| Title |
How does ageing affect grasp adaptation to a visual–haptic size conflict?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-018-5288-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samuel Couth, Emma Gowen, Ellen Poliakoff |
| Abstract |
Previous research suggests that the ability to adapt motor behaviour to sudden environmental changes may be impaired in older adults. Here, we investigated whether the adaptation of grasping behaviour in response to a visual-haptic size conflict is also affected by increasing age. 30 older and 18 young adults were instructed to grasp a hidden block whilst viewing a second block in a congruent position. Initially block sizes were equal, but after a set number of trials a sensory conflict was introduced by covertly changing the hidden block for a smaller or larger block. The scale and speed of maximum grasp aperture adaptation to the increase or decrease in the size of the hidden block was measured. Older adults successfully adapted to the visual-haptic size conflict in a similar manner to young adults, despite a tendency to adapt less when the hidden block increased in size. This finding is attributed to the physical capabilities of the grasping hand of older adults, rather than an effect of age-related sensory or cognitive decline. The speed of grasp adaptation did not differ between age groups; however, awareness of the visual-haptic conflict lead to faster adaptation. These findings suggest that sensorimotor adaptation for grasping is intact for cognitively healthy older adults. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
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 > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 5 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,623,070
of 23,070,218 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,488
of 3,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,283
of 330,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#33
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,070,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,247 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 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 330,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.