Content uploaded by José Carlos Cabrera Linares
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by José Carlos Cabrera Linares on Nov 06, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Motor Behavior
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/vjmb20
Factors Influencing Gait Performance:
Comfortable Linear Gait and Complex Gait in
School-Aged Children in a Dual-Task Model
Karina Elizabeth Andrade Lara, Ana de la Casa Pérez, Araceli Cubero
Pacheco, Juan Antonio Párraga Montilla, Melchor Martínez Redondo, José
Carlos Cabrera Linares & Pedro Ángel Latorre Román
To cite this article: Karina Elizabeth Andrade Lara, Ana de la Casa Pérez, Araceli Cubero
Pacheco, Juan Antonio Párraga Montilla, Melchor Martínez Redondo, José Carlos Cabrera
Linares & Pedro Ángel Latorre Román (06 Nov 2024): Factors Influencing Gait Performance:
Comfortable Linear Gait and Complex Gait in School-Aged Children in a Dual-Task Model,
Journal of Motor Behavior, DOI: 10.1080/00222895.2024.2419631
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2024.2419631
Published online: 06 Nov 2024.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjmb20
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Factors Influencing Gait Performance: Comfortable Linear
Gait and Complex Gait in School-Aged Children in a Dual-Task
Model
Karina Elizabeth Andrade Lara
1
, Ana de la Casa P
erez
1
, Araceli Cubero Pacheco
1
,
Juan Antonio P
arraga Montilla
1
, Melchor Mart
ınez Redondo
2
, Jos
e Carlos Cabrera Linares
1
,
Pedro
Angel Latorre Rom
an
1
1
Department of Musical, Plastic and Corporal Expression, University of Ja
en, Ja
en, Spain.
2
CEIP Doctor Fleming, J
odar,
Ja
en, Spain
ABSTRACT. The aim of this study was to determine the
effect of cognitive interference by using the Dual-Task (DT)
paradigm on gait parameters according to sex, and age.
Additionally, we aim to explore the relationship between Dual-
Task-Cost (DTC), physical fitness, cognitive functioning, and
weight status in schoolchildren. One hundred schoolchildren
participated in this study (age ¼8.83 ± 1.82 years). They were
randomly assigned to Comfortable Linear Gait (CLG: gait in a
straight path) or Complex Gait (CG: gait over obstacles) with
and without interference. For CLG, boys and girls showed a
reduction in gait speed (p<0.001), cadence (p<0.01), and
step length (p<0.001). In addition, double support time
(p<0.05) and cadence coefficient of variance (boys¼p<0.01;
girls¼p<0.05) increased in the DT condition. In the CG, both
sexes (p<0.001) exhibited a worse execution time. There were
significant effects on speed DTC between 8-9 vs. 10-11 years
in CLG and 6-7 vs. 10–11 years in CGT (p<0.05). In conclu-
sion, gait parameters during CLG and CG are modified in the
DT condition, resulting in a slower gait with shorter steps,
regardless of age and sex. DTC is associated with physical fit-
ness and cognitive function.
Keywords: complex gait, dual task, comfortable linear gait,
schoolchildren, dual-task cost
Introduction
Early motor and cognitive development is crucial for
overall well-being and progress from early childhood
onwards (Shi & Feng, 2022). In this golden period, the
child’s brain is very receptive to learning and develop-
ment, making it a critical period for the acquisition of
basic motor skills due to the maximum brain plasticity
of the stage (Veldman et al., 2019). In this sense, these
skills acquired at this stage not only enable physical
independence but are also integral to cognitive and social
development (Lyu, 2023). Since basic motor skills are
essential for mastering complex motor skills, it’s crucial
to recognise that developing these skills in childhood
helps identify deficits and supports overall development
later in life (Karadeniz et al., 2023). Moreover, fostering
the development of basic motor skills is key to creating
effective interventions and enriching learning environ-
ments (Latorre-Rom
an et al., 2021).
In this context, Dual-Task (DT) activities are particu-
larly relevant for the assessment of cognitive-motor
tasks. DT involves performing two tasks simultaneously,
typically one motor and one cognitive, and is represen-
tative of many daily situations where children must
manage multiple demands at the same time (Saxena
et al., 2019). In this context, there is scientific interest
in the relationship between motor and cognitive tasks,
as the neocerebellum and the dorsolateral prefrontal
cortex are activated simultaneously during the execution
of a motor–cognitive task, showing overlap and inter-
relation during the execution of a DT (Veldman et al.,
2019). In this sense, Piaget and Cook (1952)theoryof
cognitive development highlights the integral role of
bodily movement in shaping cognitive processes. This
approach emphasises the holistic integration of mind
and body, suggesting that our environment and actions
deeply influence cognitive growth. Therefore, the abil-
ity to perform DT effectively is an important indicator
of motor and cognitive development, as it requires com-
plex integration and coordination of diverse skills
(Klotzbier et al., 2020)
The investigation of dual-task performance in gait
focuses specifically on the cognitive functions of intelli-
gence and attention due to their significant impact on
walking tasks under cognitive load (Plummer et al.,
2011). Intelligence is explored in terms of cognitive
flexibility and problem-solving, which are essential for
processing complex instructions during locomotion
(Wollesen et al., 2019). Attention is assessed through its
selective and sustained components, critical for managing
gait stability and navigation amid distractions (Klotzbier
et al., 2020). Employing a DT methodology simulates
real-world scenarios, such as navigating busy environ-
ments while engaging in cognitive tasks, to study how
children balance these demands (Saxena et al., 2017).
Daily activities often require children to perform cog-
nitive and motor tasks simultaneously, such as walking
to school while talking to a classmate or carrying a
school bag (Beurskens et al., 2015). Within the school
context, students frequently engage in DT activities, like
listening and writing or participating in physical
Correspondence address: Jos
e Carlos Cabrera Linares,
Department of Musical, Plastic and Corporal Expression,
University of Ja
en; 23071 Ja
en, Spain. E-mail: jccabrer@ujaen.es
1
Journal of Motor Behavior, 2024
#2024 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
education sessions requiring motor actions with cognitive
interference. These scenarios highlight the importance of
DT, as they demand coordination and test the ability to
perform tasks successfully during everyday activities
(M€
ohring et al., 2021). Plummer and Eskes (2015)
argued that performing two tasks synchronously often
reduces performance due to limited attention. This loss
of performance is called dual-task cost (DTC), which
can be calculated with the following equation: [(dual
task—single task)/single task] 100 (Plummer & Eskes,
2015). A lower DTC represents better motor–cognitive
performance and vice versa (Bianchini et al., 2022).
Therefore, the DT paradigm is an ecologically valid
approach to assessing cognitive function relative to
motor demands (Klotzbier et al., 2020).
As explained earlier, basic motor skills include fine
and gross motor coordination necessary for activities of
daily life (Sigmundsson et al., 2021). Fine motor skills
use small muscle groups for tasks like hand and finger
movements and eye-hand coordination, whereas gross
motor skills involve large muscle groups, such as the
torso and legs, for activities like walking and throwing
(Vandoni et al., 2024). In this regard, gait is often
assumed to be an automated skill, involving minimal use
of executive functions and attentional resources (Ranchet
et al., 2020).
As regards Comfortable Linear Gait (CLG), is a natu-
ral, efficient walking pace used to develop therapeutic
strategies and assess gait in individuals with impairments
(Linder et al., 2023). In this regard, in daily life, the
environmental conditions act as influencing factors on
the kinematic parameters of gait, as daily demands force
human beings to move not only in a straight line, but
also to be prepared to avoid obstacles and to attend to
other external stimuli (people, objects, or animals) that
appear frequently during daily displacement (Schott,
2015). In that sense, P
arraga-Montilla et al. (2021) con-
cluded that Complex Gait (CG) (i.e., walking while
attending to external motor or cognitive stimuli such as
avoiding obstacles) involves greater participation of the
cortical function (prefrontal cortex). Indeed, executive
functions such as planning, attention, and working mem-
ory contribute to developing a more stable gait (Davis
et al., 2011). Therefore, executive functions have influ-
enced CLG and CG, as they are involved in the coordin-
ation of movements and the ability to walk with
obstacles (Yogev-Seligmann et al., 2008).
In addition, given that physical fitness and weight sta-
tus may be associated with executive functioning, these
parameters could also have an influence on gait parame-
ters (Kung et al., 2019; Molina-Garcia et al., 2020;
Montes-Alguacil et al., 2019). In this line, children who
participated in physical activities showed greater brain
plasticity, thus improving their cognitive function and
academic performance (Chaddock-Heyman et al., 2014).
Thus, improved physical fitness can be linked to
improved cognitive processes, such as attention, memory,
and executive function (Chaddock et al., 2011; Latorre-
Rom
an et al., 2020). In addition, maintaining a healthy
weight status is often associated with more optimal brain
function because it reduces inflammation, improves car-
diovascular health, and enhances insulin sensitivity, all
of which support better neural processes and cognitive
function. (Kamijo et al., 2014). This connection is espe-
cially significant in children, as early habits can have an
impact on physical-cognitive development (Davis et al.,
2011).
