Should the Minimal Intervention Principle Be Considered When Investigating Dual-Tasking Effects on Postural Control?

Felix Wachholz,Federico Tiribello,Peter Federolf,Arunee Promsri

doi:10.3390/brainsci10010001

Felix Wachholz, Federico Tiribello + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10010001

Copy DOI

Journal: Brain sciences	Publication Date: Dec 19, 2019
Citations: 16	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Universität Innsbruck, University of Phayao

Abstract

Dual-tasking charges the sensorimotor system with performing two tasks simultaneously. Center of pressure (COP) analysis reveals the postural control that is altered during dual-tasking, but may not reveal the underlying neural mechanisms. In the current study, we hypothesized that the minimal intervention principle (MIP) provides a concept by which dual-tasking effects on the organization and prioritization of postural control can be predicted. Postural movements of 23 adolescents (age 12.7 ± 1.3; 8 females) and 15 adults (26.9 ± 2.3) were measured in a bipedal stance with eyes open, eyes closed and eyes open while performing a dual-task using a force plate and 39 reflective markers. COP data was analyzed by calculating the mean velocity, standard deviation and amplitude of displacement. Kinematic data was examined by performing a principal component analysis (PCA) and extracting postural movement components. Two variables were determined to investigate changes in amplitude (aVark) and in control (Nk) of the principal movement components. Results in aVark and in Nk agreed well with the predicted dual-tasking effects. Thus, the current study corroborates the notion that the MIP should be considered when investigating postural control under dual-tasking conditions.

Highlights

Human motor control is largely automatized in many every-day situations, which means that sensorimotor processing requires little or no attention [1]
In the anterior-posterior direction (Figure 1, column 1), differences were only observed in the mean velocity of the center of pressure (COP) motion (F(2, 72) = 11.107, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.236)
Post-hoc tests showed that the COP mean velocity was smaller in the eyes-open trial compared to the eyes-closed trial (p < 0.001)

Summary

Introduction

Human motor control is largely automatized in many every-day situations, which means that sensorimotor processing requires little or no attention [1]. The so-called dual-task paradigm has been used by researchers to investigate this connection between postural control and attentional focus [2,3]. Results are not always consistent when evaluating the effect of performing a concurrent cognitive task on the neural control of stabilizing one’s posture. Some researchers argue that postural control is controlled in a more effective way during dual-tasking [4,5,6,7,8], suggesting that automatic processes regulate postural control [1,3,4,9]. Others have found traditional variables like center of pressure (COP) sway variability, velocity, frequency, or area to be increased and interpret this as less effective postural control [10,11,12,13,14,15] resulting from cognitive resource competition [10]. Some researchers report that postural control is well developed around the age of 12 [19,20] whereas others report differences in equilibrium scores until the age of 15–16 [21,22]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion