Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Manipulating sensory information: obstacle crossing strategies between typically developing children and young adults

Abstract

Individuals constantly adapt their locomotion to navigate through complex environments. However, little known about anticipatory strategies used by children during adaptive locomotion. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of manipulating visual and somatosensory information during a multiple obstacle crossing task between children and adults. It was hypothesized that compared to young adults, children would have difficulty with anticipatory motor planning and online control during a multiple obstacle crossing task when sensory information was manipulated. Children (N = 16, \(\overline{x}\) = 9 ± 1.07 years) and young adults (N = 16, \(\overline{x}\) = 22 ± 0.96 years) walked along a 7 m pathway towards a goal while avoiding stepping on one, or two virtual obstacles placed 5 m from the start. Visual information regarding the number of obstacles was either presented at the start of steady-state locomotion, or two steps prior to the first obstacle. Each participant completed 36 trials, 18 on flat ground and 18 on foam terrain. Results indicated that in comparison to young adults, children’s foot positions were significantly closer to the first obstacle when visual information about the obstacle was delayed. On flat ground, children demonstrated similar Trail foot positions relative to the first and second obstacles, suggesting children planned for the avoidance of the obstacles separately. On foam terrain, children performed similar to young adults, such that their Trail foot position relative to the first obstacle was significantly closer to the obstacle compared to their Trial foot position relative to the second obstacle. The results suggest that children plan for the avoidance of multiple obstacles differently compared to young adults. When stability is challenged, maintaining forward progression of locomotion overrides the planning of obstacle crossing, such that children perform similar to young adults. Therefore, it appears that children have difficulties with online control and anticipatory motor strategies during a multiple obstacle crossing task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Austin GP, Garrett GE, Bohannon RW (1999) Kinematic analysis of obstacle clearance during locomotion. Gait Posture 10:109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(99)00022-3

  2. Berard JR, Vallis LA (2006) Characteristics of single and double obstacle avoidance strategies a comparison between adults and children. Exp Brain Res 175:21–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0529-0

  3. Bijman MP, Fisher JJ, Vallis LA (2016) How does visual manipulation affect obstacle avoidance strategies used by athletes? J Sports Sci 34(10):915–922. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2015.1078486

  4. Chen H-CC, Ashton-Miller JA, Alexander NB, Schultz AB (1994) Age effects on strategies used to avoid obstacles. Gait Posture 2:139–146

  5. Hollands MA, Marple-Horvat DE, Henkes S, Rowan AK (1995) Human eye movements during visually guided stepping. J Motor Behav 27(2):155–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1995.9941707

  6. Krell J, Patla AE (2002) The influence of multiple obstacles in the travel path on avoidance strategy. Gait Posture 16:15–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00194-1

  7. MacLellan MJ, Patla AE (2006a) Adaptations of walking pattern on a compliant surface to regulate dynamic stability. Exp Brain Res 173:521–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0399-5

  8. MacLellan AJ, Patla AE (2006b) Stepping over an obstacle an obstacle on a compliant travel surface reveals adaptive and maladaptive changes in locomotion patterns. Exp Brain Res 173:531–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0398-6

  9. Marigold DS, Patla AE (2005) Adapting locomotion to different surface compliances: neuromuscular responses and change in movement dynamics. J Neurophysiol 94:1733–1750. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00019.2005

  10. Matthis JS, Frajen BR (2013) Visual control of foot placement when walking over complex terrain. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 40(1):106–115. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033101

  11. McFadyen BJ, Malouin F, Dumas F (2001) Anticipatory locomotor control for obstacle avoidance in mid-childhood aged children. Gait Posture 13:7–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(00)00090-4

  12. Mohagheghi AA, Moraes R, Patla AE (2004) The effects of distance and on-line visual information on the control of approach phase and step over an obstacle during locomotion. Exp Brain Res 155:459–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1751-7

  13. Patla AE (1996) Neurobiomechanical bases for the control of human locomotion. In: Bronstein AM, Brandt T, Woollacott MH (eds) Clinical disorders of balance, posture and gait. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 19–40

  14. Patla AE (1997) Understanding the roles of vision in the control of human locomotion. Gait Posture 5:54–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(96)01109-5

  15. Patla AE, Rietdyk S (1993) Visual control of limb trajectory over obstacles during locomotion: effect of obstacle height and width. Gait Posture 1:45–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.11.005

  16. Patla AE, Vickers JN (1997) Where and when do you look as we approach and step over an obstacle in the travel path? NeuroReport 8:3661–3665

  17. Patla AE, Adkin A, Martin C, Holden R, Prentice S (1996a) Characteristics of voluntary visual sampling of the environment for safe locomotion over different terrains. Exp Brain Res 112:513–522

  18. Patla AE, Rietdyk S, Martin C, Prentice S (1996b) Locomotor patterns of the leading and the trailing limbs as solid and fragile obstacles are stepped over: some insights into the role of vision during locomotion. J Motor Behav 28(1):35–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1996.9941731

  19. Pryde KM, Roy EA, Patla AE (1997) Age-related trends in locomotor ability and obstacle avoidance. Hum Mov Sci 16:507–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9457(96)00064-4

  20. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MJ (1985) The growth of stability: postural control from a developmental perspective. J Motor Behav 17(2):131–147

  21. Vallis LA, McFadyen BJ (2005) Children use different anticipatory control strategies than adults to circumvent an obstacle in the travel path. Exp Brain Res 167:119–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-005-0054-6

  22. Winter DA (1995) Human balance and posture control during standing and walking. Gait Posture 3(4):193–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/0966-6362(96)82849-9

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (05288-2014).

Author information

Correspondence to Michael Cinelli.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

There were no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Communicated by Francesco Lacquaniti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rapos, V., Cinelli, M. Manipulating sensory information: obstacle crossing strategies between typically developing children and young adults. Exp Brain Res 238, 513–523 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-020-05732-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Children
  • Obstacle crossing
  • Visuo-motor control
  • Multi-sensory integration
  • Dynamic stability