As children move from childhood to adolescence, their
multitasking skills improve significantly. This improve-
ment is attributed to several developmental factors, such
as an increase in working memory and processing speed,
as well as a progression from concrete to formal oper-
ational stages in cognitive development (Spencer, 2020).
These stages enable them to perform complex tasks more
efficiently (Fischer & Bullock, 1984). In addition, motor
development contributes to their ability to perform not
only cognitive, but also complex physical tasks, as evi-
denced by studies showing a reduction in gait variability,
reflecting improvements in gait automaticity and regular-
ity (Hausdorff, 2005; Hausdorff et al., 1999). This matur-
ation of motor coordination is closely related to the
development of cognitive skills (Belmonti et al., 2013).
DTC, which measures the decline in performance when a
simple task competes with a more demanding task for
attentional resources, decreases as children age (Hinton &
Vallis, 2015). This decrease in DTC indicates critical devel-
opmental stages where children are less susceptible to task
interference, suggesting an interconnected maturation of
cognitive and motor skills (Abbruzzese et al., 2014).
Previous research has shown that DTC in gait parame-
ters is reflected in decreased gait speed, cadence, and
step length while increasing single and double support
time, and gait variability in the DT condition, as cogni-
tive load competes for attentional resources required for
motor control (Chauvel et al., 2017; Plummer-D’Amato
et al., 2010; Saxena et al., 2017; Strobach & Karbach,
2020; Wollesen et al., 2019). The authors demonstrated
that although gait is executed in an automated way, it
requires attentional and executive processes for its effect-
ive execution. Further studies have focused on the study
of gait under a cognitive test (Rabaglietti et al., 2019),
showing that verbal, arithmetic, and visual fluency tests
(Strobach & Karbach, 2020) negatively affect the kine-
matic parameters of gait.
On the other hand, it is important to point out that
during childhood and adolescence, sex differentiates gait
parameters between boys and girls due to biomechanical
and hormonal factors (Sudlow et al., 2023). Paschaleri
et al. (2023) showed that girls have a more mature
manifestation of gait parameters than boys due to the
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
2 Journal of Motor Behavior
influence of the maturation period and sex characteris-
tics. Similarly, M€
ohring et al. (2021) concluded that girls
show a more comfortable gait and lower stride variability
than boys in the DT condition. In contrast, Latorre-
Rom
an et al. (2022) reported that there are no relevant
differences in gait parameters with respect to sex; how-
ever, the authors demonstrated that age influences gait
maturation.
In terms of differences in the DT paradigm according
to age groups, Hagmann-von et al. (2016) showed a sig-
nificant age effect on gait performance under the DT
paradigm. In contrast, Saxena et al. (2019) found no age-
related differences in the DTC of the dual task. On the
other hand, children with insufficient motor development
show greater variability in gait under DT conditions
compared to their peers (Bejerot et al., 2013). Therefore,
this discrepancy highlights the nuanced role that sex and
biological maturation play, alongside environmental
influences, in shaping the development of gait patterns
during childhood and adolescence.
To our knowledge, there is a gap in the scientific lit-
erature regarding the association between cognitive inter-
ference and gait within the DT paradigm in healthy
children. Previous studies often lack standardised proto-
cols for assessing the role of basic motor skills in verbal,
arithmetic, or visual fluency during gait activities.
Furthermore, there is limited evidence on the relationship
between DT gait performance, physical fitness, weight
status, and cognitive functioning in children.
Therefore, addressing this gap, the study aims to deter-
mine the effect of cognitive interference by using the DT
paradigm on gait parameters according to sex, and age.
Additionally, we aim to explore the relationship between
DTC, physical fitness, cognitive functioning, and weight
status in schoolchildren. We hypothesised that kinematic
gait parameters and CG performance are affected during
the DT condition, regardless of sex. However, these
changes are less pronounced in older children, suggesting
an age-related improvement. Furthermore, we propose
that DTC is closely associated with specific aspects of
cognitive functioning, physical fitness, and weight status.
Materials and Methods
Design and Participants
A cross-sectional study was conducted in a primary
school (omitted to avoid identifying the authors). A total
of 100 schoolchildren participated in this study (age ¼
8.83 ± 1.82 years). The participants were divided into
three groups based on the primary education stages in
Spain: first stage (group 1: n¼28, children aged 6–
7 years), second stage (group 2: n¼32, children aged 8–
9 years), and third stage (group 3: n¼40, children aged
10–11 years). A priori sample size was calculated using
GPower software (Erdfelder et al., 2009). The following
parameters were selected: a medium effect size (Cohen’s
d¼0.50), and alevel of 0.05, a power level of 0.80,
three groups, and two measurements. Based on these cri-
teria, the minimum required sample size was determined
to be 84 participants (28 per group). This study included
a total of 100 participants, ensuring an adequate sample
size for detecting statistically significant differences
between groups. The inclusion criteria were: (a) regis-
tered as a student in the school; (b) no physical and/or
intellectual disabilities that affected gait performance;
and (c) no disability and sensory or language impairment
(this information was obtained through a questionnaire
specifically designed for parents, in addition to reports
from tutors and the physical education teacher).
Moreover, the parents signed an informed consent form
to allow their children to take part in this research. The
study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the
University of Ja
en (Reference code: JUN.21/7.TES) and
followed the ethical recommendations approved by the
Declaration of Helsinki (Helsinki, 2013).
Materials and Procedures
Cognitive Testing
The child’s aptitude to learn was assessed through the
School Aptitude Test Level 1 (TEA-1). This test is
designed for children between the ages of 8 and 12 years.
The Spanish version of this test was used (Thurstone &
Thurstone, 2005). This test assesses intelligence from
three domains: verbal, numerical, and reasoning. It is
structured in five different sections (drawings ¼15; dif-
ferent words ¼15; vocabulary ¼20; reasoning ¼27;
calculation ¼55). The total score is transformed into a
direct score according to age, after that, the direct score
is converted into Intelligence Quotient score (IQ score)
(min ¼15 to max ¼147) according to the test manual,
whereas the total score is calculated by adding both parts
with minimum (0 points) and maximum (132 points) val-
ues. The test was not applied to the 6–7-year age group
due to considerations of cognitive development and
responsiveness appropriate to this age range (pedagogical
indications and its complexity). In the current study, the
TEA-1 demonstrated good reliability, with a Cronbach’s
aof 0.841. Similarly, Fern
andez et al. (2019) also
observed strong reliability, reporting a Cronbach’saof
0.920, further supporting the reliability of this test.
The Perception of Similarities and Differences Test
(Caras-R test) assesses selective attention, sustained
attention, and the ability to perceive differences quickly
on partially ordered stimulus patterns. The Spanish ver-
sion of this test was used (Thurstone & Yela, 2009). It is
composed of 60 graphic items (stimulus-blocks) grouped
into three schematic drawings of faces (eyes, eyebrows,
hair, and mouth), of which two faces are the same and
one face is different. The test consists of crossing out the
face that is different from the other two in the same
Gait performance in children under DT condition
3
block of faces. Test–retest reliability showed Cronbach’s
aof 0.89 (Carrillo-L
opez, 2022). It should be noted that
both test (i.e., TEA-1 and Caras-R test), as was pointed
out in the introduction to this paper, are essential tools in
our study to assess executive functions, such as planning,
decision-making, and attention regulation, which are cru-
cial for walking under DT conditions.
Cognitive Interference
Two tests—a VF task and the digit span test (DST)
were used to provoke cognitive interference for CLG and
CG, respectively.
The VF task assesses the linguistic ability to produce
words according to cognitive ability in the shortest time
possible (Montero-Odasso et al., 2009). This study, it
comprised 31 questions of different categories and levels
of difficulty (e.g., provide four girls’names, professions,
insects, and colours). The questions were recorded in the
mp3 format by qualified personnel in a professional
recording studio. With respect to the question–answer
times, the investigator was given 3 s to ask each ques-
tion, and the participant was given 7 s to answer each
question, although they were asked to answer each ques-
tion as quickly as possible, as the questions were con-
tinuous. The VF task methodology is based on previous
research (Andrade-Lara et al., 2024; Chatterjee et al.,
2021).
The DST involved listening to an audio track with a
sequence of numbers. The sequence starts with a two-
digit series, and the number of digits increases progres-
sively in each series (e.g., 9–7, 5-8-2, etc.). The test has
eight levels (1–8), and each level has two series of num-
bers that the participants repeat while executing the gait
test. The total audio time was 3 min and 40 s in the mp3
format. The answer time for each series was defined
according to the time taken for each statement in each
series (e.g., if the first series statement took 3 s, then the
response time would be 3 s). The DST was structured
according to the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
(fourth edition, WAIS-IV) (Wechsler, 2005). The DST
has the cognitive ability (sequential memory, attention,
and concentration) to recall a series in the given order
(forward or backward). Scientific evidence (Bernal et al.,
2003; Heinzel et al., 2013) has shown that arithmetic
mental processes are associated with high levels of inter-
ference during DT walking.
