Top

Optie A:

Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
Optie B:

Deel de link per e-mail
Link delen

vorige artikel Attribution of vision and knowledge in ‘spontan...

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

12-04-2019 | Original Article | Uitgave 6/2020

Cognitive control processes associated with successful gait performance in dual-task walking in healthy young adults

Tijdschrift:: Psychological Research > Uitgave 6/2020

Auteurs:: Tino Stöckel, Anett Mau-Moeller

» Toegang tot de volledige tekst krijgen

Belangrijke opmerkingen

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Abstract

Growing evidence suggests that the reliance on cognitive control processes during normal walking increases as the locomotor task gets more complex and challenging. The aims of the present study were to explore the (negative) effects of smartphone gaming on gait performance in healthy young adults, and to identify cognitive resources that might help to maintain high gait performance during dual-task walking. Gait speed and gait variability during walking at a self-selected comfortable speed were assessed in 40 healthy, young adults, and compared between single-task and dual-task walking (i.e., concurrent smartphone gaming) in undisturbed, simple and more challenging walking environments (i.e., stepping over an obstacle while walking). Based on single-task performance, dual-tasking costs were computed and linked to higher-level cognitive control processes, which were assessed for each individual. Cognitive function testing encompassed tests on the mental representation of the gait, working memory capacity, inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility. Our data revealed that gaming on a smartphone while walking strongly affected participants’ gait performance (i.e., up to 26.8% lower gait speed and 60.2% higher gait variability), and decrements in gait performance were related to higher cognitive control processes. Cognitive resources that were associated with performance decrements in dual-task walking include response inhibition, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and a well-structured mental representation of the gait. From that, it appears that even in healthy young adults better cognitive resources may help to maintain high gait performance in situations, in which we have to deal with dual- or multi-task demands (e.g., using a smartphone) while walking.

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Hier inloggen

Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:

BSL Psychologie Totaal

Met BSL Psychologie Totaal blijf je als professional steeds op de hoogte van de nieuwste ontwikkelingen binnen jouw vak. Met het online abonnement heb je toegang tot een groot aantal boeken, protocollen, vaktijdschriften en e-learnings op het gebied van psychologie en psychiatrie. Zo kun je op je gemak en wanneer het jou het beste uitkomt verdiepen in jouw vakgebied.

Meer informatie

Al-Yahya, E., Dawes, H., Smith, L., Dennis, A., Howells, K., & Cockburn, J. (2011). Cognitive motor interference while walking: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(3), 715–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.08.008. CrossRefPubMed

Amboni, M., Barone, P., & Hausdorff, J. M. (2013). Cognitive contributions to gait and falls: Evidence and implications. Movement Disorders, 28(11), 1520–1533. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.25674. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Beurskens, R., & Bock, O. (2012). Age-related deficits of dual-task walking: A review. Neural Plasticity, 2012, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/131608. CrossRef

Beurskens, R., Steinberg, F., Antoniewicz, F., Wolff, W., & Granacher, U. (2016). Neural correlates of dual-task walking: Effects of cognitive versus motor interference in young adults. Neural Plasticity, 2016, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8032180. CrossRef

Ble, A., Volpato, S., Zuliani, G., Guralnik, J. M., Bandinelli, S., Lauretani, F., & Ferrucci, L. (2005). Executive function correlates with walking speed in older persons: The InCHIANTI study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(3), 410–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53157.x. CrossRefPubMed

Bowie, C. R., & Harvey, P. D. (2006). Administration and interpretation of the Trail Making Test. Nature Protocols, 1(5), 2277–2281. https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2006.390. CrossRefPubMed

Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587. CrossRef

Corsi, P. M. (1972). Human memory and the medial temporal region of the brain (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from McGill University (PID 70754).

Craik, F. I. M., & Bialystok, E. (2006). Cognition through the lifespan: Mechanisms of change. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(3), 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.01.007. CrossRefPubMed

Diamond, A. (2012). Activities and programs that improve children’s executive functions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412453722. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychological Reviews, 64, 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750. CrossRef

Diamond, A., & Ling, D. S. (2016). Conclusions about interventions, programs, and approaches for improving executive functions that appear justified and those that, despite much hype, do not. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.11.005. CrossRef

Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203267. CrossRef

Gläscher, J., Adolphs, R., Damasio, H., Bechara, A., Rudrauf, D., Calamia, M., & Tranel, D. (2012). Lesion mapping of cognitive control and value-based decision making in the prefrontal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(36), 14681–14686. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1206608109. CrossRef

Grant, D. A., & Berg, E. (1948). A behavioral analysis of degree of reinforcement and ease of shifting to new responses in a Weigl-type card-sorting problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38(4), 404–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0059831. CrossRefPubMed

Holtzer, R., Mahoney, J. R., Izzetoglu, M., Izzetoglu, K., Onaral, B., & Verghese, J. (2011). fNIRS study of walking and walking while talking in young and old individuals. The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 66A(8), 879–887. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glr068. CrossRef

Hommel, B. (2011). The Simon effect as tool and heuristic. Acta Psychologica, 136(2), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.011. CrossRefPubMed

Hubert, A. (2015). True color [Software]. Available from http://play.google.com.

