Does Strength Training Improve Cognitive Function in Athletes?
Yes — a growing body of evidence suggests structured strength training can improve aspects of cognitive function, not just physical output. Several studies have reported that resistance training is associated with improvements in attention and processing speed alongside gains in muscle strength and sport-specific performance. Some of this research has also found that these cognitive improvements can occur without measurable changes in common neuroplasticity-related blood markers such as BDNF and IGF-1 — though it's worth stressing that these are only two markers, and unchanged levels do not, on their own, establish or rule out any specific mechanism.
Editorial note: An earlier version of this article cited a specific randomized controlled trial (with a DOI, PubMed ID, and 2026 publication date) that we have been unable to verify. Because the source could not be confirmed, we have removed the study-level statistics and specific claims that traced to it. The general discussion below reflects the broader, established direction of the literature rather than any single unverified study. If you rely on this topic for programming or clinical decisions, consult primary sources directly.
The General Picture
Across the research on concurrent training in athletes, a few themes recur:
- Resistance training appears to support cognitive performance, particularly measures of attentional control and processing speed (often assessed with tools like the Stroop test), in addition to its well-established effects on strength.
- Sport-specific performance can improve when strength work is added to an athlete's routine, even in-season.
- Neuroplasticity biomarkers are inconsistent. BDNF and IGF-1 are frequently studied because of their link to exercise-induced brain adaptation, but changes in these markers do not always track with observed cognitive changes. This is a reason for caution, not a basis for claiming a novel mechanism.
We have removed the previously listed participant counts, ages, training-tier classifications, exact loading prescriptions, specific test batteries, and p-values, because those figures were tied to a source we could not verify. Presenting unverifiable numbers as findings would be misleading.
Limitations of This Area of Research
Whatever specific study you draw on, these caveats generally apply:
Small sample sizes. Much of the strength-and-cognition literature uses small groups, which limits how confidently results generalize.
Specific populations. Findings in young, female, or highly-trained athletes may not transfer to older lifters, male athletes, recreational trainees, or beginners.
Short durations and specific contexts. In-season interventions over ~12 weeks are a narrow window. Whether effects persist, accumulate, or fade over longer periods is often unclear.
What This Means for Your Training
The practical takeaways below reflect broadly supported training principles rather than any single unverified study.
A modest, consistent frequency can produce meaningful adaptation. Athletes managing a full sport-specific schedule generally don't need to overhaul their week to benefit from strength work. A couple of well-structured sessions, consistently executed, can drive progress.
Moderate-to-moderately-heavy loading is a workable range. Loading in the roughly 60–80% 1-RM range is a common general recommendation for building strength without the fatigue cost of maximal work — useful for athletes already carrying a sport-specific training load. Treat this as general guidance, and adjust to your own program and recovery.
Cognitive performance may be trainable. Attentional control — processing information quickly and accurately under interference — is relevant to any sport involving rapid decisions, and the broader literature suggests training stress produces adaptations beyond the muscles alone.
Track your sessions with the same rigor you'd track a sport. One reason strength training produces consistent results in structured studies is that the variables are controlled: sets, reps, load, frequency. In practice, most lifters don't track with that precision. Kenso is built specifically for this — logging your working weights, tracking session-to-session load progression, and giving you a structured view of whether your training is actually moving forward.
Progressive overload still requires a baseline. If you don't know your working weights, you're estimating — and estimation tends to drift conservative over time. Establishing real strength benchmarks and tracking them across a training block is exactly the kind of intentional structure that separates training from exercise.
Kenso's rule-based double-progression engine is designed for this: set your baseline, follow a structured protocol, and let the data guide your weight and rep recommendations (including deload triggers). If you're an athlete supplementing strength work alongside sport training, a low-frequency, consistent model is a reasonable template to build from.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does strength training actually improve cognitive function?
Current evidence suggests it can, at least in the short term. Multiple studies report improvements in measures like attentional control after periods of resistance training. The mechanism isn't fully understood — changes in markers like BDNF and IGF-1 don't consistently track with cognitive improvements — so treat the effect as promising rather than settled.
How many strength training sessions per week are needed to see results?
There's no single answer, and this depends on your goals, experience, and concurrent training. As general guidance, many athletes see benefits from two to three well-structured sessions per week, particularly when balancing sport-specific loads. Consult a coach or current, verifiable guidelines to tailor frequency to your situation.
What intensity should strength training be for athletes?
A common general recommendation is moderate-to-moderately-heavy loading (roughly 60–80% of 1-RM). This range tends to build strength without the fatigue cost of maximal work, which can help athletes protect their sport-specific training. Adjust based on your program, experience, and recovery.
Why might cognitive function improve without changes in BDNF or IGF-1?
BDNF and IGF-1 are commonly associated with exercise-induced brain adaptations, but they are only two of many possible markers. Unchanged levels don't establish a mechanism one way or the other — they simply mean those two markers didn't move. Cognitive changes could involve other physiological or attentional factors, and the research doesn't yet offer a definitive explanation.
How should athletes track strength training progress alongside sport training?
Tracking both load and performance markers — not just effort — is essential. Logging your working weights and session volume over a structured block gives you objective data on whether your programming is working. Kenso's iOS app is built for exactly this kind of structured tracking, including progression across multi-week training blocks.
A Note on Sources
The specific randomized controlled trial previously cited here — including its DOI, PubMed identifier, and publication date — could not be verified and has been removed. A future-dated publication combined with an uncheckable DOI and PubMed ID are strong indicators of a fabricated or erroneous reference, and we will not present it as an established source. If you are researching this topic, we recommend searching primary databases (e.g., PubMed) directly for peer-reviewed, verifiable studies on resistance training and cognitive function.
Want to apply a structured strength protocol to your own training? Kenso helps you set baselines, track progression, and build or adjust programs with an AI Coach that reads your training history. Download Kenso on the App Store and train with intention.