Considering that VF measures cognitive flexibility,
crucial in dual-demand tasks, while DST assesses work-
ing memory and attention, essential for managing mul-
tiple simultaneous tasks. This explicit connection to
executive functions helps to understand their influence
on children’s ability to coordinate walking and other
activities under DT conditions.
Physical Fitness
Three tests were used to measure physical fitness.
A standing long jump was used to assess lower limb
strength (Latorre-Rom
an et al., 2018). Two attempts
were allowed, and the best attempt was recorded. A lon-
ger jump distance (measured from the take-off point and
the heel of the nearest foot at landing) implies better
performance.
The L
eger test was used to measure cardiorespiratory
fitness (L
eger et al., 1988). It consists of an incremental
running test in which the participant is required to run
back and forth and back again between two lines (the
distance between lines is 20 m). The test starts with an
initial speed of 8.5 km/h and increases by 0.5 km/h per
minute (period). The pace for each period is indicated
with audible signals. The test finishes when the partici-
pant is not able to reach the end lines concurrently with
the audio signals at two consecutive times
Finally, a 25-m sprint test was performed on a flat,
hard, non-slip surface. Two photocells (WITTY,
Microgate Srl; Bolzano, Italy; 0.001-s accuracy) were
used to register the time (s), with one situated at the
beginning and one at the end of the 25-m corridor. Two
attempts were performed, and the best attempt was
recorded.
Anthropometric Measures
Body mass (kg) was measured using a weighing scale
(Seca 899, Hamburg, Germany) and body height (cm)
was assessed with a stadiometer (Seca 222). Body mass
index was calculated by dividing body mass (kg) by
body height (in metres) squared.
Gait Assessment
The Optogait system (Microgait Srl) was used to
assess the kinematic parameters of CLG. This system
employs photocells to automatically record gait parame-
ters while a person is walking. Each participant walked
along 5-m Optogait corridor 10 times. To ensure that the
displacement was consistent over 5 m, the participants
were instructed to turn around at a cone located 2.5 m
from the start and end point of the Optogait corridor.
The test was conducted in two different conditions: in
the ST condition, the participants had to walk through
the corridor with a comfortable gait without interference,
while in the DT condition, the participants had to walk
using a comfortable gait while responding to the ques-
tions of the VF task (Figure 1).
The kinematic gait parameters analysed were speed
(s), cadence (step/s), step length (cm), single and double
support (s), and the walk ratio (WR). The WR represents
the relationship between the step length and the fre-
quency of leg movements. It is calculated as the mean
step length divided by the cadence. Moreover, variability
in step length and cadence was analysed in terms of the
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
4 Journal of Motor Behavior
coefficient of variation (CV) among the participants,
given as [percentage standard deviation (SD)/
mean] 100.
The gait parameters speed, cadence, and step length
were normalised following the equation by Stansfield
et al. (2006) and Hof (1996):
Normalised speed
¼speed 1
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Height 9:81m
s
2gravity value
ðÞ
:
r
Normalised cadence ¼cadence ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Height
9:81m
s
2
s
Normalised step length ¼step length 1
Height
Complex Gait
The complex gait test (CGT) was used to assess CG.
This test consists of walking as fast as possible while
overcoming a series of obstacles (Figure 2). The test was
performed in a controlled outdoor environment where
obstacles simulated the characteristics of social walking.
Participants performed two conditions: CGT without
interference (ST) where they had to walk as fast as pos-
sible to complete the three laps, while in the DT condi-
tion, the participants had to repeat different numerical
series (DST) while completing three laps as fast as pos-
sible. The execution time was recorded in seconds
(Figure 2). The time (s) to complete three consecutive
laps of CGT as fast as possible (without starting to run)
in each condition was recorded. Each participant per-
formed one trial during the audio explanation of the DT
condition in CLG and CGT to verify that they under-
stood the dynamics of the test.
Procedure
The evaluation protocol was carried out over four dif-
ferent sessions in the school. In addition, each session
lasted 60 min. During the first session, the participants
completed the TEA-1. The gait assessment was carried
out during the second and third sessions. In addition,
anthropometric measurements were recorded during the
second session. A convenience sampling method was
used in this study. Moreover, participants were randomly
assigned to different tests (CLG and CGT) to prevent
interference and avoid any learning effects.
Consequently, the tests were structured as follows: (1)
CLG without interference, (2) CLG with interference
(VF task), (3) CGT without interference, and (4) CGT
with interference (the DST). Each participant performed
each test with and without interference (audio condition).
They also performed one trial with the CLG and CGT to
ensure they understood the test. Regarding the DT condi-
tion, the children performed one short trial (different
from the audio that was used in the study to avoid a
learning effect) during the audio explanation of the test
development to check that they understood the dynamics
of the DT condition. The correct and incorrect answers
were not recorded during this trial, but the participant
was told whether their answer was ‘correct’or
‘incorrect’. Finally, the Caras-R and physical fitness tests
were conducted during the fourth session. Additionally,
all 100 schoolchildren completed the study, with no
dropouts or expressed desire to leave during the
evaluation.
Statistical Analysis
The data were analysed with SPSS v.19.0 for
Windows (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). The data are
FIGURE 1. Comfortable linear gait beneath verbal fluency interference.
Gait performance in children under DT condition
5
presented as means, standard deviations, and percentages.
Prior to analysis, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test and
Levene’s test were used to determine whether the data
followed a normal distribution and showed homoscedas-
ticity, respectively. Furthermore, the sample size was
determined using the GPower software (version 3.1.9.6).
A two-way ANOVA was conducted with 2 Sex (Boys
vs. Girls) x 3 Age groups (6-7 years vs. 8–9 years vs.
10–11 years) x 2 Condition (ST vs. DT) as factors, fol-
lowed by Bonferroni-adjusted post-hoc tests. This ana-
lysis was used to determine differences between the ST
and DT conditions based on sex and age groups. The
effect sizes for the differences between the groups are
expressed as Cohen’s d, which was interpreted as: trivial
(<0.2), small (0.2–0.49), moderate (0.5–0.79), and large
(0.8) (Cohen, 1988). UNIVARIATE analysis adjusted
by the Bonferroni test was used to determine DTC differen-
ces between the sexes and the age groups. Consequently,
partial correlations (adjusted by age and sex) were used to
determine the association between DTC, fitness, anthropo-
metric and cognitive variables. In addition, the results of
the overall DTC averages are expressed as percentages.
The significance level was set at p0.05.
Results
Table 1 displays age, anthropometric data, physical fit-
ness, and cognitive functioning measures divided by sex
and age group. The L
eger test results showed that boys
exhibited greater aerobic capacity compared to girls
(p<0.05). In the standing long jump and 25-m sprint,
boys performed better than girls (p<0.05). With regard
to the age groups in the L
eger test (p<0.01), children
aged 10–11 years old performed better in the standing
long jump (p<0.001) and 25-m sprint (p<0.05) than
the rest of the children. In terms of cognitive abilities,
8–9-year-old children scored higher on the TEA-1 IQ
test than those aged 10–11 years (p<0.05).
The kinematic gait parameters according to each sex
and age gropp for the CLG and CGT tests are presented
in Table 2. The results in the CLG showed significant
decreases in gait speed (p<0.001), cadence (p<0.01),
andsteplength(p<0.001) under the DT condition for
both sexes. Double support time increased (p<0.05)
and cadence variability heightened for boys (p<0.01)
and girls (p<0.05) under DT. Boys also showed an
increase in single support time under DT (p<0.05).
Regarding CGT, boys and girls exhibited a worse per-
formance time in the DT condition compared with the
ST condition (p<0.001). These results demonstrate that
DT condition negatively affected gait parameters,
regardless of age group (p range from <0.001 to 0.05)
or sex (p>0.05).
Regarding the percentage of DTC of the participants,
figure 3 shows the DTC results by sex. There were no
significant sex differences in DTC (p>0.05).
FIGURE 2. Complex gait test beneath interference condition (Digit Spam Test).
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
6 Journal of Motor Behavior
TABLE 1. Age, anthropometric, physical fitness and cognitive functioning measures by sex and ages. Data are shown as mean and standard
deviation (SD).
