Refine
Year of publication
Language
- English (31)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (31)
Keywords
- working memory (10)
- aging (6)
- fMRI (6)
- depression (4)
- modality compatibility (4)
- cognitive-postural dual task (3)
- dual task (3)
- neuroimaging (3)
- postural stability (3)
- Aging (2)
Age-related decline in executive functions and postural control due to degenerative processes in the central nervous system have been related to increased fall-risk in old age. Many studies have shown cognitive-postural dual-task interference in old adults, but research on the role of specific executive functions in this context has just begun. In this study, we addressed the question whether postural control is impaired depending on the coordination of concurrent response-selection processes related to the compatibility of input and output modality mappings as compared to impairments related to working-memory load in the comparison of cognitive dual and single tasks. Specifically, we measured total center of pressure (CoP) displacements in healthy female participants aged 19–30 and 66–84 years while they performed different versions of a spatial one-back working memory task during semi-tandem stance on an unstable surface (i.e., balance pad) while standing on a force plate. The specific working-memory tasks comprised: (i) modality compatible single tasks (i.e., visual-manual or auditory-vocal tasks), (ii) modality compatible dual tasks (i.e., visual-manual and auditory-vocal tasks), (iii) modality incompatible single tasks (i.e., visual-vocal or auditory-manual tasks), and (iv) modality incompatible dual tasks (i.e., visual-vocal and auditory-manual tasks). In addition, participants performed the same tasks while sitting. As expected from previous research, old adults showed generally impaired performance under high working-memory load (i.e., dual vs. single one-back task). In addition, modality compatibility affected one-back performance in dual-task but not in single-task conditions with strikingly pronounced impairments in old adults. Notably, the modality incompatible dual task also resulted in a selective increase in total CoP displacements compared to the modality compatible dual task in the old but not in the young participants. These results suggest that in addition to effects of working-memory load, processes related to simultaneously overcoming special linkages between input- and output modalities interfere with postural control in old but not in young female adults. Our preliminary data provide further evidence for the involvement of cognitive control processes in postural tasks.
Age-related decline in executive functions and postural control due to degenerative processes in the central nervous system have been related to increased fall-risk in old age. Many studies have shown cognitive-postural dual-task interference in old adults, but research on the role of specific executive functions in this context has just begun. In this study, we addressed the question whether postural control is impaired depending on the coordination of concurrent response-selection processes related to the compatibility of input and output modality mappings as compared to impairments related to working-memory load in the comparison of cognitive dual and single tasks. Specifically, we measured total center of pressure (CoP) displacements in healthy female participants aged 19-30 and 66-84 years while they performed different versions of a spatial one-back working memory task during semi-tandem stance on an unstable surface (i.e., balance pad) while standing on a force plate. The specific working-memory tasks comprised: (i) modality compatible single tasks (i.e., visual-manual or auditory-vocal tasks), (ii) modality compatible dual tasks (i.e., visual-manual and auditory-vocal tasks), (iii) modality incompatible single tasks (i.e., visual-vocal or auditory-manual tasks), and (iv) modality incompatible dual tasks (i.e., visual-vocal and auditory-manual tasks). In addition, participants performed the same tasks while sitting. As expected from previous research, old adults showed generally impaired performance under high working-memory load (i.e., dual vs. single one-back task). In addition, modality compatibility affected one-back performance in dual-task but not in single-task conditions with strikingly pronounced impairments in old adults. Notably, the modality incompatible dual task also resulted in a selective increase in total CoP displacements compared to the modality compatible dual task in the old but not in the young participants. These results suggest that in addition to effects of working-memory load, processes related to simultaneously overcoming special linkages between input-and output modalities interfere with postural control in old but not in young female adults. Our preliminary data provide further evidence for the involvement of cognitive control processes in postural tasks.
Age-related decline in executive functions and postural control due to degenerative processes in the central nervous system have been related to increased fall-risk in old age. Many studies have shown cognitive-postural dual-task interference in old adults, but research on the role of specific executive functions in this context has just begun. In this study, we addressed the question whether postural control is impaired depending on the coordination of concurrent response-selection processes related to the compatibility of input and output modality mappings as compared to impairments related to working-memory load in the comparison of cognitive dual and single tasks. Specifically, we measured total center of pressure (CoP) displacements in healthy female participants aged 19–30 and 66–84 years while they performed different versions of a spatial one-back working memory task during semi-tandem stance on an unstable surface (i.e., balance pad) while standing on a force plate. The specific working-memory tasks comprised: (i) modality compatible single tasks (i.e., visual-manual or auditory-vocal tasks), (ii) modality compatible dual tasks (i.e., visual-manual and auditory-vocal tasks), (iii) modality incompatible single tasks (i.e., visual-vocal or auditory-manual tasks), and (iv) modality incompatible dual tasks (i.e., visual-vocal and auditory-manual tasks). In addition, participants performed the same tasks while sitting. As expected from previous research, old adults showed generally impaired performance under high working-memory load (i.e., dual vs. single one-back task). In addition, modality compatibility affected one-back performance in dual-task but not in single-task conditions with strikingly pronounced impairments in old adults. Notably, the modality incompatible dual task also resulted in a selective increase in total CoP displacements compared to the modality compatible dual task in the old but not in the young participants. These results suggest that in addition to effects of working-memory load, processes related to simultaneously overcoming special linkages between input- and output modalities interfere with postural control in old but not in young female adults. Our preliminary data provide further evidence for the involvement of cognitive control processes in postural tasks.
There is evidence for cortical contribution to the regulation of human postural control. Interference from concurrently performed cognitive tasks supports this notion, and the lateral prefrontal cortex (lPFC) has been suggested to play a prominent role in the processing of purely cognitive as well as cognitive-postural dual tasks. The degree of cognitive-motor interference varies greatly between individuals, but it is unresolved whether individual differences in the recruitment of specific lPFC regions during cognitive dual tasking are associated with individual differences in cognitive-motor interference. Here, we investigated inter-individual variability in a cognitive-postural multitasking situation in healthy young adults (n = 29) in order to relate these to inter-individual variability in lPFC recruitment during cognitive multitasking. For this purpose, a oneback working memory task was performed either as single task or as dual task in order to vary cognitive load. Participants performed these cognitive single and dual tasks either during upright stance on a balance pad that was placed on top of a force plate or during fMRI measurement with little to no postural demands. We hypothesized dual one-back task performance to be associated with lPFC recruitment when compared to single one-back task performance. In addition, we expected individual variability in lPFC recruitment to be associated with postural performance costs during concurrent dual one-back performance. As expected, behavioral performance costs in postural sway during dual-one back performance largely varied between individuals and so did lPFC recruitment during dual one-back performance. Most importantly, individuals who recruited the right mid-lPFC to a larger degree during dual one-back performance also showed greater postural sway as measured by larger performance costs in total center of pressure displacements. This effect was selective to the high-load dual one-back task and suggests a crucial role of the right lPFC in allocating resources during cognitivemotor interference. Our study provides further insight into the mechanisms underlying cognitive-motor multitasking and its impairments.
There is evidence for cortical contribution to the regulation of human postural control. Interference from concurrently performed cognitive tasks supports this notion, and the lateral prefrontal cortex (lPFC) has been suggested to play a prominent role in the processing of purely cognitive as well as cognitive-postural dual tasks. The degree of cognitive-motor interference varies greatly between individuals, but it is unresolved whether individual differences in the recruitment of specific lPFC regions during cognitive dual tasking are associated with individual differences in cognitive-motor interference. Here, we investigated inter-individual variability in a cognitive-postural multitasking situation in healthy young adults (n = 29) in order to relate these to inter-individual variability in lPFC recruitment during cognitive multitasking. For this purpose, a oneback working memory task was performed either as single task or as dual task in order to vary cognitive load. Participants performed these cognitive single and dual tasks either during upright stance on a balance pad that was placed on top of a force plate or during fMRI measurement with little to no postural demands. We hypothesized dual one-back task performance to be associated with lPFC recruitment when compared to single one-back task performance. In addition, we expected individual variability in lPFC recruitment to be associated with postural performance costs during concurrent dual one-back performance. As expected, behavioral performance costs in postural sway during dual-one back performance largely varied between individuals and so did lPFC recruitment during dual one-back performance. Most importantly, individuals who recruited the right mid-lPFC to a larger degree during dual one-back performance also showed greater postural sway as measured by larger performance costs in total center of pressure displacements. This effect was selective to the high-load dual one-back task and suggests a crucial role of the right lPFC in allocating resources during cognitivemotor interference. Our study provides further insight into the mechanisms underlying cognitive-motor multitasking and its impairments.
Basic psychological needs theory postulates that a social environment that satisfies individuals’ three basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness leads to optimal growth and well-being. On the other hand, the frustration of these needs is associated with ill-being and depressive symptoms foremost investigated in non-clinical samples; yet, there is a paucity of research on need frustration in clinical samples. Survey data were compared between adult individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD; n = 115; 48.69% female; 38.46 years, SD = 10.46) with those of a non-depressed comparison sample (n = 201; 53.23% female; 30.16 years, SD = 12.81). Need profiles were examined with a linear mixed model (LMM). Individuals with depression reported higher levels of frustration and lower levels of satisfaction in relation to the three basic psychological needs when compared to non-depressed adults. The difference between depressed and non-depressed groups was significantly larger for frustration than satisfaction regarding the needs for relatedness and competence. LMM correlation parameters confirmed the expected positive correlation between the three needs. This is the first study showing substantial differences in need-based experiences between depressed and non-depressed adults. The results confirm basic assumptions of the self-determination theory and have preliminary implications in tailoring therapy for depression.
Basic psychological needs theory postulates that a social environment that satisfies individuals’ three basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness leads to optimal growth and well-being. On the other hand, the frustration of these needs is associated with ill-being and depressive symptoms foremost investigated in non-clinical samples; yet, there is a paucity of research on need frustration in clinical samples. Survey data were compared between adult individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD; n = 115; 48.69% female; 38.46 years, SD = 10.46) with those of a non-depressed comparison sample (n = 201; 53.23% female; 30.16 years, SD = 12.81). Need profiles were examined with a linear mixed model (LMM). Individuals with depression reported higher levels of frustration and lower levels of satisfaction in relation to the three basic psychological needs when compared to non-depressed adults. The difference between depressed and non-depressed groups was significantly larger for frustration than satisfaction regarding the needs for relatedness and competence. LMM correlation parameters confirmed the expected positive correlation between the three needs. This is the first study showing substantial differences in need-based experiences between depressed and non-depressed adults. The results confirm basic assumptions of the self-determination theory and have preliminary implications in tailoring therapy for depression.
The mechanisms underlying increased dual-task costs in the comparison of modality compatible stimulus -response mappings (e.g., visual-manual, auditory-vocal) and modality incompatible mappings (e.g., visual -vocal, auditory-manual) remain elusive.
To investigate whether additional control mechanisms are at work in simultaneously processing two modality incompatible mappings, we applied a transfer logic between both types of dual-task mappings in the context of a mental fatigue induction.
We expected an increase in dual-task costs for both modality mappings after a fatigue induction with modality compatible tasks. In contrast, we expected an additional, selective increase in modality incompatible dual-task costs after a fatigue induction with modality incompatible tasks.
We tested a group of 45young individuals (19-30 years) in an online pre-post design, in which participants were assigned to one of three groups. The two fatigue groups completed a 90-min time-on -task intervention with a dual task comprising either compatible or incompatible modality mappings.
The third group paused for 90 min as a passive control group. Pre and post-session contained single and dual tasks in both modality mappings for all participants. In addition to behavioral performance measurements, seven subjective items (effort, focus, subjective fatigue, motivation, frustration, mental and physical capacity) were analyzed.
Mean dual-task performance during and after the intervention indicated a practice effect instead of the presumed fatigue effect for all three groups. The modality incompatible intervention group showed a selective performance improvement for the modality incompatible mapping but no transfer to the modality compatible dual task. In contrast, the compatible intervention group showed moderately improved performance in both modality map-pings.
Still, participants reported increased subjective fatigue and reduced motivation after the fatigue inter-vention.
This dynamic interplay of training and fatigue effects suggests that high control demands were involved in the prolonged performance of a modality incompatible dual task, which are separable from modality compatible dual-task demands.