Psychological Research

, Volume 83, Issue 1, pp 104–115 | Cite as

A cross-sectional analysis on the effects of age on dual tasking in typically developing children

  • Shikha SaxenaEmail author
  • Annette Majnemer
  • Karen Li
  • Miriam Beauchamp
  • Isabelle Gagnon
Original Article


Dual tasking is an integral part of everyday activities for children. Therefore, as with the other aspects of child development—motor, cognitive, perceptual, psychological, and behavioral—it is important to understand the maturation process of dual-tasking skills in children. Characterizing age-related changes in children’s dual-task performance has been problematic, because differences in dual-tasking ability are confounded by age differences in abilities in the relevant single-task performances. The effect of age on dual-tasking ability was examined in 221 typically developing children aged 5–8 years using two motor–cognitive dual-task paradigms: walking while performing an n-back cognitive task, and drawing a trail while performing an n-back cognitive task. The test–retest reliability of the dual-task paradigm was examined by re-assessing 50 participants after 1 month. Individual differences in single-task performance were controlled for, so that any age differences in dual-task costs could not be attributed to differences in single-task performance. There were no age-related differences in dual-task cost of any task (p > 0.05). However, the dual-task cost of trail-making was significantly greater than the dual-task cost of walking when performed under similar cognitive loads (p < 0.0001). The intra-class correlation coefficient ranged from 0.71 to 0.92 for all dual-task performances. The results suggest that previously reported age differences in dual-task costs in young children may have been driven by developmental differences in single-task ability, and that general task coordination ability is comparable in children 5–8 years of age.



The authors thank Mourad Dahhou for statistical expertise and Eda Cinar for content expertise during data interpretation.


No funding disclosures.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

All procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of interest

Shikha Saxena, Annette Majnemer, Karen Li, Miriam Beauchamp, and Isabelle Gagnon declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Data availability statement