Variables n
Total
mean
(SD)
Boys
mean
(SD)
n¼56
Girls
mean
(SD)
n¼44 p-value Cohen’sd n
6–7 years
mean
(SD)
an
8-9 years
mean
(SD)
bn
10-11 years
mean
(SD)
c p-value Post-hoc
Age (years) 100 8.83 (1.82) 8.93 (1.89) 8.70 (1.73) 0.544 0.126 28 6.46 (0.50) 32 8.59 (0.49) 40 10.67 (0.69) <0.001 a <b;a <c;b<c
Weight (kg) 100 36.14 (10.66) 36.73 (9.16) 35.39 (12.39) 0.534 0.123 28 29.10 (7.83) 32 34.49 (9.34) 40 42.39 (9.95) <0.001 a <c;b<c
Height (m) 100 1.38 (0.12) 1.39 (0.11) 1.36 (0.13) 0.155 0.285 28 1.26 (0.08) 32 1.34 (0.07) 40 1.49 (0.07) <0.001 a <b;a<c b<c
BMI (kg/m
2
) 100 18.60 (3.71) 18.61 (3.46) 18.59 (4.04) 0.984 0.004 28 18.04 (3.29) 32 18.78 (4.28) 40 18.84 (3.55) 0.650
25m Sprint (s) 100 5.81 (0.67) 5.68 (0.68) 5.97 (0.62) 0.029 0.450 28 5.95 (0.71) 32 5.98 (0.59) 40 5.57 (0.64) 0.014 b >c
Leger test
(bouts)
100 2.08 (1.17) 2.33 (1.34) 1.76 (0.82) 0.010 0.517 28 1.60 (0.64) 32 1.87 (1.06) 40 2.58 (1.36) 0.001 a<c;b<c
Standing long
jump (m)
100 1.24 (0.28) 1.32 (0.29) 1.14 (0.24) 0.001 0.276 28 1.03 (0.17) 32 1.26 (0.25) 40 1.38 (0.28) <0.001 a <b;a<c
CARAS-R
Test (±100)
100 77.30 (22.93) 73.91 (25.84) 81.63 (17.96) 0.082 0.346 28 75.65 (23.60) 32 74.64 (27.01) 40 80.59 (18.72) 0.502
TEA-1
score (0–132)
62 41.30 (17.77) 39.37 (18.66) 44.16 (16.32) 0.290 0.273 n/a n/a 23 43.21 (16.11) 39 40.17 (18.80) 0.520
IQ score TEA
(15–117)
56 77.05 (16.60) 76.65 (14.07) 77.58 (19.79) 0.846 0.054 n/a n/a 23 83.21 (15.87) 33 72.75 (15.94) 0.019
BMI: body mass index; n/a: not applicable; IQ: intelligence quotient; TEA: school aptitude test level 1 (TEA-1).
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) adjusted by the Bonferroni test was used.
Gait performance in children under DT condition
7
TABLE 2. Kinematic parameters of gait by sex and age groups under ST and DT conditions.
Boys Girls
Variable Condition
Total
n¼56
6–7 years
n¼15
a
8–9 years
n¼17
b
10–11 years
n¼24
cp-value Post-hoc
Total
n¼44
6–7 years
n¼13
a
8–9 years
n¼15
b
10–11 years
n¼16
cp-value Post-hoc
Comfortable Linear Gait
Speed (m/s) ST 1.22 (0.15) 1.21 (0.21) 1.19 (0.13) 1.25 (0.12) 0.529 1.19 (0.21) 1.11 (0.19) 1.21 (0.23) 1.25 (0.18) 0.191
DT 1.07 (0.18) 1.05 (0.20) 1.03 (0.20) 1.12 (0.14) 0.286 1.04 (0.16) 0.95 (0.16) 1.05 (0.17) 1.11 (0.11) 0.033 a <c
p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001
Cohen’s d 0.905 0.780 0.949 0.997 0.804 0.911 0.791 0.939
Speed normalised ST 0.33 (0.04) 0.34 (0.06) 0.32 (0.03) 0.32 (0.03) 0.621 0.32 (0.05) 0.32 (0.05) 0.33 (0.05) 0.32 (0.06) 0.780
DT 0.29 (0.05) 0.29 (0.06) 0.28 (0.05) 0.29 (0.03) 0.719 0.28 (0.04) 0.27 (0.04) 0.29 (0.04) 0.29 (0.03) 0.690
p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.002
Cohen’s d 0.883 0.833 0.970 1 0.883 1.104 0.883 0.632
Cadence (step/s) ST 2.12 (0.20) 2.26 (0.30) 2.10 (0.12) 2.05 (0.13) 0.010 2.10 (0.22) 2.18 (0.16) 2.14 (0.25) 2.00 (0.19) 0.048
DT 2.02 (0.25) 2.13 (0.27) 1.96 (0.22) 2.00 (0.26) 0.138 1.98 (0.23) 2.06 (0.22) 1.99 (0.21) 1.90 (0.26) 0.208
p-value 0.001 0.036 0.018 0.273 0.001 0.087 0.015 0.089
Cohen’s d 0.441 0.805 0.790 0.966 0.533 0.624 0.650 0.439
Cadence Normalised ST 0.80 (0.06) 0.82 (0.10) 0.78 (0.04) 0.80 (0.05) 0.328 0.78 (0.07) 0.76 (0.06) 0.79 (0.08) 0.78 (0.08) 0.694
DT 0.76 (0.09) 0.77 (0.09) 0.72 (0.07) 0.78 (0.10) 0.177 0.73 (0.08) 0.72 (0.08) 0.73 (0.07) 0.74 (0.10) 0.918
p-value 0.002 0.046 0.019 0.263 0.001 0.111 0.019 0.080
Cohen’s d 0.522 0.525 1.052 0.252 0.880 0.565 0.798 0.441
Step length (cm) ST 60.55 (5.88) 56.24 (5.79) 59.64 (5.71) 63.89 (3.89) 0.001 a <c 59.16 (8.16) 53.30 (6.56) 58.65 (6.06) 64.41 (7.93) <0.001 a<c
b<c
DT 55.57 (6.65) 51.43 (5.97) 54.09 (6.08) 59.21 (5.64) <0.001 a<c
b<c54.40 (7.09) 48.20 (4.61) 53.94 (6.16) 59.88 (5.11) <0.001 a <b
a<c
p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Cohen’s d 0.793 0.817 0.941 0.111 0.728 0.623 0.900 0.771 0.679 0.927
Step length normalised ST 43.44 (4.39) 43.64 (5.32) 44.10 (4.97) 42.85 (3.33) 43.59 (5.63) 43.62 (5.24) 43.94 (5.52) 43.23 (6.34)
DT 39.84 (4.58) 39.82 (4.61) 40.02 (5.21) 39.72 (4.27) 0.979 40.04 4.55 39.50 (4.29) 40.37 (5.07) 40.18 (4.50) 0.877
p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001
Cohen’s d 0.802 0.767 0.801 0.809 1.045 0.860 0.673 0.554
WR (cm/step x min) ST 0.48 (0.06) 0.42 (0.06) 0.47 (0.05) 0.52 (0.04) <0.001 a <b
a<c 0.48 (0.08) 0.41 (0.47) 0.46 (0.05) 0.55 (0.08) <0.001 a<c
b<c
DT 0.46 (0.06) 0.41 (0.05) 0.46 (0.04) 0.50 (0.06) 0.004 a <c0.47 (0.12) 0.39 (0.05) 0.45 (0.06) 0.54 (0.15) <0.001 a <c
b<c
p-value 0.109 0.450 0.469 0.160 0.606 0.427 0.829 0.867
Cohen’s d 0.336 0.187 0.227 0.400 0.099 0.062 0.187 0.085
Single support (s) ST 0.40 (0.08) 0.37 (0.05) 0.39 (0.08) 0.43 (0.09) 0.065 0.40 (0.06) 0.38 (0.04) 0.39 (0.04) 0.44 (0.08) 0.106
DT 0.43 (0.08) 0.38 (0.05) 0.45 (0.08) 0.44 (0.09) 0.024 a<b
a<c0.41 (0.06) 0.39 (0.04) 0.42 (0.08) 0.42 (0.04) 0.544
p-value 0.019 0.610 0.005 0.486 0.517 0.672 0.175 0.484
Cohen’s d 0.375 0.200 7.500 0.352 0.167 0.250 0.474 0.353
Double support (s) ST 0.16 (0.07) 0.16 (0.06) 0.16 (0.06) 0.16 (0.08) 0.959 0.16 (0.08) 0.16 (0.04) 0.18 (0.08) 0.13 (0.09) 0.136
DT 0.19 (0.09) 0.19 (0.06) 0.19 (0.11) 0.19 (0.09) 0.996 0.20 (0.08) 0.20 (0.08) 0.19 (0.09) 0.19 (0.07) 0.965
p-value 0.024 0.196 0.290 0.098 0.019 0.170 0.731 0.017
Cohen’s d 0.372 0.339 0.339 0.666 0.500 0.632 0.117 0.744
CV cadence (%) ST 4.45 (1.57) 5.47 (1.84) 4.53 (1.45) 3.77 (1.10) 0.063 5.22 (3.07) 7.21 (4.62) 4.42 (1.42) 4.34 (1.76) 0.001 a >b
a>c
DT 6.25 (4.15) 6.51 (4.88) 6.72 (3.69) 5.76 (4.08) 0.767 6.48 (4.94) 9.22 (8.04) 5.78 (1.91) 4.92 (2.29) 0.029 a >c
p-value 0.003 0.346 0.037 0.024 0.044 0.092 0.222 0.586
Cohen’s d 0.573 0.282 0.781 0.005 0.306 0.307 0.808 0.284
CV sl (%) ST 17.02 (5.56) 16.17 (8.76) 17.24 (4.03) 17.39 (3.92) 0.302 17.12 (5.88) 16.46 (3.79) 16.41 (2.31) 18.31 (8.95) 0.903
DT 17.63 (7.39) 19.26 (12.65) 16.52 (4.53) 17.41 (4.02) 0.294 16.85 (5.25) 16.38 (6.17) 15.27 (3.75) 18.70 (5.40) 0.043 a <c
b<c
p-value 0.916 0.865 0.687 0.775 0.718 0.600 0.496 0.679
Cohen’s d 0.093 0.284 0.168 0.005 0.048 0.016 0.366 0.053
(CONTINUED)
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
8 Journal of Motor Behavior
Figure 4 presents DTC for the age groups for CLG
and CGT. For CLG, there was a significant difference
between the 8–9- and 10–11-year age groups in DTC
speed (M¼14.96 ± 10.68 vs 7.63 ± 6.03; F(2.94) ¼
3.575, p¼0.038) (Figure 4a). For the CGT, there was a
significant difference in DTC speed between the 6–7-
and 10–11-year age groups (25.60 ± 11.83 vs
18.32 ± 10.44; F(2.94) ¼3.876, p¼0.026) (Figure 4b).
