ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2024
Investigating cognitive-motor effects during slacklining using mobile EEG.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing mobile brain and body imaging: Open-source solutions for real-world research applications.iScience · 2026Article
- A portable solution for simultaneous human movement and mobile EEG acquisition: readiness potential for basketball free-throw shooting.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Processing of social exclusion in a strict hierarchy.PloS one · 2025Article
- Mobile EEG for the study of cognitive-motor interference during swimming?Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Neural speech tracking and auditory attention decoding in everyday life.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Balancing is a very important skill, supporting many daily life activities. Cognitive-motor interference (CMI) dual-tasking paradigms have been established to identify the cognitive load of complex natural motor tasks, such as running and cycling. Here we used wireless, smartphone-recorded electroencephalography (EEG) and motion sensors while participants were either standing on firm ground or on a slackline, either performing an auditory oddball task (dual-task condition) or no task simultaneously (single-task condition). We expected a reduced amplitude and increased latency of the P3 event-related potential (ERP) component to target sounds for the complex balancing compared to the standing on ground condition, and a further decrease in the dual-task compared to the single-task balancing condition. Further, we expected greater postural sway during slacklining while performing the concurrent auditory attention task. Twenty young, experienced slackliners performed an auditory oddball task, silently counting rare target tones presented in a series of frequently occurring standard tones. Results revealed similar P3 topographies and morphologies during both movement conditions. Contrary to our predictions we observed neither significantly reduced P3 amplitudes, nor significantly increased latencies during slacklining. Unexpectedly, we found greater postural sway during slacklining with no additional task compared to dual-tasking. Further, we found a significant correlation between the participant's skill level and P3 latency, but not between skill level and P3 amplitude or postural sway. This pattern of results indicates an interference effect for less skilled individuals, whereas individuals with a high skill level may have shown a facilitation effect. Our study adds to the growing field of research demonstrating that ERPs obtained in uncontrolled, daily-life situations can provide meaningful results. We argue that the individual CMI effects on the P3 ERP reflects how demanding the balancing task is for untrained individuals, which draws on limited resources that are otherwise available for auditory attention processing. In future work, the analysis of concurrently recorded motion-sensor signals will help to identify the cognitive demands of motor tasks executed in natural, uncontrolled environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.