![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between force control and cognitive performance under dual-task conditions in younger (18–22 years) and older adults (65–77 years). Cognitive (n-back test) and motor performance (force-tracking) was measured independently and simultaneously. Results indicated overall age-related differences for the n-back and the force-tracking task. Age-related differences increased during dual-task conditions. While younger adults exhibited no decrease in cognitive or motor performance during dual-task conditions, older adults showed a decrease in motor and cognitive performance. Additionally, when older adults made an error in the cognitive task they tended to show greater variability in the force-tracking task. These results suggest that cognitive motor deficits are responsible for older adults' performance decrements under dual-task conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This project was supported by a seed grant from the Center on Aging and Cognition: Health, Education, and Training and NIH AG022178. We would like thank Hasker Davis for his assistance with the n-back task and Wendy A. Rogers for her helpful suggestions during the study design. We would also like to thank Casey Fiesler, Erik M. Norrell, and David Rottblatt for their assistance in data collection and data analysis. We thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful comments.
Notes
1See for results.
2We found no age effect for the best and worst 5 of 10 trials (tbest(27) = −0.66, p = .51; tworst(27) = −1.33, p = .20). However, for both groups, younger and older adults, the difference between the best and the worst five trials was significant (ty(14) = −4.40, p < .01; to(13) = −4.66, p < .01).
3The maximum force of the younger participants was 9% greater than the maximum force of the older adults; however, this difference was not significant (t(27) = 0.83, p = .41; M y = 52.68, SD y = 11.46, M o = 48.76, SD o = 13.86).