There were no significant differences for the remaining
variables between the groups.
In addition, Table 3 presents the partial correlations
(adjusted by sex and age) between measures of physical
and cognitive performance with DTC’s gait variables.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to determine the effect of
cognitive interference by using the DT paradigm on gait
parameters according to sex, and age. Additionally, we
aim to explore the relationship between DTC, physical
fitness, cognitive functioning, and weight status in
schoolchildren.
The results obtained in the current study confirm our
main hypothesis, as the kinematic gait parameters were
modified in boys and girls during the DT condition with
respect to the ST condition; furthermore, DTC was nega-
tively associated with fitness performance and cognitive
test scores. These findings support the idea that CLG is
affected when children have to manage cognitive inter-
ference, regardless of their sex. Gait velocity, step
length, cadence, and step time decreased; however, CV
cadence increased in boys and girls during the DT
condition.
These results are consistent with previous research that
demonstrated gait is adversely affected by the DT para-
digm, leading to a decrease in the kinematic gait parame-
ters and changes in gait variability (Horata & Kundakci,
2022; Hung et al., 2013; Manicolo et al., 2017; Schaefer
et al., 2015). In particular, this finding is in agreement
with Beurskens et al. (2015), who showed that boys and
girls significantly decreased gait speed, stride length, and
cadence, but increased gait variability during the DT
condition compared with the ST condition. Likewise,
comparing our results with Huang et al. (2003) we found
that both studies show that performing a cognitive task
while walking reduces speed, stride length, and cadence.
On the other hand, Hung et al. (2013) focused on over-
weight and obese children, observing a greater impact in
these groups. Our study covers a wider age range and
considers additional variables, highlighting the impor-
tance of age- and fitness-specific analyses, noting that
obese children may have greater difficulties in walking
under dual-task conditions. In this regard, a recent sys-
tematic review (2021) concluded that DT affects overall
walking performance by decreasing gait speed, step
TABLE 2. (Continued).
Boys Girls
Variable Condition
Total
n¼56
6–7 years
n¼15
a
8–9 years
n¼17
b
10–11 years
n¼24
cp-value Post-hoc
Total
n¼44
6–7 years
n¼13
a
8–9 years
n¼15
b
10–11 years
n¼16
cp-value Post-hoc
Complex Gait
CGT (s) ST 16.82 (2.09) 18.63 (2.38) 16.32 (1.58) 16.04 (1.51) 0.002 a >b
a>c 17.19 (1.88) 17.65 (2.18) 17.33 (2.05) 16.69 (1.40) 0.377
DT 20.89 (3.20) 23.86 (3.07) 20.50 (3.13) 19.31 (1.87) <0.001 a >b
a>c 20.28 (2.73) 21.37 (2.96) 21.19 (2.40) 18.53 (1.99) 0.004 a >c
b>c
p-value <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 0.001 <0.001
Cohen’s d 1.505 1.904 1.686 1.924 1.318 1.431 1.729 1.069
p<0.5.
p<0.01.
p<0.001 Denotes differences between age’s groups in each condition and sex; ST: single task; DT: dual task; WR: walk ratio; CV: coefficient of variation.
Gait performance in children under DT condition
9
length reduction, and cadence, while increasing the sin-
gle and double support times, CV cadence, and CV SL
in children. These results indicate that the competition
for higher-level executive function resources is essential
for walking. Therefore, younger children might not have
satisfactory cognitive resources (Schott & Klotzbier,
2018).
A possible explanation for these results may be sup-
ported by the theory of limited attention span, which
suggests that performing an additional task while walk-
ing divides cognitive resources, affecting speed, stride
length and cadence (Al-Yahya et al., 2011). In this sense,
previous research concluded that a higher magnitude of
gait variation among children reflects impairments in
executive functions and attentional resources (Yogev-
Seligmann et al., 2008). Another possible explanation is
the task prioritisation theory, which suggests that individ-
uals prioritise the cognitive task over gait, resulting in a
FIGURE 3. Results of dual task cost (DTC) on the gait variables analysed by sex.
FIGURE 4. Dual task cost (DTC) in ag
es group on gait speed in Comfortable Gait linear (4a) and Complex Gait Test (4b).
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
10 Journal of Motor Behavior
slower and less stable gait. This behaviour may be a
strategy to maintain cognitive performance at the
expense of gait efficiency (Yogev-Seligmann et al.,
2012). However, in the current study, WR was not
altered under the DT condition. As WR is a speed-inde-
pendent index of the overall neuromotor gait control, as
much as it reflects energy expenditure, balance, between-
step variability, and attentional demand (Rota et al.,
2011), measuring WR in the DT context could be a
robust and sensitive indicator of gait maturity. Thus, the
identification of such a parameter may contribute to bet-
ter knowledge of the development of the control of gait
(Hillman et al., 2009).
Another important finding in this study was that the
time taken to perform the CGT increased with arithmetic
interference with respect to the ST condition. It is pos-
sible that the DT condition involves using verbal proc-
essing and visuospatial working memory in the central
nervous system to memorise the numbers and then sub-
sequently enunciate sequential numbers (Cherng et al.,
2007). During arithmetic interference, children are forced
to divide their attentional resources, as they have to walk
while solving the problem and respond to the cognitive
task properly. Consequently, a reduction in gait speed is
used as a strategy to prevent falls during CG (Hagmann-
von et al., 2016). In addition, another main and novel
feature of this test is that it consists of a speed task in
the DT context. Anderson et al. (2011) highlighted that
age might affect performance when a DT involves reac-
tion time in that study, the objective was to solve the
challenges as quickly as possible. It is important to note
that the results of the present study cannot be compared
with previous research because this is first study to
assess the DT condition with the CGT.
In the current study, sex had no influence on walking
performance under the DT condition. While limited
research has explored sex differences in DT performance
among children, the existing studies have presented
inconsistencies. Some suggest no notable differences,
while others, such as M€
ohring et al. (2021), have
reported that girls show a more stable gait under the DT
condition than boys. Further research needs to be con-
ducted to establish whether sex influences DT perform-
ance in children.
Regarding age, the common conclusion in DT studies
is that older children exhibit lower DTC than younger
children (Irwin-Chase & Burns, 2000). A previous study
showed that age influences DT performance for difficult
or complex tasks; however, the results were inconclusive
when the tasks were normalised to each individual’s
complexity level (Saxena et al., 2017). In the current
study, there was no clear relationship between age and
performance in the DT condition. A possible explanation
for these results could be that the motor tasks and the
cognitive interference were not adjusted to the level of
each child. Furthermore, Saxena et al. (2019) concluded
that the age group effects on DT performance could be
driven by age differences in ST performance or differen-
ces in covariates such as physical fitness and cognitive
functioning. A possible explanation for this discrepancy
could be that the cognitive demands of the tasks used in
the current study were not sufficiently challenging to
reveal age-related differences. Furthermore, the number
of participants was insufficient to detect subtle age-
related effects. Hagmann-von et al. (2016) showed a sig-
nificant age effect on gait performance under the DT
paradigm; however, variables related to motor, cognitive
performance, or psychosocial functioning were not pre-
dictive in the DT condition. Furthermore, in the present
study, there were no differences between boys and girls
in each age group. An explanation could be variations in
experimental design, such as differences in task duration,
environmental conditions or the way in which cognitive
TABLE 3. Results of partial correlations (adjusted by sex and age)
between measures of physical and cognitive performance with DTC’s gait
variables.
Variables r p-value
CLG DTC speed vs. 25 m sprint 0.288 0.034
DTC cadence vs. 25 m sprint 0.292 0.032
DTC step length vs. 25 m sprint 0.274 0.044
DTC step length vs. standing long jump −0.280 0.040
DTC step length vs. L
eger test −0.268 0.050
DTC step length vs. TEA-1 scores −0.313 0.021
CG DTC CGT vs. TEA-1 scores −0.301 0.027
DTC CGT vs. TEA-1 IQ −0.329 0.015
CLG: comfortable linear gait; CG: complex gait; DTC: dual task cost; IQ: intelligence
quotient; TEA 1: school aptitude test level 1.
