Rougier Patrice R, Bonnet Cédrick T
Laboratoire de Physiologie de l'Exercice, EA4338, Université de Savoie, Domaine Scientifique de Savoie-Technolac, 73376 Le Bourget du Lac cedex, France.
Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives et de Sciences Affectives, UMR CNRS 9193, Faculté de Médecine, pôle recherche, 59045 Lille, France.
Hum Mov Sci. 2016 Jun;47:106-115. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2016.03.001. Epub 2016 Mar 4.
Contrasted postural effects have been reported in dual-task protocols associating balance control and cognitive task that could be explained by the nature and the relative difficulty of the cognitive task and the biomechanical significance of the force platform data. To better assess their respective role, eleven healthy young adults were required to stand upright quietly on a force platform while concomitantly solving mental-calculation or mental-navigation cognitive tasks. Various levels of difficulty were applied by adjusting the velocity rate at which the instructions were provided to the subject according to his/her maximal capacities measured beforehand. A condition without any concomitant cognitive task was added to constitute a baseline behavior. Two basic components, the horizontal center-of-gravity movements and the horizontal difference between center-of-gravity and center-of-pressures were computed from the complex center-of-pressure recorded movements. It was hypothesized that increasing the delay should infer less interaction between postural control and task solution. The results indicate that both mental-calculation and mental-navigation tasks induce reduced amplitudes for the center-of-pressure minus center-of-gravity movements, only along the mediolateral axis, whereas center-of-gravity movements were not affected, suggesting that different circuits are involved in the central nervous system to control these two movements. Moreover, increasing the delays task does not infer any effect for both movements. Since center-of-pressure minus center-of-gravity expresses the horizontal acceleration communicated to the center-of-gravity, one may assume that the control of the latter should be facilitated in dual-tasks conditions, inferring reduced center-of-gravity movements, which is not seen in our results. This lack of effect should be thus interpreted as a modification in the control of these center-of-gravity movements. Taken together, these results emphasized how undisturbed upright stance control can be impacted by mental tasks requiring attention, whatever their nature (calculation or navigation) and their relative difficulty. Depending on the provided instructions, i.e. focusing our attention on body movements or on the opposite diverting this attention toward other objectives, the evaluation of upright stance control capacities might be drastically altered.
在将平衡控制与认知任务相结合的双任务实验中,已报告了对比性的姿势效应,这可能由认知任务的性质和相对难度以及力平台数据的生物力学意义来解释。为了更好地评估它们各自的作用,要求11名健康的年轻成年人在力平台上安静直立,同时解决心算或心理导航认知任务。通过根据预先测量的受试者最大能力调整向其提供指令的速度来应用不同难度级别。添加了无任何伴随认知任务的条件以构成基线行为。从记录的复杂压力中心运动中计算出两个基本成分,即水平重心运动以及重心与压力中心之间的水平差异。假设增加延迟应减少姿势控制与任务解决之间的相互作用。结果表明,心算和心理导航任务仅沿中外侧轴导致压力中心减去重心运动的幅度减小,而重心运动未受影响,这表明中枢神经系统中涉及不同的回路来控制这两种运动。此外,增加延迟任务对这两种运动均无影响。由于压力中心减去重心表示传递到重心的水平加速度,因此可以假设在双任务条件下对后者的控制应得到促进,从而推断出重心运动减少,但我们的结果中并未出现这种情况。因此,这种缺乏影响应被解释为对这些重心运动控制的改变。综上所述,这些结果强调了需要注意力的心理任务,无论其性质(计算或导航)及其相对难度如何,都能对不受干扰的直立姿势控制产生影响。根据提供的指令,即把我们的注意力集中在身体运动上或相反地将注意力转移到其他目标上,直立姿势控制能力的评估可能会发生巨大变化。