| Title |
Failures in adaptive locomotion: trial-and-error exploration to determine adequate foot elevation over obstacles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-017-5117-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michel J. H. Heijnen, Shirley Rietdyk |
| Abstract |
Lifting the limb sufficiently to clear an obstacle seems like a straightforward task, yet trips are a common cause of falls across all ages. Examination of obstacle contacts in the lab revealed a progressive decrease in foot elevation with repeated exposures, ultimately resulting in failure (Heijnen et al. Exp Brain Res 23:219-231, 2012). The purpose of this study was to determine if the progressive decrease in foot elevation continued when knowledge of obstacle contact was removed. Twenty-one young adults (mean 20.0 ± 1.0 years; 8 males) crossed a 20 cm obstacle in a 12 m walkway for 150 trials. The obstacle was covertly lowered between the lead and trail limb crossing of the obstacle, which eliminated obstacle contact with the trail limb if the limb was too low. The average failure rate was 8%, substantially higher than the 1-2% observed for stationary, visible obstacles. Therefore, tactile information from obstacle contact was instrumental for guiding the trail limb; visual information and joint angle information were insufficient for most participants. Foot elevation change over successive trials varied across participants, and was categorized as (1) asymptotic decrease (N = 11, 52%), with foot elevation converging to obstacle height, (2) linear decrease (N = 7, 33%), and (3) stable (N = 3, 14%). The asymptotic and stable groups appeared to have reasonable knowledge of obstacle height; the linear group did not. The asymptotic behavior is consistent with participants exploring the region above the obstacle through trial-and-error to determine appropriate foot elevation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 19% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 11% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 9 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 7 | 26% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 15% |
| Engineering | 3 | 11% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,837,177
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#1,905
of 3,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,062
of 331,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#22
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,241 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.