1. Effects on Dual Task Walking John Nguyen, Hannah Smith-Williams, & Heather Phipps KINS 3591.02

2. Introduction  Proficient Walking  Heel-forefoot pattern  Increased stride length  Increased walking velocity VIDEO

3. Literature #1  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167945706000285  “Relationships between dual-task related changes in stride velocity and stride time variability in healthy older adults”  Purpose: Observe gait changes, if any, in healthy older adults and see if there’s a relation to attention  45 healthy adults (ages 60-71)  4 experimental conditions  Walking at a normal self pace, walking at a slow self pace, performing a verbal task while sitting, perform a verbal task while walking  Results:  Significant dual-task decrease in stride velocity  Decrease in walking speed for dual-task walking  Effect of walking speed on stride time  Dual-task gait changes -increase in stops, lateral deviation, steps, walking time  Verbal task decrease mean stride velocity & stride time, increase stride time variability  Conclusion:  Dual-task related to attention demand of verbal task -involves cortical regions

4. Literature #2  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457511001965  “Distraction and pedestrian safety: How talking on the phone, texting, and listening to music impact crossing the street”  Purpose: Experts test the impact of pedestrian safety due to distractions  138 college students (ages 17-45)  Four groups:  Crossing while talking on the phone, crossing while texting, crossing while listening to music, crossing undistracted  Complete 10 trials in virtual pedestrian environment  Results:  Music & text group experienced more “hits” vs. undistracted  All 3 dual-task groups looked away from street environment  Conclusion:  Texting  more cognitively distracting vs. talking  Talking  more cognitively distracting vs. listening to music  Listening to music  constant disruption

5. Literature #3  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966636211008046  “Cell phones change the way we walk”  Purpose: observe participants’ changes, if any, of walking in 3 conditions  Hypothesis: Cell phone use will negatively influence walking, and texting will lead to greater disruptions  33 participants (age range 26)  Three groups (11 each)  Walking undistracted (WALK), walking while talking on phone (TALK), walking while texting (TEXT)  1 familiarization trial, 2 trails for analysis (a week later)  Results  TEXT group- 61% increase in lateral deviation & 13% increase in linear distance traveled  WALK group- no decrease in walking speed  WALK & TALK group- no increase in linear distance traveled  Conclusion  Texting & talking on cell phones influence walking  Cell phone use  unable to maintain walking speed  Texting  affects safety  Cell phone use affects memory  Dual task walking impacts executive function  Texting condition had greater interference

6. Purpose To test the participants ability to walk undistracted, then distracted while doing dual tasks and observe the changes. Observing:  Stride Length  Step Length  Gait Velocity  Cadence

7. Hypothesis The subject will show a significant change in the direction they walk along with consistency when they are performing a dual task walk compared to walking undistracted.

8. Methods: Participants Gender: Female Age: 20 Weight: 52.16 kg Height: 157.5 cm Any Disabilities: No Experience with Dual-Tasking: Yes Additional Comments: Walks slightly on the outside of foot

9. Equipment  2 Anti Force Plates  10 Camera Vicon System  Labeling: Vicon Nexus  Retro Reflective Markers  Data Collection: 250 Hertz  Processing: KWON 3D XP  Starting Marker  iPhone4S Cellphone  Headphones  2.27 kg Handbag

10. Procedure 1.Set-up computer program 2.Calibration 3.Put retro reflective markers on designated body segments 4.Taped reflectors on participant’s attire, if needed 5.Perform test trial 6.Removed retro reflective markers (Medial Knee & Medial Ankle) 7.Participant performed 6 trials of walking 8.Participant performed 5 trials of dual-task walking

11. Resultant Body Segments  Pelvis -RASIS=Right Anterior Superior Illiac Spine -LASIS=Left Anterior Superior Illiac Spine -SAC= back sacrum  Thigh -RK=Right Knee -LK= Left Knee -RH=Right Hip -LH=Left Hip  Shank -LA=Left Ankle -RA=Right Ankle -LK=Left Knee -RK=Right Knee  Foot -RF=Right Foot -LF=Left Foot -RT=Right Toe -LT=Left Toe -RH=Right Hell -LH=Left Heel

12. Results: Visual Events

13. Results

14. Center of Pressure: Force Plate 1/ Y Axis

15. Possible Sources of Error  Only used one age group  Her personal phone was used  Texting the same sentence  Participant was aware of the experiment

16. Conclusion Hypothesis was incorrect.  Little or no significant change in stride length, step length, gait velocity, and cadence.  Significant change in center of pressure when normally walking compared to walking with distractions.

17. Ways to improve the study:  Obstacles  Target  More participants  Even gender ratio  Age range  Unaware of study’s purpose

18. References  Dubost V., Kressig R.W., Gonthier R., Herrmann F.R., Aminian K., Najafi B., Beauchet O. (2006). Relationships between dual-task related changes in stride velocity and stride time variability in healthy older adults. Human Movement Science, 25(3), pp. 372-382.  Lamberg E., Muratori L. (2011). Cell phones change the way we walk. Gait & Posture. 35(4), pp. 688–690  Schwebel D., Stavrinos D., Byington K., Davis T., O’Neal E., Jong D. (2011). Distraction and pedestrian safety: How talking on the phone, texting, and listening to music impact crossing the street. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 45, pp. 266–271.  Texting while walking FAIL -- epic fail compilation[Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9H2q6yYKSI

19. Questions?? QUESTIONS?!?!?! ¡¿QUESTOINES?! Ερωτήσεις ?