↓ Skip to main content

An apparent contradiction: increasing variability to achieve greater precision?

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
Title
An apparent contradiction: increasing variability to achieve greater precision?
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, October 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00221-013-3748-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noah J. Rosenblatt, Christopher P. Hurt, Mark L. Latash, Mark D. Grabiner

Abstract

To understand the relationship between variability of foot placement in the frontal plane and stability of gait patterns, we explored how constraining mediolateral foot placement during walking affects the structure of kinematic variance in the lower-limb configuration space during the swing phase of gait. Ten young subjects walked under three conditions: (1) unconstrained (normal walking), (2) constrained (walking overground with visual guides for foot placement to achieve the measured unconstrained step width) and, (3) beam (walking on elevated beams spaced to achieve the measured unconstrained step width). The uncontrolled manifold analysis of the joint configuration variance was used to quantify two variance components, one that did not affect the mediolateral trajectory of the foot in the frontal plane ("good variance") and one that affected this trajectory ("bad variance"). Based on recent studies, we hypothesized that across conditions (1) the index of the synergy stabilizing the mediolateral trajectory of the foot (the normalized difference between the "good variance" and "bad variance") would systematically increase and (2) the changes in the synergy index would be associated with a disproportionate increase in the "good variance." Both hypotheses were confirmed. We conclude that an increase in the "good variance" component of the joint configuration variance may be an effective method of ensuring high stability of gait patterns during conditions requiring increased control of foot placement, particularly if a postural threat is present. Ultimately, designing interventions that encourage a larger amount of "good variance" may be a promising method of improving stability of gait patterns in populations such as older adults and neurological patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Israel 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 97 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 24%
Student > Master 20 20%
Researcher 15 15%
Unspecified 12 12%
Professor 7 7%
Other 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 18 18%
Sports and Recreations 17 17%
Engineering 16 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 15%
Neuroscience 10 10%
Other 25 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 January 2014.
All research outputs
#3,638,964
of 13,318,908 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#489
of 2,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,982
of 184,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#10
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,318,908 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,276 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 184,611 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.