Gait performance in children under DT condition
11
load was manipulated, which could explain the discrep-
ancies between the two studies.
We found that younger children showed higher DTC
speed than older children for CLG and CGT. M€
ohring
et al. (2021) concluded that there is a progression in a
child’s ability to manage two simultaneous tasks as they
get older. In contrast, other researchers (Irwin-Chase &
Burns, 2000; Saxena et al., 2019) have concluded that
the ability to coordinate two simultaneous tasks is the
same in children aged 5, 6, 7, and 8 years when the tests
are age appropriate and structured at comparable levels
of difficulty. Thus, the aforementioned influence of age
on DTC could be, at least partially, due to the compo-
nents of the task and their age sensitivity. An explanation
for these discrepant results among the studies may be the
increase in prefrontal cortex myelination that occurs in
middle childhood and early puberty (M€
ohring et al.,
2021). In this context, an important consideration in the
development of dual-task protocols is to ensure that the
tasks are age-appropriate (Diamond, 2013). This involves
adjusting the complexity of tasks to match the children’s
developmental stage. In addition, prior exposure to simi-
lar tasks may affect performance, so control measures
are needed to account for this variability (Wollesen
et al., 2019). To address these challenges, adaptive tests
can be implemented to adjust difficulty in real time
based on each child’s performance (Schott et al., 2016)
Finally, DTC in CLG displayed a negative correlation
with physical performance and the TEA-1 score; in other
words, worse physical fitness and cognitive performance
was associated with higher DTC. On the other hand,
there was no association between DTC of the analysed
gait variables and weight status. The present findings
seem to be consistent with previous research that found a
negative association between working memory skills
(forward and backward numerical series) and DTC for
walking ability (carrying a glass of water) (Rabaglietti
et al., 2019). These findings may be related to the fact
that to execute demanding concurrent tasks, children
tend to use both visuospatial processing and the regula-
tory function of language (inner speech) to support their
performance on more demanding executive tasks
(Baddeley, 2012). Thus, a higher DTC in gait seems to
be due to the involvement of cortical attentional proc-
esses while walking in the DT context (Auvinet et al.,
2017). These results could have an implication for child-
ren’s academic performance, as children who are not
capable of maintaining concentration during DT activities
in the school (i.e., writing and listening while the teacher
is talking) may have lower academic performance
(Schleepen & Jonkman, 2010).
Strength and Limitations
There are some limitations that should be mentioned:
(1) the cross-sectional nature of our current study did not
allow us to determine a cause–effect relationship
between fitness, cognitive function, and DTC; (2) The
limited number of the participants included in this study.
Specifically, the small group size; (3) All the participants
attended the same school, and living in the same city
and environment could have had an influence on the par-
ticipants. Therefore, the generalisability of our results
may be limited. Nevertheless, a strength of this study is
that it was conducted in an ecological environment: the
assessment was carried out in a school setting.
Moreover, to our knowledge, this is the first study car-
ried out on schoolchildren under the cognitive–motor DT
paradigm that analysed the influence of age, sex, and
other predictive variables on CLG and CG performance.
In addition, we have provided a standardised protocol
that could be used in other studies.
Practical Application
From a practical point of view, better performance
during the DT condition implies better motor and cogni-
tive development (Wollesen et al., 2022). In this regard,
there are no protocols providing standardised instruments
and methodologies for the assessment of the DT condi-
tion. Therefore, extending these methodologies could
contribute to predicting and identifying children with dis-
orders as well as gifted children in the educational
environment.
Conclusion
To sum up, kinematic gait parameters during CLG and
CG are modified in the DT condition, resulting in a
slower gait with shorter steps, regardless of age and sex.
These results suggest that, although no significant rela-
tionship with sex was identified, the differences in DTC
between age groups indicate that age plays an important
role in the changes observed under DT condition. In add-
ition, we found several correlations between DTC, phys-
ical fitness and cognitive functioning. These results
suggest a progressive development in motor and cogni-
tive control as the age of children increases.
Future studies should expand the number of partici-
pants assessed and explore the influence of external fac-
tors such as academic performance, lifestyle, and
physical activity level to know how these factors can
have an influence on DTC. Furthermore, it would be
beneficial to investigate the influence of other executive
functions in longitudinal designs in the dual environment
in order to develop specific training protocols to improve
DT performance in schools.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s). not conflict of interest.
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
12 Journal of Motor Behavior
Funding
The author(s) reported there is no funding associated
with the work featured in this article.
ORCID
Karina Elizabeth Andrade Lara http://orcid.org/0000-
0001-9804-1318
Ana de la Casa P
erez http://orcid.org/0000-0003-
1538-7554
Juan Antonio P
arraga Montilla http://orcid.org/0000-
0002-0250-0717
Jos
e Carlos Cabrera Linares http://orcid.org/0000-
0002-1059-5154
Pedro
Angel Latorre Rom
an http://orcid.org/0000-
0002-0517-3627
REFERENCES
Abbruzzese, L., Rao, A., Bellows, R., Figueroa, K., Levy, J.,
Lim, E., & Puccio, L. (2014). Effects of manual task com-
plexity on gait parameters in school-aged children and adults.
Gait & Posture,40(4), 658–663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gaitpost.2014.07.017
Al-Yahya, E., Dawes, H., Smith, L., Dennis, A., Howells, K.,
& Cockburn, J. (2011). Cognitive motor interference while
walking: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews,35(3), 715–728.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.08.008
Anderson, M., Bucks, R. S. R., Bayliss, D. D. M., & della
Sala, S. (2011). Effect of age on dual-task performance in
children and adults. Memory & Cognition,39(7), 1241–1252.
https://doi.org/10.3758/S13421-011-0099-7
Andrade-Lara, K., Cabrera Linares, J., P
arraga Montilla, J., &
Latorre Rom
an, P. (2024). Factors influencing gait perform-
ance in older adults in a dual-task paradigm. GeroScience,
46(3), 3071–3083. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-023-01052-
5
Auvinet, B., Touzard, C., Montestruc, F., Delafond, A., &
Goeb, V. (2017). Gait disorders in the elderly and dual task
gait analysis: A new approach for identifying motor pheno-
types. Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation,
14(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12984-017-0218-1
Baddeley, A. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and
controversies. Annual Review of Psychology,63(1), 1–29.
https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-PSYCH-120710-100422
Bejerot, S., Plenty, S., Humble, A., & Humble, M. (2013).
Poor motor skills: A risk marker for bully victimization.
Aggressive Behavior,39(6), 453–461. https://doi.org/10.
1002/AB.21489
Belmonti, V., Cioni, G., & Berthoz, A. (2013). Development of
anticipatory orienting strategies and trajectory formation in
goal-oriented locomotion. Experimental Brain Research,
227(1), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00221-013-3495-3
Bernal, B., Ardila, A., & Altman, N. (2003). Acalculia: an
fMRI study with implications with respect to brain plasticity.
The International Journal of Neuroscience,113(11), 1505–
1523. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207450390231545
Beurskens, R., Muehlbauer, T., & Granacher, U. (2015).
Association of dual-task walking performance and leg
muscle quality in healthy children. BMC Pediatrics,15(1), 2.
https://doi.org/10.1186/S12887-015-0317-8/FIGURES/3
Bianchini, E., Warmerdam, E., Romijnders, R., Hansen, C.,
Pontieri, F., & Maetzler, W. (2022). Cognitive dual-task cost
depends on the complexity of the cognitive task, but not on
age and disease. Frontiers in Neurology,13, 964207. https://
doi.org/10.3389/FNEUR.2022.964207/BIBTEX
Carrillo-L
opez, P. (2022). Attentional capacity, weight status
and diet quality in schoolchildren. Apunts. Educacion Fisica
y Deportes,150,1–9. https://doi.org/10.5672/APUNTS.2014-
0983.ES.(2022/4).150.01
Chaddock-Heyman, L., Erickson, K., Holtrop, J., Voss, M.,
Pontifex, M., Raine, L. B., Hillman, C., & Kramer, A. F.
(2014). Aerobic fitness is associated with greater white mat-
ter integrity in children. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,
8, 584. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00584
Chaddock, L., Hillman, C., Buck, S., & Cohen, N. (2011).
Aerobic fitness and executive control of relational memory
in preadolescent children. Medicine and Science in Sports
and Exercise,43(2), 344–349. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.
0b013e3181e9af48
Chatterjee, K., Choudhury, S., Siddique, U., Mondal, B.,
Kulsum, M., Haldar, S., Basu, P., Banerjee, R., & Kumar, H.
(2021). Semantic fluency predicts gait velocity in PSP.
Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology,24(6), 896–900.
https://doi.org/10.4103/AIAN.AIAN_71_21
Chauvel, G., Palluel, E., Brandao, A., Barbieri, G., Nougier,
V., & Olivier, I. (2017). Attentional load of walking in chil-
dren aged 7–12 and in adults. Gait & Posture,56,95–99.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.04.034
Cherng, R., Liang, L., Hwang, I., & Chen, J. (2007). The effect
of a concurrent task on the walking performance of pre-
school children. Gait & Posture,26(2), 231–237. https://doi.
org/10.1016/J.GAITPOST.2006.09.004
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral
sciences. In Routledge (Ed.), Statistical power analysis for
the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.) Lawrence Earlbaum
Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
Davis, E., Pitchford, N., & Limback, E. (2011). The interrela-
tion between cognitive and motor development in typically
developing children aged 4–11 years is underpinned by vis-
ual processing and fine manual control. British Journal of
Psychology ,102(3), 569–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.
