Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29196834›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2018

Motor-cognitive dual-task performance: effects of a concurrent motor task on distinct components of visual processing capacity.

E C S Künstler, K Finke, A Günther, C Klingner, O Witte, P Bublak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Time estimation during motor activity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The effects of cognitive-motor training interventions on executive functions in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

E C S KünstlerHans Berger Department of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. Erika.Kuenstler@med.uni-jena.de.
K FinkeHans Berger Department of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
A GüntherHans Berger Department of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
C KlingnerHans Berger Department of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
O WitteHans Berger Department of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
P BublakHans Berger Department of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft SPP 1772/1 - BU 1327/4-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dual tasking, or the simultaneous execution of two continuous tasks, is frequently associated with a performance decline that can be explained within a capacity sharing framework. In this study, we assessed the effects of a concurrent motor task on the efficiency of visual information uptake based on the 'theory of visual attention' (TVA). TVA provides parameter estimates reflecting distinct components of visual processing capacity: perceptual threshold, visual processing speed, and visual short-term memory (VSTM) storage capacity. Moreover, goodness-of-fit values and bootstrapping estimates were derived to test whether the TVA-model is validly applicable also under dual task conditions, and whether the robustness of parameter estimates is comparable in single- and dual-task conditions. 24 subjects of middle to higher age performed a continuous tapping task, and a visual processing task (whole report of briefly presented letter arrays) under both single- and dual-task conditions. Results suggest a decline of both visual processing capacity and VSTM storage capacity under dual-task conditions, while the perceptual threshold remained unaffected by a concurrent motor task. In addition, goodness-of-fit values and bootstrapping estimates support the notion that participants processed the visual task in a qualitatively comparable, although quantitatively less efficient way under dual-task conditions. The results support a capacity sharing account of motor-cognitive dual tasking and suggest that even performing a relatively simple motor task relies on central attentional capacity that is necessary for efficient visual information uptake.

Indexed as

Task Performance and AnalysisAdultAgedChoice BehaviorCognitionDecision MakingFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMemory, Short-TermMiddle AgedMultitasking BehaviorPsychomotor PerformanceVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID29196834
PMCPMC5816117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.