Aim The purpose is to map how the acute effect of physical activity affects children's executive functions in ages 12-13 in relation to intensity level. What is the result of a flanker test that examines children's impulse control / attention ability after a physical activity at high intensity? What is the result of a flanker test that examines children's impulse control / attention ability after a physical activity at medium intensity? What will be the result of a flanker test that examines children's impulse control / attention ability after a non-physical activity in the form of watching movies? Does the learning effect affect the result on the flanker test? How does the influence of different intensity levels differ from physical activity and to see films on children's impulse control / attention ability? Method 12 pupils aged 12-13 years participated in a quantitative method study with interventions of medium and high intensity activity and rest followed by a computerized flanker test. The collected data has then been processed in SPSS. Results After high-intensity physical activity, the response rate m (median value) of 741 ms was for congruent part and m 905 (milliseconds) ms on the incongruent part. After medium intensity, the response rate m of 556 ms for congruent portion, m of 648 ms, was incoherent. After rest, the response speed of m 520 ms was for congruent part. For the inconsistent part, m was 607 ms. There was no significant difference in whether the participants had physical activity at medium intensity, whether they had high-intensity physics activity or whether they were watching film before. The difference between the congruent and the inconsistent results is not significantly affected between the intervention groups. The learning effect had a significant impact on the response rate response of the congruent part (p = 0.00) and the incongruent part (p = 0.009). Conclusion The learning effect has an influence on the participants' response rate in the flanker test. The learning effect was so strong that any impact of training could not be discerned. When it comes to impulse control, it turns out that this effect was not affected by either the learning effect or physical activity. From this it is concluded that this part of impulse control can neither be changed nor measured with the design of the study.