MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386738083 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0284308

Emotional states affect steady state walking performance

2023· article· en· W4386738083 on OpenAlexafffund
Abhishesh Homagain, Kaylena A. Ehgoetz Martens

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSadnessAngerGaitMoodAffect (linguistics)HappinessPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCadenceRepeated measures designMedicineClinical psychologySocial psychologyMathematicsCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gait is a large component and indicator of health. Many factors affect gait including age, disease, and even mood disorders. Few studies have looked at the influence of emotional states on gait. This study aimed to investigate the influence of emotional states on walking performance to understand whether an emotional state may be an important factor to consider when evaluating gait. Thirty-six young adults were recruited (23F, 13M) and performed a neutral baseline condition of walking which included six passes of walking across an 8m walkway (a total of 48m of walking). Participants then completed 6 pseudo-randomized emotional state induction conditions while immersive 360-degree videos were used to induce the following emotional conditions: happiness, excitement, sadness, fear, and anger. Participants viewed the emotion elicitation videos using a virtual reality head-mounted display (HMD), then rated their emotional state using self-assessment manikins and walked (without the HMD) over a pressure sensor walkway. One-way repeated measures ANOVA and pairwise comparisons were used to examine differences in gait parameters across the emotional conditions. Participants walked with significantly reduced step length and speed during the sadness condition compared to the other emotional conditions and the neutral condition. Furthermore, participants adjusted the timing of their walking during the sadness condition and walked with significantly increased step, stance, and swing times compared to other emotional conditions, but not the neutral condition. Step time was significantly reduced during the conditions of excitement and fear compared to the neutral condition. Emotions may impact variety of gait parameters involving pace and rhythm, however have little influence on gait variability and postural control. These results indicate that perhaps the emotions of sadness and excitement should be taken into account as potential confounds for future gait analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→