Influence of Postural Anxiety on Postural Reactions to Multi-Directional Surface Rotations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have shown significant effects of increased postural anxiety in healthy young individuals when standing quietly or performing voluntary postural tasks. However, little is known about the influence of anxiety on reactive postural control. The present study examined how increased postural anxiety influenced postural reactions to unexpected surface rotations in multiple directions. Ten healthy young adults (mean age: 25.5 yr, range: 22-27 yr) were required to recover from unexpected rotations of the support surface (7.5 degrees amplitude, 50 degrees/s velocity) delivered in six different directions while standing in a low postural threat (surface height: 60 cm above ground) or high postural threat (surface height: 160 cm above ground) condition. Electromyographic data from 12 different postural leg, hip, and trunk muscles was collected simultaneously. Full body kinematic data were also used to determine total body center of mass (COM) and segment displacements. Four distinct changes were observed with increased postural anxiety: increased amplitude in balance-correcting responses (120-220 ms) in all leg, trunk, and arm muscles; decreased onset latency of deltoid responses; reduced magnitude of COM displacement; and reduced angular displacement of leg, pelvis, and trunk. These observations suggest that changes in dynamic postural responses with increased anxiety are mediated by alterations in neuro-muscular control mechanisms and thus may contribute significantly to the pathophysiology of balance deficits associated with aging or neurological disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".