Hyman, I. E., Boss, S. M., Wise, B. M., McKenzie, K. E., & Caggiano, J. M. (2009). Did you see the unicycling clown? Inattentional blindness while walking and talking on a cell phone. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(5), 597–607. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1638. CrossRef

Jacksteit, R., Mau-Moeller, A., Behrens, M., Bader, R., Mittelmeier, W., Skripitz, R., & Stöckel, T. (2018). The mental representation of the human gait in patients with severe knee osteoarthrosis: A clinical study to aid understanding of impairment and disability. Clinical Rehabilitation, 32(1), 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215517719312. CrossRefPubMed

Jacksteit, R., Mau-Moeller, A., Völker, A., Bader, R., Mittelmeier, W., Skripitz, R., & Stöckel, T. (2019). The mental representation of the human gait in hip osteoarthrosis and total hip arthroplasty patients: A clinical cross-sectional study. Clinical Rehabilitation, 33(2), 335–344. CrossRef

Kelly, V. E., Eusterbrock, A. J., & Shumway-Cook, A. (2013). Factors influencing dynamic prioritization during dual-task walking in healthy young adults. Gait & Posture, 37(1), 131–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.05.031. CrossRef

Kelly, V. E., Janke, A. A., & Shumway-Cook, A. (2010). Effects of instructed focus and task difficulty on concurrent walking and cognitive task performance in healthy young adults. Experimental Brain Research, 207(1–2), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-010-2429-6. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kessels, R. P. C., van Zandvoort, M. J. E., Postma, A., Kappelle, L. J., & de Haan, E. H. F. (2000). The Corsi block-tapping task: Standardization and normative data. Applied Neuropsychology, 7, 252–258. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324826AN0704. CrossRefPubMed

Kressig, R. W., & Beauchet, O. (2006). Guidelines for clinical applications of spatio-temporal gait analysis in older adults. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 18(2), 174–176. CrossRef

Lamberg, E. M., & Muratori, L. M. (2012). Cell phones change the way we walk. Gait & Posture, 35(4), 688–690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.12.005. CrossRef

Lim, J., Amado, A., Sheehan, L., & Van Emmerik, R. E. A. (2015). Dual task interference during walking: The effects of texting on situational awareness and gait stability. Gait & Posture, 42(4), 466–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.07.060. CrossRef

Lopresti-Goodman, S. M., Rivera, A., & Dressel, C. (2012). Practicing safe text: The impact of texting on walking behavior. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(4), 644–648. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2846. CrossRef

Lu, C., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2(2), 174–207. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210959. CrossRef

Lustig, C., Shah, P., Seidler, R., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. A. (2009). Aging, training, and the brain: A review and future directions. Neuropsychology Review, 19(4), 504–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-009-9119-9. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Meyer, D. E., Kieras, D. E., Lauber, E., Schumacher, E. H., Glass, J., Zurbriggen, E., & Apfelblat, D. (1995). Adaptive executive control: Flexible multiple-task performance without pervasive immutable response-selection bottlenecks. Acta Psychologica, 90(1–3), 163–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(95)00026-Q. CrossRef

Montero-Odasso, M., Verghese, J., Beauchet, O., & Hausdorff, J. M. (2012). Gait and cognition: A complementary approach to understanding brain function and the risk of falling. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60(11), 2127–2136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.04209.x. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Morris, R., Lord, S., Bunce, J., Burn, D., & Rochester, L. (2016). Gait and cognition: Mapping the global and discrete relationships in ageing and neurodegenerative disease. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 64, 326–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.02.012. CrossRefPubMed

Mueller, S. T., & Piper, B. J. (2014). The psychology experiment building language (PEBL) and PEBL test battery. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 222, 250–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.10.024. CrossRefPubMed

Nasar, J., Hecht, P., & Wener, R. (2008). Mobile telephones, distracted attention, and pedestrian safety. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40(1), 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2007.04.005. CrossRefPubMed

Nasar, J. L., & Troyer, D. (2013). Pedestrian injuries due to mobile phone use in public places. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 57, 91–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.03.021. CrossRefPubMed

Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 155–189). Hove, England: Psychology Press/Erlbaum (UK) Taylor & Francis.

