Successful execution of motor tasks requires an integration of the perception of one's physical abilities and the perception of the task itself. Physical and cognitive decline associated with ageing may lead to misjudgments of these perceived and actual abilities and possibly to errors that may lead to balance loss. We aimed to directly quantify the degree to which older adults misjudge their actual gait ability. Twenty-seven older adults participated and were instructed to walk on a narrow path projected on a treadmill. We tested two paradigms to estimate the participants' perceived gait ability: a path width manipulation, in which participants had to indicate the smallest path width that they could walk on without stepping outside or losing balance (at given speed), and a treadmill speed manipulation, in which they had to indicate the maximum speed that they could use at a given path width. We determined their actual ability as the probability of stepping inside the path over a range of path widths and speeds. The path width paradigm seemed suitable for evaluating self-perception of actual gait ability and revealed that participants appeared to show a range of misjudgment towards either over- or underestimating their actual abilities. Better abilities appeared not associated with better judgment. Direct quantification of the degree of misjudgment provides insight in the interplay between cognition and physical abilities and can be of added value towards prevention of falls and promotion of healthy ageing.

Disparities between perceived and actual physical abilities have been shown in older adults and may lead to balance loss or falls. However, it is unclear whether one’s misjudgment is an inherent trait and thus consistent across different tasks, and whether this misjudgment is age-related. We measured the degree of misjudgment in young and older adults on four different stepping tasks; stepping over a raised bar, crossing a declining cord by stepping over it at a self-selected height, crossing a virtual river by stepping over it at a self-selected width, and making a recovery step after release from an inclined position. Before comparison, we carefully checked the validity of the different tasks to determine the misjudgment. No substantial differences were found in the amplitude of the misjudgment between the age groups, and the degree of misjudgment did not transfer across different stepping tasks. However, since only one task (i.e., stepping over a raised bar) met our criteria for validly assessing one’s misjudgment, it remains unclear whether the degree of misjudgment is task-specific or an inherent trait. These findings stress the importance of testing the construct validity of the task, prior to the examination of the misjudgment of stepping ability.

Selecting motor strategies in daily life tasks requires a perception of the task requirements as well as of one's own physical abilities. Age-related cognitive and physical changes may affect these perceptions. This might entail that some older adults select inappropriate movement strategies when confronted with daily-life motor tasks, which could lead to balance loss or falls. We investigated whether older adults select motor strategies in accordance with their actual physical ability. Twenty-one older adults were subjected to a stepping down paradigm, in which full-body kinematics of selected and reactive behavior were recorded. Stepping down from a curb can be done with either (1) a relatively low effort but more balance threatening heel landing, or (2) a more controlled but more demanding toe landing. The probability of selecting a toe landing grows with an increase in curb height. We determined the curb height at which participants switched from heel to toe landing during expected stepping down over different heights as an indicator of their perceived ability. During an unexpected step down trial, participants encountered a step down of 0.1 m earlier than expected, because part of the walkway was removed and covered by a black cloth. We evaluated participants' actual physical ability from the reactive behavior, with performance defined as the reduction in kinetic energy between the peak value after landing and the onset of the next step. To unravel whether the selected motor strategies corresponded with actual physical ability, the ability to recover from the unexpected step down was correlated to the height at which the participants switched movement strategy. The switching height was not correlated to the ability to recover from an unexpected step down (ρ = 0.034, p = 0.877). This finding suggests that older adults do not select their movement strategy in stepping down based on their actual abilities, or have an imprecise perception of their actual abilities. Future research should evaluate whether inappropriate motor strategy selection in a stepping down paradigm can explain accidental falls in older adults.

No abstract

To walk safely in their environment, people need to select adequate movement strategies during gait. In situations that are perceived as more threatening, older adults adopt more cautious strategies. For individuals with excessive fear, selecting adequate strategies might be troubling. We investigated how a postural threat affects the selection of strategies within and between older adults by using a steppingdown paradigm. In twenty-four older adults we determined the height at which they switched in stepping-down strategies from a less demanding but more balance threatening heel landing to a more demanding yet safer toe landing. We expected that this switching height would be lower in the high (0.78 m elevation) compared to low threat (floor level) condition. Furthermore, we investigated if older adults, for which the postural threat evoked an increase in the perceived fear, presented a different stepping down strategy due to the postural threat. Our results indicated that the postural threat changed older adults' strategies selection towards a more conservative toe landing. Hence, despite the additional effort, older adults prefer more cautious strategies during a postural threat. No effects of perceived fear on strategy selection between individuals were observed, potentially due to relatively small differences in fear among participants.