Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37904007›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2024

Stand up to better pay attention, sit down to better subtract: a new perspective on the advantage of cognitive-motor interactions.

G Abou Khalil, K Doré-Mazars, A Legrand

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

G Abou KhalilUniversité Paris Cité, Vision Action Cognition, 92100, Boulogne-Billancourt, France. gabriella.abou-khalil@u-paris.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2661-3043
K Doré-MazarsUniversité Paris Cité, Vision Action Cognition, 92100, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6015-1490
A LegrandUniversité Paris Cité, Vision Action Cognition, 92100, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9804-501X
Université Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Stroop task and subtraction rely on the different cognitive processes and cerebral regions, but both these cognitive functions interact with posture. The study of cognitive-motor interactions falls under the concept of sharing resources, implying that resources for processing are limited. Researchers try to understand this interaction by constructing dual task (DT) paradigms. None have investigated the Stroop and subtraction tasks in three inherently simple postures in two groups of young adults. This study aimed to test whether a given posture benefits a given cognitive function when cognitive and postural tasks are not overly demanding and are underpinned by common cerebral structures. This study presents the results of 60 healthy young adults performing a subtraction task in three postures (sitting, standing, and walking) and 57 healthy young adults performing the Stroop task in the same three postures. Our results showed that performance at the Stroop task, in terms of number of correct answers and interference, are better while standing or even walking compared to sitting while subtraction is better sitting compared to standing and walking. Moreover, static postural parameters did not vary when in DT compared to single task. This means that there was no additional cost on posture when achieving the cognitive activity simultaneously. The absence of impact of the DT on postural parameters in static postures and the changes in the gait pace when walking suggest that cognitive tasks can be achieved in various postures, without being too costly on posture.

Indexed as

Sitting PositionWalkingCognitionGaitHumansPostureYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID37904007
OpenAlexW4388015430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.