Piper, B. J., Li, V., Eiwaz, M. A., Kobel, Y. V., Benice, T. S., Chu, A. M., & Mueller, S. T. (2012). Executive function on the psychology experiment building language test. Behavior Research Methods, 44(1), 110–123. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0096-6. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Plummer, P., Apple, S., Dowd, C., & Keith, E. (2015). Texting and walking: Effect of environmental setting and task prioritization on dual-task interference in healthy young adults. Gait & Posture, 41(1), 46–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.08.007. CrossRef

Reitan, R. M., & Wolfson, D. (1995). Category test and trail making test as measures of frontal lobe functions. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 9(April), 50–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854049508402057. CrossRef

Salthouse, T. A. (2010). Is Flanker-based inhibition related to age? Identifying specific influences of individual differences on neurocognitive variables. Brain and Cognition, 73(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2010.02.003.Is. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Sánchez-Cubillo, I., Periáñez, J. A., Adrover-Roig, D., Rodríguez-Sánchez, J. M., Ríos-Lago, M., Tirapu, J., & Barceló, F. (2009). Construct validity of the trail making test: Role of task-switching, working memory, inhibition/interference control, and visuomotor abilities. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 15, 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617709090626. CrossRefPubMed

Schack, T. (2012). A method for measuring mental representation. In G. Tenenbaum & B. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of measurement in sport (pp. 203–214). Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics.

Schack, T., & Mechsner, F. (2006). Representation of motor skills in human long-term memory. Neuroscience Letters, 391(3), 77–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2005.10.009. CrossRefPubMed

Schack, T., & Ritter, H. (2009). The cognitive nature of action—functional links between cognitive psychology, movement science, and robotics. Progress in Brain Research, 174, 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(09)01319-3. CrossRefPubMed

Sigman, M., & Dehaene, S. (2006). Dynamics of the central bottleneck: Dual-task and task uncertainty. PLoS Biology, 4(7), e220. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040220. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Stins, J. F., Polderman, J. C. T., Boomsma, D. I., & de Geus, E. J. C. (2008). Conditional accuracy in response interference tasks: Evidence from the Eriksen flanker task and the spatial conflict task. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 409–417. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10053-008-0005-4. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Stöckel, T., Hughes, C. M. L., & Schack, T. (2012). Representation of grasp postures and anticipatory motor planning in children. Psychological Research, 76(6), 768–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-011-0387-7. CrossRefPubMed

Stöckel, T., Jacksteit, R., Behrens, M., Skripitz, R., Bader, R., & Mau-Moeller, A. (2015). The mental representation of the human gait in young and older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 943. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00943. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Stuhr, C., Hughes, C. M. L., & Stöckel, T. (2018). Task-specific and variability-driven activation of cognitive control processes during motor performance. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 10811. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-29007-3. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2008). Response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(11), 418–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.005. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Willis, S. L., Tennstedt, S. L., Marsiske, M., Ball, K., Elias, J., Koepke, K. M., & ACTIVE Study Group. (2006). Long-term effects of cognitive training on everyday functional outcomes in older adults. JAMA, 296(23), 2805. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.23.2805. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Woollacott, M., & Shumway-Cook, A. (2002). Attention and the control of posture and gait: A review of an emerging area of research. Gait & Posture, 16(1), 1–14. CrossRef

Yogev-Seligmann, G., Hausdorff, J. M., & Giladi, N. (2008). The role of executive function and attention in gait. Movement Disorders, 23(3), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.21720. CrossRefPubMed

Zelinski, E. M. (2009). Far transfer in cognitive training of older adults. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 27(5), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.3233/RNN-2009-0495. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Cognitive control processes associated with successful gait performance in dual-task walking in healthy young adults
Auteurs:: Tino Stöckel
Anett Mau-Moeller
Publicatiedatum: 12-04-2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01184-4
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Tijdschrift: Psychological Research An International Journal of Perception, Attention, Memory, and Action
Uitgave 6/2020
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Publisher's Note

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:

BSL Psychologie Totaal

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2020

Deaf signers outperform hearing non-signers in recognizing happy facial expressions

Embodied cognition in multitasking: increased hand-specific task shielding when stimuli are presented near the hand

The primacy order effect in complex decision making

Are model parameters linked to processing stages? An empirical investigation for the ex-Gaussian, ex-Wald, and EZ diffusion models

Measuring spontaneous mentalizing with a ball detection task: putting the attention-check hypothesis by Phillips and colleagues (2015) to the test

The effects of music on spatial reasoning