Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 233, Issue 9, pp 2607–2617 | Cite as

Allocation of attention and dual-task effects on upper and lower limb task performance in healthy young adults

  • Tara L. McIsaacEmail author
  • Benjapol Benjapalakorn
Research Article

Abstract

Many daily activities require separate tasks of the arms and legs to be performed together, as in driving where one foot controls the accelerator, one arm steers, and the other arm and foot shift gears and clutch. Strategies and underlying mechanisms for attention allocation and task prioritization have been explored in standing and walking while performing a manual or cognitive task. These studies reveal a task-related strategy that often, but not always, prioritizes the lower limb task of walking. However, in the absence of locomotion and gait-related postural control, as in sitting, multi-limb dual-task strategies are largely unexplored. Therefore, to characterize dual-task interference of arm and leg tasks during a driving-like activity, seated participants were assessed for the interference effect on hand velocity and movement time of a three-phase reach task and on the error in tracking of a foot-pedal ramp-tracking task. We found that the dual-task cost to reaching shown as decreases in reach performance differed among the three phases, that the cost to foot-pedal tracking also differed by phase, and that the between-task trade-off and prioritization strategy varied between the steep and gradual tracking ramps. Therefore, we propose that attention to concurrent reaching and foot-pedal tracking was flexibly allocated based on phase of the tasks.

Keywords

Multi-limb Motor control Prioritization Driving Arm and leg 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank G. Diermayr, D. Nilsen, and Y.-C. Hung for helpful comments on early versions of the manuscript. This work was supported by a Teachers College Dean’s Grant to T. L. McIsaac and the Chulalongkorn University Instructor Development Grant to B. Benjapalakorn.

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest in this work.

References

  1. Bloem BR, Valkenburg VV, Slabbekoorn M, Willemsen MD (2001) The multiple tasks test: development and normal strategies. Gait Posture 14:191–202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Boisgontier MP, Beets IAM, Duysens J, Nieuwboer A, Krampe RT, Swinnen SP (2013) Age-related differences in attentional cost associated with postural dual tasks: increased recruitment of generic cognitive resources in older adults. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 37:1824–1837CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Brackstone M, McDonald M (2007) Driver headway: how close is too close on a motorway? Ergonomics 50:1183–1195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Diermayr G, McIsaac TL, Kaminski TR, Gordon AM (2011) Aging effects on object transport during gait. Gait Posture 34:334–339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dressel J (2008) Measuring dual task cost using the performance operating characteristic: the effect of emotional words on one’s functional field of view Doctoral Dissertation 3315981. University of Kansas, KansasGoogle Scholar
  6. Federal Highway Administration (2012) Highway statistics 2012—distribution of licensed drivers. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2012/dl20.cfm. Accessed June 06 2014
  7. Fitch GA et al (2013) The impact of hand-held and hands-free cell phone use on driving performance and safety-critical event risk. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  8. Gysin P, Kaminski TR, Hass CJ, Grobet CE, Gordon AM (2008) Effects of gait variations on grip force coordination during object transport. J Neurophysiol 100:2477–2485CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Janssen CP, Brumby DP, Garnett R (2012) Natural break points: the influence of priorities and cognitive and motor cues on dual-task interleaving. J Cogn Eng Decis Making 6:5–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kahneman D (1973) Attention and effort. Prentice-Hall series in experimental psychology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  11. Kelly VE, Janke AA, Shumway-Cook A (2010) Effects of instructed focus and task difficulty on concurrent walking and cognitive task performance in healthy young adults. Exp Brain Res 207:65–73PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kelly VE, Eusterbrock AJ, Shumway-Cook A (2013) Factors influencing dynamic prioritization during dual-task walking in healthy young adults. Gait Posture 37:131–134PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Laessoe U, Hoeck HC, Simonsen O, Voigt M (2008) Residual attentional capacity amongst young and elderly during dual and triple task walking. Hum Mov Sci 27:496–512CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lajoie Y, Teasdale N, Bard C, Fleury M (1993) Attentional demands for static and dynamic equilibrium. Exp Brain Res 97:139–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Marteniuk RG, MacKenzie CL, Jeannerod M, Athenes S, Dugas C (1987) Constraints on human arm movement trajectories. Can J Psychol 41:365–378CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Meyer DE, Kieras DE (1997a) A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychol Rev 104:3–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Meyer DE, Kieras DE (1997b) A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. Psychol Rev 104:749–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nagasaki H (1989) Asymmetric velocity and acceleration profiles of human arm movements. Exp Brain Res 74:319–326CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2014) Distracted driving facts and statistics. US Department of Transportation. http://www.distraction.gov/content/get-the-facts/facts-and-statistics.html. Accessed 23 December 2014
  20. Navon D, Miller J (2002) Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cogn Psychol 44:193–251CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Norman DA, Bobrow DG (1975) On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cogn Psychol 7:44–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pashler H (1994) Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychol Bull 116:220–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Plummer-D’Amato P, Cohen Z, Daee NA, Lawson SE, Lizotte MR, Padilla A (2012) Effects of once weekly dual-task training in older adults: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Geriatr Gerontol Int 12:622–629CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Rapp MA, Krampe RT, Baltes PB (2006) Regular research article: adaptive task prioritization in aging: selective resource allocation to postural control is preserved in Alzheimer disease. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 14:52–61CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Schumacher EH, Seymour TL, Glass JM, Fencsik DE, Lauber EJ, Kieras DE, Meyer DE (2001) Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychol Sci 12:101–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M, Kerns KA, Baldwin M (1997) The effects of two types of cognitive tasks on postural stability in older adults with and without a history of falls. J Gerontol Ser A-Biol Sci Med Sci 52A:M232–M240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Stutts J, Feaganes J, Reinfurt D, Rodgman E, Hamlett C, Gish K, Staplin L (2005) Driver’s exposure to distractions in their natural driving environment. Accid Anal Prev 37:1093–1101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Supuk T, Bajd T, Kurillo G (2011) Assessment of reach-to-grasp trajectories toward stationary objects. Clin Biomech 26:811–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Van Mier H, Hulstijn W, Petersen SE (1993) Changes in motor planning during the acquisition of movement patterns in a continuous task. Acta Psychol 82:291–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. van Vliet P, Pelton TA, Hollands KL, Carey L, Wing AM (2013) Neuroscience findings on coordination of reaching to grasp an object: implications for research. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 27:622–635CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Wickens CD (2002) Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 3:159–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Woollacott M, Shumway-Cook A (2002) Attention and the control of posture and gait: a review of an emerging area of research. Gait Posture 16:1–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Yogev-Seligmann G, Hausdorff JM, Giladi N (2008) The role of executive function and attention in gait. Mov Disord 23:329–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Yogev-Seligmann G, Hausdorff JM, Giladi N (2012) Do we always prioritize balance when walking? Towards an integrated model of task prioritization. Mov Disord 27:765–770CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, Teachers CollegeColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Faculty of Sports SciencesChulalongkorn UniversityBangkokThailand
  3. 3.Department of Physical Therapy, Arizona School of Health SciencesA.T. Still UniversityMesaUSA

Personalised recommendations