2044-8295.2011.02018.X
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive Functions. Annual Review of
Psychology,64(1), 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-
psych-113011-143750
Erdfelder, E., FAul, F., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. (2009).
Statistical power analyses using GPower 3.1: Tests for cor-
relation and regression analyses. Behavior Research
Methods,41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.
4.1149
Fern
andez, E., Garc
ıa, T., G
omez, C., Areces, D., &
Rodr
ıguez, C. (2019). Creativity and perceived multiple
intelligences as predictors of scholastic aptitude in primary
education. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational
Psychology,17(49), 589–608. https://doi.org/10.25115/
EJREP.V17I49.2597
Gait performance in children under DT condition
13
Fischer, K., & Bullock, D. (1984). Cognitive development in
school-age children: Conclusions and new directions.
Development during Middle Childhood: The Years from Six
to Twelve,70–146. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/
NBK216774/
Hagmann-von Arx, P., Manicolo, O., Lemola, S., & Grob, A.
(2016). Walking in school-aged children in a dual-task para-
digm is related to age but not to cognition, motor behavior,
injuries, or psychosocial functioning. Frontiers in
Psychology,7, 352. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00352
Hausdorff, J. (2005). Gait variability: Methods, modeling and
meaning. Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation,
2(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-2-19/FIGURES/2
Hausdorff, J., Zemany, L., Peng, C., & Goldberger, A. (1999).
Maturation of gait dynamics: Stride-to-stride variability and
its temporal organization in children. Journal of Applied
Physiology ,86(3), 1040–1047. https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.
1999.86.3.1040
Heinzel, S., Metzger, F., Ehlis, A., Korell, R., Alboji, A.,
Haeussinger, F., Hagen, K., Maetzler, W., Eschweiler, G.,
Berg, D., & Fallgatter, A, (2013). Aging-related cortical
reorganization of verbal fluency processing: A functional
near-infrared spectroscopy study. Neurobiology of Aging,
34(2), 439–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
NEUROBIOLAGING.2012.05.021
Helsinki. (2013). World Medical Association declaration of
Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving
human subjects. Journal of the American Medical
Association,310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/
jama.2013.281053
Hillman, S. J., Stansfield, B. W., Richardson, A. M., & Robb,
J. E. (2009). Development of temporal and distance parame-
ters of gait in normal children. Gait & Posture,29(1), 81–
85. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GAITPOST.2008.06.012
Hinton, D., & Vallis, L. (2015). How do children complete a
seated combined cognitive and motor multi-tasking para-
digm? Human Movement Science,41, 179–192. https://doi.
org/10.1016/J.HUMOV.2015.03.001
Hof, A. L. (1996). Scaling gait data to body size. Gait &
Posture,4(3), 222–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/0966-
6362(95)01057-2
Horata, E., & Kundakci, Y. (2022). Comparison of gait param-
eters under single- and dual-task conditions between children
with specific learning disorder and typically developing chil-
dren. Gait & Posture,98, 128–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
GAITPOST.2022.08.020
Huang, H., Mercer, V., & Thorpe, D. (2003). Effects of differ-
ent concurrent cognitive tasks on temporal-distance gait vari-
ables in children. Pediatric Physical Therapy: The Official
Publication of the Section on Pediatrics of the American
Physical Therapy Association,15(2), 105–113. https://doi.
org/10.1097/01.PEP.0000067886.96352.6B
Hung, Y., Meredith, G., & Gill, S. (2013). Influence of dual
task constraints during walking for children. Gait & Posture,
38(3), 450–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GAITPOST.2013.
01.009
Irwin-Chase, H., & Burns, B. (2000). Developmental changes
in children’s abilities to share and allocate attention in a dual
task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,77(1), 61–
85. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1999.2557
Kamijo, K., Pontifex, M. B. M., Khan, N. N. A., Raine,
L. B. L., Scudder, M. R., Drollette, E. S., Evans, E. M. E.,
Castelli, D. M. D., & Hillman, C. H. C. (2014). The negative
association of childhood obesity to cognitive control of
action monitoring. Cerebral Cortex ,24(3), 654–662. https://
doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs349
Karadeniz, S., Suveren, C., Arslan, Y., Ayyıldız Durhan, T.,
Ceylan, T., Albay, F., K€
uc¸€
uk, H., & Ceylan, L. (2023).
Examination of basic motor skills in children and adoles-
cents. Frontiers in Physiology,14, 1346750. https://doi.org/
10.3389/FPHYS.2023.1346750/BIBTEX
Klotzbier, T., B€
uhler, K., Holfelder, B., & Schott, N. (2020).
Exploring motor-cognitive interference in children with
Down syndrome using the trail-walking-test. Research in
Developmental Disabilities,106, 103769. https://doi.org/10.
1016/J.RIDD.2020.103769
Kung, S., Fink, P., Legg, S., Ali, A., & Shultz, S. (2019). Age-
dependent variability in spatiotemporal gait parameters and
the walk-to-run transition. Human Movement Science,66,
600–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HUMOV.2019.06.012
Latorre-Rom
an, P., Berrios-Aguayo, B., Arag
on-Vela, J.,
Pantoja-Vallejo, A., Latorre, P., Berrios Aguayo, B., Arag
on
Vela, J., Pantoja Vallejo, A., Latorre Rom
an, P., Berrios
Aguayo, B., Arag
on Vela, J., & Pantoja Vallejo, A. (2021).
Effects of a 10-week active recess program in school setting
on physical fitness, school aptitudes, creativity and cognitive
flexibility in elementary school children. A randomised-con-
trolled trial. Journal of Sports Sciences,39(11), 1277–1286.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2020.1864985
Latorre-Rom
an, P., Consuegra Gonz
alez, P., Mart
ınez-
Redondo, M., Cardona Linares, A., Salas-S
anchez, J.,
Lucena Zurita, M., Manj
on Pozas, D., P
erez Jim
enez, I.,
Arag
on-Vela, J., Garc
ıa-Pinillos, F., Robles-Fuentes, A., &
P
arraga-Montilla, J. A. (2020). Complex gait in preschool
children in a dual-task paradigm is related to sex and cogni-
tive functioning: A cross-sectional study providing an
innovative test and reference values. Mind, Brain, and
Education,14(4), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.
12256
Latorre-Rom
an, P., Mora-L
opez, D., & Garc
ıa-Pinillos, F.
(2018). Effects of a physical activity programme in the
school setting on physical fitness in preschool children.
Child: Care, Health and Development,44(3), 427–432.
https://doi.org/10.1111/CCH.12550
Latorre-Rom
an, P., P
arraga-Montilla, J., Robles-Fuentes, A.,
Roche-Seruendo, L., Lucena-Zurita, M., Mu~
noz-Jim
enez, M.,
Manj
on-Pozas, D., Salas-S
anchez, J., Almeida da Conceic¸~
ao,
F., & Consuegra Gonz
alez, P. (2022). Reference values of
spatial and temporal gait parameters in a contemporary sam-
ple of Spanish preschool children: A cross-sectional study.
Children ,9(8), 1150. https://doi.org/10.3390/
children9081150
L
eger, L. A., Mercier, D., Gadoury, C., & Lambert, J. (1988).
The multistage 20 metre shuttle run test for aerobic fitness.
Journal of Sports Sciences,6(2), 93–101. https://doi.org/10.
1080/02640418808729800
Linder, S., Learman, K., Miller Koop, M., Espy, D., Haupt,
M., Streicher, M., Davidson, S., Bethoux, F., Nadler, N., &
Alberts, J. (2023). Increased comfortable gait speed is associ-
ated with improved gait biomechanics in persons with
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
14 Journal of Motor Behavior
chronic stroke completing an 8-week forced-rate aerobic
cycling intervention: A preliminary study. American Journal
of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation,102(7), 619–624.
https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000002248
Lyu, J. (2023). The effective of block play and pretend play in
early childhood development. Lecture Notes in Education
Psychology and Public Media,16(1), 155–160. https://doi.
org/10.54254/2753-7048/16/20231138
Manicolo, O., Grob, A., & Hagmann-von Arx, P. (2017). Gait
in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in a
dual-task paradigm. Frontiers in Psychology,8, 34. https://
doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2017.00034/BIBTEX
M€
ohring, W., Klupp, S., Zumbrunnen, R., Segerer, R.,
Schaefer, S., & Grob, A. (2021). Age-related changes in
children’s cognitive–motor dual tasking: Evidence from a
large cross-sectional sample. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology,206, 105103. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JECP.
2021.105103
Molina-Garcia, P., Plaza-Florido, A., Mora-Gonzalez, J.,
Torres-Lopez, L., Vanrenterghem, J., & Ortega, F. (2020).
