Effects of aging on the relationship between cognitive demand and step variability during dual-task walking
- 730 Downloads
A U-shaped relationship between cognitive demand and gait control may exist in dual-task situations, reflecting opposing effects of external focus of attention and attentional resource competition. The purpose of the study was twofold: to examine whether gait control, as evaluated from step-to-step variability, is related to cognitive task difficulty in a U-shaped manner and to determine whether age modifies this relationship. Young and older adults walked on a treadmill without attentional requirement and while performing a dichotic listening task under three attention conditions: non-forced (NF), forced-right (FR), and forced-left (FL). The conditions increased in their attentional demand and requirement for inhibitory control. Gait control was evaluated by the variability of step parameters related to balance control (step width) and rhythmic stepping pattern (step length and step time). A U-shaped relationship was found for step width variability in both young and older adults and for step time variability in older adults only. Cognitive performance during dual tasking was maintained in both young and older adults. The U-shaped relationship, which presumably results from a trade-off between an external focus of attention and competition for attentional resources, implies that higher-level cognitive processes are involved in walking in young and older adults. Specifically, while these processes are initially involved only in the control of (lateral) balance during gait, they become necessary for the control of (fore-aft) rhythmic stepping pattern in older adults, suggesting that attentional resources turn out to be needed in all facets of walking with aging. Finally, despite the cognitive resources required by walking, both young and older adults spontaneously adopted a “posture second” strategy, prioritizing the cognitive task over the gait task.
KeywordsAging Gait Cognitive control Step variability Resource competition
This study was supported by the National Institute on Aging at the National Institutes of Health (1K99AG033684). The authors are very grateful to Sharon Lynn Salhi, Ph.D., for presubmission editorial assistance.
- Aylward GP, Gordon M, Verhulst SJ (1997) Relationships between continuous performance task scores and other cognitive measures: causality or commonality. Assessment 4:325–336Google Scholar
- Brach JS, Berlin JE, VanSwearingen JM, Newman AB, Studenski SA (2005) Too much or too little step width variability is associated with a fall history in older persons who walk at or near normal gait speed. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2:21. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-2-21 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Braver TS, Cohen JD (2000) On the control of control: the role of dopamine in regulating prefrontal function and working memory. In: Monsell S, Driver J (eds) Attention and performance XVIII. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 713–737Google Scholar
- Bryden MP (1988) An overview of the dichotic listening procedure and its relation to cerebral organization. In: Hugdahl K (ed) Handbook of dichotic listening: theory, methods, and research. Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK, pp 1–44Google Scholar
- Hugdahl K (2003) Dichotic listening in the study of auditory laterality. In: Hugdahl K, Davidson RJ (eds) The asymmetrical brain. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 441–476Google Scholar
- Kinsbourne M (1975) The mechanism of hemispheric control of the lateral gradient of attention. In: Rabbitt PMA, Dornic S (eds) Attention and performance V. Academic, London, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Newell KM, Corcos DM (1993) Issues in variability and motor control. In: Newell KM, Corcos DM (eds) Variability and motor control. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, pp 1–12Google Scholar
- Sheikh JI, Yesavage JA (1986) Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) (1986): recent evidence and development of a shorter version. In: Brink TL (ed) Clinical gerontology: a guide to assessment and intervention. The Haworth Press, Binghamton, NY, pp 165–173Google Scholar
- Vaughan C, Davis B, O’Connor J (1999) Dynamics of human gait. Kiboho Publishers, Cape Town, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
- Wechsler D (1981) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—3rd edition. Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, TXGoogle Scholar
- Yogev-Seligmann G, Rotem-Galili Y, Mirelman A, Dickstein R, Giladi N, Hausdorff JM (2010) How does explicit prioritization alter walking during dual-task performance? Effects of age and sex on gait speed and variability. Phys Ther 90:177–186. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20090043 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar