Body Mobility and Attention Networks in 6- to 7-Year-Old Children

Rosenbaum, J.; Hascoët, Jean‐Michel; Hamon, Isabelle; Petel, Arthur; Caudron, Sébastien; Ceyte, Hadrien

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.743504

Cited by 1 publication

(6 citation statements)

References 95 publications

(165 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among TC, we found no significant difference in MedRT between the three body mobility conditions during incongruent trials. Moreover, among TC, we previously showed that the difference between incongruent and congruent trials was more important in the sitting-still posture than in the standing-still posture ( 32 ), suggesting that the sitting-still and standing-still postures have opposite effects between PC and TC. These results are summarized in Figure 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Regarding the function of attention, alertness ( 38 , 39 ), and to a lesser extent executive control ( 40 – 43 ), but not orienting ( 38 ), may be improved in a standing compared with a sitting posture. We also previously demonstrated that in TC of 6–7 years of age, standing may improve executive control compared with a sitting posture ( 32 ). Spontaneous body motions and adopting a standing/upright posture may enable children to increase cortical arousal ( 40 , 44 – 46 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…It was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud-Est III Ethics Committee (2017–010 B). The method of this study has already been documented, ( 48 ) and TC behavior was previously analyzed ( 32 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Children’s movements were video-recorded, reported on a standardized evaluation grid, and independently analyzed by JR and HC. The general amount of movements (Mov) was calculated for each body mobility condition ( 32 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The efficiency of each attentional function may be separately assessed using the Attention Network Test (ANT), ( 31 ) which has been adapted for children (ANT-c) ( 25 ). Studies have used this test to describe attentional functions during childhood among TC ( 32 ) and PC ( 14 , 15 , 17 ). While overall response time and accuracy may be reduced in PC compared with TC ( 14 , 15 ) due to more lapses of attention ( 14 ), the ANT-c highlights that prematurity may have different effects on each attentional function ( 14 , 15 , 17 , 19 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Influence of body mobility on attention networks in school-aged prematurely born children: A controlled trial

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

School-aged prematurely born children (PC) have a higher risk of academic difficulties, which may be partly explained by attention difficulties. It has been suggested that children’s attentional performance might be influenced by their body posture and spontaneous body motion. The aim of this study (ClinicalTrials.gov – NCT 03125447) was to test the influence of three body mobility conditions on the three functions of attention (alertness, orienting, and executive control) among school-aged PC vs. term-born children (TC). Notably, 21 PC and 21 TC performed the Attention Network Test for Children in three body mobility conditions, namely, sitting and standing imposed fixed postures and a free-to-move condition. The children’s median reaction times were compared between trials (1) with and without alerting cues, (2) with valid and invalid orienting cues, and (3) with and without distracting information, to calculate the performance of alertness, orienting, and executive control, respectively. Results showed that with distracting information, PC exhibited significantly slower responses in the standing-still posture than in the sitting-still posture (1,077 ± 240 vs. 1,175 ± 273 ms, p < 0.05), but not TC. No difference was observed with the free-to-move condition. PC and TC did not significantly differ in alertness or orienting, regardless of body mobility condition. These data suggest that PC must use executive resources to stand still and maintain position, which impairs their performance during executive tasks. We speculate that these results may be related to less developed postural control and motor inhibition in PC.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%