4.5 Article

EFFECT OF TYPE OF COGNITIVE TASK AND WALKING SPEED ON COGNITIVE-MOTOR INTERFERENCE DURING DUAL-TASK WALKING

Journal

NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 260, Issue -, Pages 140-148

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.12.016

Keywords

cognition; gait; attention; multi-tasking; healthy; adults

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: We aimed to determine the effect of distinctly different cognitive tasks and walking speed on cognitive-motor interference of dual-task walking. Methods: Fifteen healthy adults performed four cognitive tasks: visuomotor reaction time (VMRT) task, word list generation (WLG) task, serial subtraction (SS) task, and the Stroop (STR) task while sitting and during walking at preferred-speed (dual-task normal walking) and slow-speed (dual-task slow-speed walking). Gait speed was recorded to determine effect on walking. Motor and cognitive costs were measured. Results: Dual-task walking had a significant effect on motor and cognitive parameters. At preferred-speed, the motor cost was lowest for the VMRT task and highest for the STR task. In contrast, the cognitive cost was highest for the VMRT task and lowest for the STR task. Dual-task slow walking resulted in increased motor cost and decreased cognitive cost only for the STR task. Conclusions: Results show that the motor and cognitive cost of dual-task walking depends heavily on the type and perceived complexity of the cognitive task being performed. Cognitive cost for the STR task was low irrespective of walking speed, suggesting that at preferred-speed individuals prioritize complex cognitive tasks requiring higher attentional and processing resources over walking. While performing VMRT task, individuals preferred to prioritize more complex walking task over VMRT task resulting in lesser motor cost and increased cognitive cost for VMRT task. Furthermore, slow walking can assist in diverting greater attention towards complex cognitive tasks, improving its performance while walking. (C) 2013 IBRO. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available