., Westerterp, K.R.
Simpson, Associate Professor of Biochemistry at the University of
and Rissanen, A. (2007) Physical inactivity and obesity:
Nebraska in Lincoln, for generously granting us permission to use their
A vicious circle. Obesity, 16, 409-414.
class for research purposes. We would also like to thank Dr. Jay Noren,
[12] Daskapan, A., Tuzun, E.H. and Eker, L. (2006) Perceived
then Provost at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, and now Presi-
barriers to physical activity in university students. Jour-
dent of Wayne State University in Michigan, for his guidance in the nal of Sports Science and Medicine, 5, 615-620.
initial formulation of this project.
[13] Symons, C.W. and Cinelli, B. (1997) Bridging student
health risks and academic achievement through compre-
hensive school health programs. Journal of School Health,
REFERENCES 67, 220-227.
[1] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011) Physi- [14] Coe, D.P., Pivarnik, J.M., Womack, C.J., Reeves, M.J.
cal activity and fitness. Healthy people 2020: Physical ac- and Malina, R.M. (2006) Effect of physical education and
tivity. activity levels on academic achievement in children. Me-
http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/over dicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 38, 1515-1519.
view.aspx?topicid=33 [15] Borg, G.A.V. (1982) Psychophysical bases of perceived
[2] Kim, J., Must, A., Fitzmaurice, G.M., Gillman, M.W., exertion. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 14,
Chomitz, V., Kramer, E., McGowan, R. and Peterson, 377-381.
K.E. (2005) Relationship of physical fitness to prevalence [16] Ogden, C.L., Fryar, C.D., Carroll, M.D. and Flegal, K.M.
and incidence of overweight among schoolchildren. Obe- (2004) Mean body weight, height, and body mass index,
sity Research, 13, 1246-1254. doi:10.1038/oby.2005.148 United States 1960-2002.
[3] Shephard, R.J. (1997) Curricular physical activity and www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad347.pdf
academic performance. Pediatric Exercise Science, 9, 113- [17] Spitzer, T. (2000) Predictors of college success: A com-
126. parison of traditional and nontraditional age students. NA-
[4] Calfas, K.J. and Taylor, W.C. (1999) Effects of physical SPA Journal, 38, 82-98.
activity on psychological variables in adolescents. Pedi- [18] Mo Suwan, L., Lebel, L., Puetpaiboon, A. and Junjana, C.
atric Exercise Science, 6, 406-423. (1999) School performance and weight status of children
[5] Field, T., Diego, M. and Sanders, C.E. (2001) Exercise is and young adolescents in a transitional society in Thai-
positively related to adolescents’ relationships and aca- land. International Journal of Obesity, 23, 272-277.
demics. Adolescence, 36, 105-110. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0800808
[6] Lambourne, K. (2006) The relationship between working [19] Shore, S.M., Sachs, M.L., Lidicker, J.R., Brett, S.N.,

Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS

 D. D. Franz, S. A. Feresu / Open Journal of Epidemiology 3 (2013) 4-11 11

Wright, A.R. and Libonati, J.R. (2008) Decreased scho- Journal of Health Behavior, 28, 522-530.
lastic achievement in overweight middle school students. doi:10.5993/AJHB.28.6.5
Obesity, 16, 1535-1538. doi:10.1038/oby.2008.254 [26] Kaleta, D., Makowiec-Dabrowska, T. and Jegier, A. (2007)
[20] Levin, S., Lowry, R., Brown, D.R. and Dietz, W.H. (2003) Occupational and leisure-time energy expenditure and
Physical activity and body mass index among US ado- body mass index. International Journal of Occupational
lescents: Youth risk behavior survey. Archives of Pediat- Medicine and Environmental Health, 20, 9-16.
rics & Adolescent Medicine, 157, 816-820. doi:10.2478/v10001-007-0009-1
doi:10.1001/archpedi.157.8.816 [27] Noble, J. and Sawyer, R. (2002) Predicting different lev-
[21] Vogels, N., Westerterp, K.R., Posthumus, D.L.A., Rutters, els of academic success in college using high school GPA
F. and Westerterp-Plantenga, M.S. (2007) Daily physical and ACT composite score. ACT Research Report Series
activity counts vs structured activity counts in lean and 2002-2004.
overweight Dutch children. Physiology and Behavior, 92, www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/PredictiveValidit
611-616. y.pdf
[22] Ekelund, U., Åman, J., Yngve, A., Renman, C., Wester- [28] Goris, A.H.C. and Westerterp, K.R. (2008) Physical ac-
terp, K. and Sjöström, M. (2002) Physical activity but not tivity, fat intake and body fat. Physiology and Behavior,
energy expenditure is reduced in obese adolescents: A 94, 164-168. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.11.009
case-control study. American Journal of Clinical Nutri- [29] Tammelin, T., Laitinen, J. and Nayha, S. (2004) Change
tion, 76, 935-941. in the level of physical activity from adolescence into
[23] Hoed, M. and den Westerterp, K.R. (2008) Body compo- adulthood and obesity at the age of 31 years. Interna-
sition is associated with physical activity in daily life as tional Journal of Obesity, 28, 775-782.
measured using a triaxial accelerometer in both men and doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802622
women. International Journal of Obesity, 32, 1264-1270. [30] ACT Inc. (2004) Average national ACT score rises for
doi:10.1038/ijo.2008.72 first time since 1997, but many students still not ready for
[24] Hill, J.O. and Wyatt, H.R. (2005) Role of physical activ- college science and math courses. Iowa City.
ity in preventing and treating obesity. Journal of Applied http://www.act.org/news/releases/2004/8-18-04.html
Physiology, 99, 765-770. [31] Martin, S.B., Morrow Jr., J.R., Jackson, A.W. and Dunn,
doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00137.2005 A.L. (2000) Variables related to meeting the CDC/ACSM
[25] Sharpe, P.A., Granner, M.L., Hutto, B., Ainsworth, B.E. physical activity guidelines. Medicine & Science in Sports
and Cook, A. (2004) Association of body mass index to & Exercise, 32, 2087-2092.
meeting physical activity recommendations. American doi:10.1097/00005768-200012000-00019

Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS