» Articles » PMID: 24523966

Allocation of Attentional Resources Toward a Secondary Cognitive Task Leads to Compromised Ankle Proprioceptive Performance in Healthy Young Adults

Overview
Publisher Wiley
Date 2014 Feb 14
PMID 24523966
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The objective of the present study was to determine whether increased attentional demands influence the assessment of ankle joint proprioceptive ability in young adults. We used a dual-task condition, in which participants performed an ankle ipsilateral position-matching task with and without a secondary serial auditory subtraction task during target angle encoding. Two experiments were performed with two different cohorts: one in which the auditory subtraction task was easy (experiment 1a) and one in which it was difficult (experiment 1b). The results showed that, compared with the single-task condition, participants had higher absolute error under dual-task conditions in experiment 1b. The reduction in position-matching accuracy with an attentionally demanding cognitive task suggests that allocation of attentional resources toward a difficult second task can lead to compromised ankle proprioceptive performance. Therefore, these findings indicate that the difficulty level of the cognitive task might be the possible critical factor that decreased accuracy of position-matching task. We conclude that increased attentional demand with difficult cognitive task does influence the assessment of ankle joint proprioceptive ability in young adults when measured using an ankle ipsilateral position-matching task.

Citing Articles

Acute psychological stress does not influence joint position reproduction performance in the elbow joint.

Koncz A, Koteles F, Aranyossy B, Horvath A PLoS One. 2025; 20(3):e0319061.

PMID: 40029910 PMC: 11875289. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319061.


Placebo and nocebo interventions impact perceived but not actual proprioceptive accuracy.

Horvath A, Aranyosy B, Drozdovszky O, Szabo A, Koteles F PLoS One. 2024; 19(8):e0307072.

PMID: 39213316 PMC: 11364228. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307072.


Effects of postural threat on perceptions of lower leg somatosensory stimuli during standing.

Cleworth T, Peters R, Chua R, Inglis J, Carpenter M Front Neurosci. 2023; 17:1191976.

PMID: 37621714 PMC: 10445653. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1191976.


Concentrating to avoid falling: interaction between peripheral sensory and central attentional demands during a postural stability limit task in sedentary seniors.

Vermette M, Prince F, Bherer L, Messier J Geroscience. 2023; 46(1):1181-1200.

PMID: 37482601 PMC: 10828328. DOI: 10.1007/s11357-023-00860-z.


The retention of proprioceptive information is suppressed by competing verbal and spatial task.

Horvath A, Ferentzi E, Rago A, Koteles F Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2022; 76(4):783-791.

PMID: 35410549 PMC: 10031633. DOI: 10.1177/17470218221096251.


References
1.
Laufer Y, Hocherman S, Dickstein R . Accuracy of reproducing hand position when using active compared with passive movement. Physiother Res Int. 2001; 6(2):65-75. DOI: 10.1002/pri.215. View

2.
Adamo D, Martin B, Brown S . Age-related differences in upper limb proprioceptive acuity. Percept Mot Skills. 2007; 104(3 Pt 2):1297-309. DOI: 10.2466/pms.104.4.1297-1309. View

3.
Jeka J, Oie K, Kiemel T . Multisensory information for human postural control: integrating touch and vision. Exp Brain Res. 2000; 134(1):107-25. DOI: 10.1007/s002210000412. View

4.
Kawato M, Wolpert D . Internal models for motor control. Novartis Found Symp. 1999; 218:291-304; discussion 304-7. DOI: 10.1002/9780470515563.ch16. View

5.
Bock O . Joint position sense in simulated changed-gravity environments. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1994; 65(7):621-6. View