Beurskens Rainer, Brueckner Dennis, Muehlbauer Thomas
Department of Health and Social Affairs, FHM Bielefeld - University of Applied Sciences, Bielefeld, Germany.
Division of Movement and Training Sciences/Biomechanics of Sport, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2020 Nov 12;11:581225. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.581225. eCollection 2020.
: Previous studies have reported positive effects of concurrent motor and cognitive task practice compared to motor or cognitive task practice only on dual-task performance in young adults. Knowledge about the effect of motor vs. cognitive task prioritization during practice on dual-task performance remains unclear and has not been investigated in depth so far. Thus, we examined the effects of motor task compared to cognitive task prioritization during dual-task practice on motor-cognitive performance in healthy young adults. : Healthy young adults were randomly assigned to dual-task (DT; i.e., concurrent motor and cognitive practice) or single-task (ST; i.e., motor or cognitive task practice only) practice groups. In DT practice, subjects were instructed to either prioritize the motor or the cognitive task. The motor task required subjects to keep a stabilometer in a horizontal position. The cognitive task involved serial three subtractions. Outcome variables were the root-mean-square error (RMSE) for the motor task and the total number of correct calculations for the cognitive task. All participants practiced for 2 consecutive days under their respective treatment condition and were tested under DT condition 24 h later (i.e., retention on day 3) without providing instructions on task prioritization. : Irrespective of prioritization (i.e., prioritize the motor task or the cognitive task), the DT practice groups similarly improved their DT motor and cognitive task performance. The ST groups also improved motor or cognitive performance depending on their respective training contents (i.e., motor practice improved RMSE and cognitive practice improved number of correct calculations but not vice versa). : We conclude that DT compared to ST practice is well-suited to improve DT performance, irrespective of task-prioritization. DT but not ST practice resulted in an improved modulation of both domains (i.e., motor and cognitive) during DT performance. Our findings might be explained by freeing up central resources following DT practice that can be used to effectively perform the concurrent execution of motor and cognitive processing demands. However, this process is not further enhanced by the prioritized task domain.
以往研究报告称,与仅进行运动或认知任务练习相比,同时进行运动和认知任务练习对年轻人的双任务表现有积极影响。关于练习期间运动任务与认知任务优先级对双任务表现的影响,目前尚不清楚,且迄今为止尚未进行深入研究。因此,我们研究了在双任务练习期间,与认知任务优先级相比,运动任务优先级对健康年轻人运动 - 认知表现的影响。
健康的年轻成年人被随机分配到双任务(DT;即同时进行运动和认知练习)或单任务(ST;即仅进行运动或认知任务练习)练习组。在双任务练习中,受试者被指示优先进行运动任务或认知任务。运动任务要求受试者将稳定计保持在水平位置。认知任务包括连续三次减法运算。结果变量是运动任务的均方根误差(RMSE)和认知任务的正确计算总数。所有参与者在各自的治疗条件下连续练习2天,并在24小时后在双任务条件下进行测试(即第3天的保留测试),测试时不提供任务优先级的指示。
无论优先级如何(即优先进行运动任务或认知任务),双任务练习组同样提高了他们的双任务运动和认知任务表现。单任务组也根据各自的训练内容提高了运动或认知表现(即运动练习改善了RMSE,认知练习提高了正确计算的数量,但反之则不然)。
我们得出结论,与单任务练习相比,双任务练习非常适合提高双任务表现,无论任务优先级如何。双任务练习而非单任务练习导致在双任务表现期间两个领域(即运动和认知)的调制得到改善。我们的发现可能是由于双任务练习后释放了中枢资源,这些资源可用于有效地同时执行运动和认知处理需求。然而,这个过程不会因优先任务领域而进一步增强。