The data sets during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


  1. Adleman, N. E., Menon, V., Blasey, C. M., White, C. D., Warsofsky, I. S., Glover, G. H., et al. (2002). A developmental fMRI study of the Stroop color-word task. Neuroimage, 16(1), 61–75 (clinical trial research support, non-U.S. govt research support, U.S. govt, P.H.S).Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, M., Bucks, R. S., Bayliss, D. M., & Della Sala, S. (2011). Effect of age on dual-task performance in children and adults. Memory & Cognition, 39(7), 1241–1252.Google Scholar
  3. Assaiante, C. (1998). Development of locomotor balance control in healthy children. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 22(4), 527–532.Google Scholar
  4. Bleyenheuft, Y., Wilmotte, P., & Thonnard, J. L. (2010). Relationship between tactile spatial resolution and digital dexterity during childhood. Somatosensory & Motor Research, 27(1), 9–14.Google Scholar
  5. Boonyong, S., Siu, K. C., van Donkelaar, P., Chou, L. S., & Woollacott, M. H. (2012). Development of postural control during gait in typically developing children: The effects of dual-task conditions. Gait Posture, 35(3), 428–434.Google Scholar
  6. Bridges, A. J., & Holler, K. A. (2007). How many is enough? Determining optimal sample sizes for normative studies in pediatric neuropsychology. Child Neuropsychology, 13(6), 528–538.Google Scholar
  7. Bucci, M. P., Seassau, M., Larger, S., Bui-Quoc, E., & Gerard, C.-L. (2014). Effect of visual attention on postural control in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Research Developmental Disabilities, 35(6), 1292–1300.Google Scholar
  8. Bujang, M. A., & Baharum, N. (2017). A simplified guide to determination of sample size requirements for estimating the value of intraclass correlation coefficient: A review. Archives of Orofacial Science. 12(1).Google Scholar
  9. Bunge, S. A., Klingberg, T., Jacobsen, R. B., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2000). A resource model of the neural basis of executive working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(7), 3573–3578.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, Y. N., & Mitra, S. (2009). The spatial–verbal difference in the n-back task: An ERP study. Acta Neurologica Taiwanica, 18(3), 170–179.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  12. Community-University Partnership for the Study of Children, Y., and Families (2011). Review of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence—3rd edn (Canadian) (WPPSI-IIICDN). Alberta: Edmonton.Google Scholar
  13. Cowan, N., Day, L., Saults, J. S., Keller, T. A., Johnson, T., & Flores, L. (1992). The role of verbal output time in the effects of word length on immediate memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(1), 1–17.Google Scholar
  14. Črnčec, R., Wilson, S. J., & Prior, M. (2006). The cognitive and academic benefits of music to children: Facts and fiction. Educational Psychology, 26(4), 579–594.Google Scholar
  15. D’Esposito, M., Detre, J. A., Alsop, D. C., Shin, R. K., Atlas, S., & Grossman, M. (1995). The neural basis of the central executive system of working memory. Nature, 378(6554), 279–281.Google Scholar
  16. Dayanidhi, S., Hedberg, Å, Valero-Cuevas, F. J., & Forssberg, H. (2013). Developmental improvements in dynamic control of fingertip forces last throughout childhood and into adolescence. Journal of Neurophysiology, 110(7), 1583–1592.Google Scholar
  17. De Graaf-Peters, V. B., Blauw-Hospers, C. H., Dirks, T., Bakker, H., Bos, A. F., & Hadders-Algra, M. (2007). Development of postural control in typically developing children and children with cerebral palsy: Possibilities for intervention? Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 31(8), 1191–1200.Google Scholar
  18. Diamond, A. (2000). Close interrelation of motor development and cognitive development and of the cerebellum and prefrontal cortex. Child Development, 71(2), 44–56.Google Scholar
  19. Dossett, D., & Burns, B. (2000). The development of children’s knowledge of attention and resource allocation in single and dual tasks. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 161(2), 216–234.Google Scholar
  20. Foley, J. A., Cantagallo, A., Della Sala, S., & Logie, R. H. (2010). Dual task performance and post traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 24(6), 851–858.Google Scholar
  21. Gasser, T., Rousson, V., Caflisch, J., & Jenni, O. G. (2010). Development of motor speed and associated movements from 5 to 18 years. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 52(3), 256–263.Google Scholar
  22. Guttentag, R. E. (1989). Age differences in dual-task performance: Procedures, assumptions, and results. Developmental Review, 9(2), 146–170.Google Scholar
  23. Hagmann-von Arx, P., Manicolo, O., Lemola, S., & Grob, A. (2016). Walking in school-aged children in a dual-task paradigm is related to age but not to cognition, motor behavior, injuries, or psychosocial functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 352.Google Scholar
  24. Hagmann-von Arx, P., Manicolo, O., Perkinson-Gloor, N., Weber, P., Grob, A., & Lemola, S. (2015). Gait in very preterm school-aged children in dual-task paradigms. PLoS One. 10(12), e0144363.Google Scholar
  25. Hallam, S., Price, J., & Katsarou, G. (2002). The effects of background music on primary school pupils’ task performance. Educational Studies, 28(2), 111–122.Google Scholar
  26. Henderson, S., Sugden, D., Barnett, A., Petermann, F., Bös, K., & Kastner, J. (2007). Movement assessment battery for children—2nd edn (Movement ABC-2)—Deutschsprachige Adaptation. London: Harcourt Assessment.Google Scholar
  27. Herath, P., Klingberg, T., Young, J., Amunts, K., & Roland, P. (2001). Neural correlates of dual task interference can be dissociated from those of divided attention: An fMRI study. Cerebral Cortex, 11(9), 796–805.Google Scholar
  28. Howell, D. R., Osternig, L. R., & Chou, L.-S. (2015). Return to activity after concussion affects dual-task gait balance control recovery. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 47(4), 673–680.Google Scholar
  29. Hrabok, M., Brooks, B. L., Fay-McClymont, T. B., & Sherman, E. M. (2014). Wechsler intelligence scale for children-fourth edition (WISC-IV) short-form validity: A comparison study in pediatric epilepsy. Child Neuropsychology, 20(1), 49–59.Google Scholar
  30. Hulme, C., Thomson, N., Muir, C., & Lawrence, A. (1984). Speech rate and the development of short-term memory span. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38(2), 241–253.Google Scholar
  31. Imbo, I., & Vandierendonck, A. (2007). The development of strategy use in elementary school children: Working memory and individual differences. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 96(4), 284–309.Google Scholar
