↓ Skip to main content

The role of gender in the association between personality and task priority in older adults’ dual-tasking while walking

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The role of gender in the association between personality and task priority in older adults’ dual-tasking while walking
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-017-0691-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maayan Agmon, Galit Armon, Shani Denesh, Mihalis Doumas

Abstract

Falls are a major problem for older adults. Many falls occur when a person's attention is divided between two tasks, such as a dual task (DT) involving walking. Most recently, the role of personality in walking performance was addressed; however, its association with DT performance remains to be determined. This cross-sectional study of 73 older, community-dwelling adults explores the association between personality and DT walking and the role of gender in this relationship. Personality was evaluated using the five-factor model. Single-task (ST) and DT assessment of walking-cognitive DT performance comprised a 1-min walking task and an arithmetic task performed separately (ST) and concurrently (DT). Dual-task costs (DTCs), reflecting the proportional difference between ST and DT performance, were also calculated. Gender plays a role in the relationship between personality and DT. Extraversion was negatively associated with DTC-motor for men (ΔR2 = 0.06, p < 0.05). Conscientiousness was positively associated with DTC-cognition for women (ΔR2 = 0.08, p < 0.01). These findings may lead to effective personality-based early detection and intervention for fall prevention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Lecturer 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 24 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 13%
Psychology 9 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Sports and Recreations 6 8%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 25 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 January 2018.
All research outputs
#21,264,673
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#3,045
of 3,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#383,805
of 446,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#62
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,241 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 446,690 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.