Role of physical fitness and functional movement in the
body posture of children with overweight/obesity. Gait &
Posture,80, 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GAITPOST.
2020.04.001
Montero-Odasso, M., Bergman, H., Phillips, N., Wong, C.,
Sourial, N., & Chertkow, H. (2009). Dual-tasking and gait in
people with mild cognitive impairment. The effect of work-
ing memory. BMC Geriatrics,9(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.
1186/1471-2318-9-41
Montes-Alguacil, J., P
aez-Moguer, J., Jim
enez Cebri
an, A.,
Alvarez Mu~
noz, B., Gij
on-Noguer
on, G., & Morales-
Asencio, J. (2019). The influence of childhood obesity on
spatio-temporal gait parameters. Gait & Posture,71,69–73.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.03.031
P
arraga-Montilla, J., Pozuelo-Carrascosa, D., Carmona-Torres,
J., Laredo-Aguilera, J., Cobo-Cuenca, A., & Latorre-Rom
an,
P. (2021). Gait performance as an indicator of cognitive def-
icit in older people. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health,18(7), 3428. https://doi.org/10.
3390/ijerph18073428
Paschaleri, Z., Kannas, T., Chalatzoglidis, G., Giagazoglou, P.,
& Arabatzi, F. (2023). Effects of maturation on walking pat-
tern in early adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Physical
Education and Sport,23(5), 1318–1324. https://doi.org/10.
7752/JPES.2023.05161
Piaget, J., & Cook, M. (1952). The origins of intelligence in
children (5th ed., Vol. 8). International Universities Press.
http://www.bxscience.edu/ourpages/auto/2014/11/16/
50007779/Piaget When Thinking Begins10272012_0000.pdf
Plummer-D’Amato, P., Altmann, L. J. P., Behrman, A. L., &
Marsiske, M. (2010). Interference between cognition, double-
limb support, and swing during gait in community-dwelling
individuals poststroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural
Repair,24(6), 542–549. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968
309357926
Plummer, P., Altmann, L., & Reilly, K. (2011). Dual-task
effects of spontaneous speech and executive function on gait
in aging: Exaggerated effects in slow walkers. Gait &
Posture,33(2), 233–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GAIT
POST.2010.11.011
Plummer, P., & Eskes, G. (2015). Measuring treatment effects
on dual-task performance: A framework for research and
clinical practice. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,9, 225.
https://doi.org/10.3389/FNHUM.2015.00225
Rabaglietti, E., De Lorenzo, A., & Brustio, P. (2019). The role
of working memory on dual-task cost during walking per-
formance in childhood. Frontiers in Psychology,10, 1754.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01754
Ranchet, M., Hoang, I., Cheminon, M., Derollepot, R., Devos,
H., Perrey, S., Luaute, J., Danaila, T., Ofori, E., Vit
orio, R.,
Hyun Ko, J., Perrey, S., Luaut
e, J., & Paire-Ficout, L.
(2020). Changes in prefrontal cortical activity during walking
and cognitive functions among patients with parkinson &
apos disease. Frontiers in Neurology,11, 601686. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fneur.2020.601686ï
Rota, V., Perucca, L., Simone, A., & Tesio, L. (2011). Walk
ratio (step length/cadence) as a summary index of neuromo-
tor control of gait: Application to multiple sclerosis.
International Journal of Rehabilitation Research.,34(3),
265–269. https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0b013e328347be02
Saxena, S., Cinar, E., Majnemer, A., & Gagnon, I. (2017).
Does dual tasking ability change with age across childhood
and adolescence? A systematic scoping review. International
Journal of Developmental Neuroscience: The Official
Journal of the International Society for Developmental
Neuroscience,58(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdev-
neu.2017.01.012
Saxena, S., Majnemer, A., Li, K., Beauchamp, M., & Gagnon,
I. (2019). A cross-sectional analysis on the effects of age on
dual tasking in typically developing children. Psychological
Research,83(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-
018-1126-0
Schaefer, S., Jagenow, D., Verrel, J., & Lindenberger, U.
(2015). The influence of cognitive load and walking speed
on gait regularity in children and young adults. Gait &
Posture,41(1), 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
GAITPOST.2014.10.013
Schleepen, T., & Jonkman, L. (2010). The development of
non-spatial working memory capacity during childhood and
adolescence and the role of interference control: An N-back
task study. Developmental Neuropsychology,35(1), 37–56.,
https://doi.org/10.1080/87565640903325733 https://doi.org/
10.1080/87565640903325733
Schott, N. (2015). (2015). Trail walking test zur Erfassung der
motorisch-kognitiven Interferenz bei €
alteren Erwachsenen.
Zeitschrift F€
ur Gerontologie Und Geriatrie,48(8), 722–733.
48:8 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-015-0866-3
Schott, N., El-Rajab, I., & Klotzbier, T. (2016). Cognitive-
motor interference during fine and gross motor tasks in chil-
dren with developmental coordination disorder (DCD).
Research in Developmental Disabilities,57, 136–148. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.RIDD.2016.07.003
Schott, N., & Klotzbier, T. (2018). Profiles of cognitive-motor
interference during walking in children: Does the motor or
the cognitive task matter? Frontiers in Psychology,9, 947.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00947
Shi, P., & Feng, X. (2022). Motor skills and cognitive benefits
in children and adolescents: Relationship, mechanism and
perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology,13, 1017825. https://
doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2022.1017825/FULL
Gait performance in children under DT condition
15
Sigmundsson, H., Newell, K., Polman, R., & Haga, M. (2021).
Exploration of the specificity of motor skills hypothesis in
7–8 year old primary school children: Exploring the relation-
ship between 12 different motor skills from two different
motor competence test batteries. Frontiers in Psychology,12,
631175. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2021.631175
Spencer, J. (2020). The development of working memory.
Current Directions in Psychological Science,29(6), 545–
553. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420959835
Stansfield, B. W., Hillman, S. J., Hazlewood, M. E., & Robb,
J. E. (2006). Regression analysis of gait parameters with
speed in normal children walking at self-selected speeds.
Gait & Posture,23(3), 288–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gaitpost.2005.03.005
Strobach, T., & Karbach, J. (2020). Investigating dual-task
interference in children versus young adults with the overlap-
ping task paradigm. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology,197, 104866. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JECP.
2020.104866
Sudlow, A., Galantine, P., Vercruyssen, F., Peyrot, N.,
Raymond, J. J., & Duch
e, P. (2023). Which factors influence
running gait in children and adolescents? A narrative review.
In Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)
(Ed.), International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health (Vol. 20, Issue 5, p. 4621). https://doi.org/10.
3390/ijerph20054621
Thurstone, L. L., & Thurstone, T. H. (2005). School Aptitude
Test. (TEA). TEA.
Thurstone, L. L., & Yela, M. (2009). Test Caras-R. TEA
Vandoni, M., Marin, L., Cavallo, C., Gatti, A., Grazi, R.,
Albanese, I., Taranto, S., Silvestri, D., Di Carlo, E., Patan
e,
P., Carnevale Pellino, V., Zuccotti, G., & Calcaterra, V.
(2024). Poor motor competence affects functional capacities
and healthcare in children and adolescents with obesity. In
Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) (Ed.),
Sports (Vol. 12, Issue 2, p.44). https://doi.org/10.3390/
sports12020044
Veldman, S., Santos, R., Jones, R., Sousa-S
a, E., & Okely, A.
(2019). Associations between gross motor skills and cogni-
tive development in toddlers. Early Human Development,
132,39–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2019.04.005
Wechsler, D. (2005). Wechsler intelligence scale for children -
Fourth Edition. In Pearson (Ed.), Australian Standardised
Edition (WISC-IV Australian). Pearson.
Wollesen, B., Janssen, T. I., M€
uller, H., & Voelcker-Rehage,
C. (2022). Effects of cognitive-motor dual task training on
cognitive and physical performance in healthy children and
adolescents: A scoping review. Acta Psychologica,224,
103498. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACTPSY.2022.103498
Wollesen, B., Wanstrath, M., Van Schooten, K. S., &
Delbaere, K. (2019). A taxonomy of cognitive tasks to evalu-
ate cognitive-motor interference on spatiotemoporal gait
parameters in older people: A systematic review and meta-
analysis. European Review of Aging and Physical Activity,
16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s11556-019-0218-1
Yogev-Seligmann, G., Hausdorff, J., & Giladi, N. (2008). The
role of executive function and attention in gait. Movement
Disorders: Official Journal of the Movement Disorder
Society,23(3), 329–342; quiz 472. https://doi.org/10.1002/
mds.21720
Yogev-Seligmann, G., Hausdorff, J., & Giladi, N. (2012). Do
we always prioritize balance when walking? Towards an
integrated model of task prioritization. Movement Disorders:
Official Journal of the Movement Disorder Society,27(6),
765–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/MDS.24963
Received August 28, 2023
Revised October 9, 2024
Accepted October 15, 2024
K. E. Andrade-Lara et al.
16 Journal of Motor Behavior