  32. Irwin-Chase, H., & Burns, B. (2000). Developmental changes in children’s abilities to share and allocate attention in a dual task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77(1), 61–85.Google Scholar
  33. Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Meier, B. (2010). The concurrent validity of the N-back task as a working memory measure. Memory, 18(4), 394–412.Google Scholar
  34. Jiang, Y. (2004). Resolving dual-task interference: An fMRI study. Neuroimage, 22(2), 748–754.Google Scholar
  35. Koechlin, E., Basso, G., Pietrini, P., Panzer, S., & Grafman, J. (1999). The role of the anterior prefrontal cortex in human cognition. Nature, 399(6732), 148–151.Google Scholar
  36. Krampe, R. T., Schaefer, S., Lindenberger, U., & Baltes, P. B. (2011). Lifespan changes in multi-tasking: Concurrent walking and memory search in children, young, and older adults. Gait Posture, 33(3), 401–405.Google Scholar
  37. Lejeune, C., Desmottes, L., Catale, C., & Meulemans, T. (2015). Age difference in dual-task interference effects on procedural learning in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 129, 165–172.Google Scholar
  38. Li, K. Z., Krampe, R. T., & Bondar, A. (2005). An ecological approach to studying aging and dual-task performance. Cognitive Limitations in Aging and Psychopathology, 190–218.Google Scholar
  39. Marx, R. G., Menezes, A., Horovitz, L., Jones, E. C., & Warren, R. F. (2003). A comparison of two time intervals for test–retest reliability of health status instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(8), 730–735.Google Scholar
  40. McCrimmon, A. W., & Smith, A. D. (2013). Review of the Wechsler abbreviated scale of intelligence, second edition (WASI-II). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31(3), 337–341.Google Scholar
  41. McDonald, B. C., Saykin, A. J., & McAllister, T. W. (2012). Functional MRI of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI): Progress and perspectives from the first decade of studies. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 6(2), 193–207.Google Scholar
  42. McIsaac, T. L., Lamberg, E. M., & Muratori, L. M. (2015). Building a framework for a dual task taxonomy. BioMed Research International. 2015, 10.Google Scholar
  43. McKenzie, B., Bull, R., & Gray, C. (2003). The effects of phonological and visual–spatial interference on children’s arithmetical performance. Educational and Child Psychology, 20(3), 93–108.Google Scholar
  44. McNemar, Q. (1974). Correction to a correction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(1), 145–146.Google Scholar
  45. Miyahara, M., Piek, J., & Barrett, N. (2006). Accuracy of drawing in a dual-task and resistance-to-distraction study: Motor or attention deficit? Human Movement Science, 25(1), 100–109.Google Scholar
  46. Monk, A. F., Jackson, D., Nielsen, D., Jefferies, E., & Olivier, P. (2011). N-backer: An auditory n-back task with automatic scoring of spoken responses. Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 888–896.Google Scholar
  47. Palluel, E., Nougier, V., & Olivier, I. (2010). Postural control and attentional demand during adolescence. Brain Research, 1358, 151–159.Google Scholar
  48. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychology Bulletin, 116(2), 220–244.Google Scholar
  49. Pelegrina, S., Lechuga, M. T., García-Madruga, J. A., Elosúa, M. R., Macizo, P., Carreiras, M., Fuentes, L. J., & Bajo, M. T. (2015). Normative data on the n-back task for children and young adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1544.Google Scholar
  50. Piaget, J. (1953). The origin of the intelligence in the child. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Pickering, S. J. (2006). Working memory and education.Google Scholar
  52. Reilly, D. S., van Donkelaar, P., Saavedra, S., & Woollacott, M. H. (2008). Interaction between the development of postural control and the executive function of attention (comparative study).Google Scholar
  53. Reiss, A. L., Abrams, M. T., Singer, H. S., Ross, J. L., & Denckla, M. B. (1996). Brain development, gender and IQ in children. A volumetric imaging study. Brain, 119, 1763–1774.Google Scholar
  54. Research Support, N. I. H. Extramural. Journal of Motor Behavior. 40(2), 90–102.Google Scholar
  55. Ruffieux, J., Keller, M., Lauber, B., & Taube, W. (2015). Changes in standing and walking performance under dual-task conditions across the lifespan (research support, non-U.S. Govt). Sports Medicine, 45(12), 1739–1758.Google Scholar
  56. Saxena, S., Cinar, E., Majnemer, A., & Gagnon, I. (2017). Does dual tasking ability change with age across childhood and adolescence? A systematic scoping review. International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience.Google Scholar
  57. Schaefer, S., Jagenow, D., Verrel, J., & Lindenberger, U. (2015). The influence of cognitive load and walking speed on gait regularity in children and young adults. Gait & Posture, 41(1), 258–262.Google Scholar
  58. Schaefer, S., Krampe, R. T., Lindenberger, U., & Baltes, P. B. (2008). Age differences between children and young adults in the dynamics of dual-task prioritization: Body (balance) versus mind (memory). Developmental Psychology, 44(3), 747–757.Google Scholar
  59. Sebastian, M. V., & Hernández-Gil, L. (2016). Do 5-year-old children perform dual-task coordination better than AD patients? Journal of Attention Disorders, 20(2), 87–95.Google Scholar
  60. Shumway-Cook, A., & Woollacott, M. (2012). Motor control: Translating research into clinical practice (4th edn.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
  61. Silverstein, A. B. (1970). Reappraisal of the validity of WAIS, WISC, and WPPSI short forms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34(1), 12–14. Scholar
  62. Tombu, M., & Jolicœur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29(1), 3.Google Scholar
  63. Yildiz, A., & Beste, C. (2015). Parallel and serial processing in dual-tasking differentially involves mechanisms in the striatum and the lateral prefrontal cortex. Brain Structure and Function, 220(6), 3131–3142.Google Scholar
  64. Zago, L., & Tzourio-Mazoyer, N. (2002). Distinguishing visuospatial working memory and complex mental calculation areas within the parietal lobes. Neuroscience Letters, 331(1), 45–49.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Faculty of MedicineMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Montreal Children’s HospitalMcGill University Health Center, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada
  4. 4.Department of Psychology, Ste-Justine Hospital Research CenterUniversity of MontrealMontrealCanada
  5. 5.Concussion Research Lab, Trauma Center, Montreal Children’s HospitalMcGill University Health CenterMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations