Restricting the Center of Mass Motion Via Multisegment Versus Localized Constraints: Its Impact on the Center of Pressure Behavior.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Motor Control Pub Date : 2026-02-02 Print Date: 2026-04-01 DOI:10.1123/mc.2025-0095
Lucas Michaud, Laurent Pommier, Valérie Grondin, Spencer Giddings, Brandon Paquet, Yves Lajoie
{"title":"Restricting the Center of Mass Motion Via Multisegment Versus Localized Constraints: Its Impact on the Center of Pressure Behavior.","authors":"Lucas Michaud, Laurent Pommier, Valérie Grondin, Spencer Giddings, Brandon Paquet, Yves Lajoie","doi":"10.1123/mc.2025-0095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificially restricting the center of mass (COM) motion during quiet standing through multisegment constraints has previously been shown to alter center of pressure (COP) dynamics. Increases in COP motion during such mechanically restricted stances have been interpreted as potential markers of exploratory behavior, whereby the central nervous system may generate movements to gather sensory input that would otherwise be limited by the imposed constraints. However, past studies relied on a plank-based apparatus that places participants in a nonecological posture, potentially limiting interpretations. This study compared the effects of the plank-based setup and a more ecologically valid belt-based apparatus that restricts COM movement without fully constraining the body. The analysis focused on both traditional measures of COP (i.e., variability) and dynamic measures (i.e., regularity and frequency components). Participants performed standing trials with both apparatuses, with eyes open and closed. Results revealed distinct COP behaviors between the two systems: compared with the unrestricted condition, the restricted condition with the plank-based apparatus yielded higher COP variability and regularity, whereas the belt-based system yielded lower COP variability and increased irregularity. These effects were not strongly influenced by visual input. The persistent COP motion observed under both conditions suggests that COP displacement may serve functions beyond merely stabilizing the COM, possibly reflecting exploratory behaviors. Overall, our findings support the use of belt-based systems as a more ecological alternative for restricting the COM motion, allowing for the study of the role of the COP in sensorimotor regulation without the limitations of a multisegment constraint.</p>","PeriodicalId":49795,"journal":{"name":"Motor Control","volume":" ","pages":"144-162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Motor Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/mc.2025-0095","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificially restricting the center of mass (COM) motion during quiet standing through multisegment constraints has previously been shown to alter center of pressure (COP) dynamics. Increases in COP motion during such mechanically restricted stances have been interpreted as potential markers of exploratory behavior, whereby the central nervous system may generate movements to gather sensory input that would otherwise be limited by the imposed constraints. However, past studies relied on a plank-based apparatus that places participants in a nonecological posture, potentially limiting interpretations. This study compared the effects of the plank-based setup and a more ecologically valid belt-based apparatus that restricts COM movement without fully constraining the body. The analysis focused on both traditional measures of COP (i.e., variability) and dynamic measures (i.e., regularity and frequency components). Participants performed standing trials with both apparatuses, with eyes open and closed. Results revealed distinct COP behaviors between the two systems: compared with the unrestricted condition, the restricted condition with the plank-based apparatus yielded higher COP variability and regularity, whereas the belt-based system yielded lower COP variability and increased irregularity. These effects were not strongly influenced by visual input. The persistent COP motion observed under both conditions suggests that COP displacement may serve functions beyond merely stabilizing the COM, possibly reflecting exploratory behaviors. Overall, our findings support the use of belt-based systems as a more ecological alternative for restricting the COM motion, allowing for the study of the role of the COP in sensorimotor regulation without the limitations of a multisegment constraint.

通过多段约束与局部约束约束约束质心运动:对压力中心行为的影响。
在安静站立时,通过多段约束人为地限制质心(COM)运动已被证明会改变压力中心(COP)动力学。在这种机械受限的姿势中,COP运动的增加被解释为探索行为的潜在标志,中枢神经系统可能产生运动来收集感觉输入,否则会受到施加的限制。然而,过去的研究依赖于一种基于木板的装置,将参与者置于非生态姿势,这可能会限制解释。这项研究比较了基于板的装置和更生态有效的基于带的装置的效果,后者限制了COM的运动,而不完全限制身体。分析的重点是COP的传统度量(即变异性)和动态度量(即规律性和频率分量)。参与者在两种设备上进行站立试验,眼睛睁着或闭着。结果显示,两种系统之间存在明显的COP行为:与不受限制的条件相比,基于木板的限制条件产生了更高的COP变异性和规律性,而基于皮带的系统产生了更低的COP变异性和增加的不规则性。这些效果不受视觉输入的强烈影响。在两种情况下观察到的持续COP运动表明COP位移可能不仅仅具有稳定COM的功能,可能反映了探索性行为。总的来说,我们的研究结果支持使用基于皮带的系统作为限制COM运动的更生态的替代方案,允许在没有多节段约束限制的情况下研究COP在感觉运动调节中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Motor Control
Motor Control 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Motor Control (MC), a peer-reviewed journal, provides a multidisciplinary examination of human movement across the lifespan. To keep you abreast of current developments in the field of motor control, it offers timely coverage of important topics, including issues related to motor disorders. This international journal publishes many types of research papers, from clinical experimental to modeling and theoretical studies. These papers come from such varied disciplines as biomechanics, kinesiology, neurophysiology, neuroscience, psychology, physical medicine, and rehabilitation. Motor Control, the official journal of the International Society of Motor Control, is designed to provide a multidisciplinary forum for the exchange of scientific information on the control of human movement across the lifespan, including issues related to motor disorders. Motor Control encourages submission of papers from a variety of disciplines including, but not limited to, biomechanics, kinesiology, neurophysiology, neuroscience, psychology, physical medicine, and rehabilitation. This peer-reviewed journal publishes a wide variety of types of research papers including clinical experimental, modeling, and theoretical studies. To be considered for publication, papers should clearly demonstrate a contribution to the understanding of control of movement. In addition to publishing research papers, Motor Control publishes review articles, quick communications, commentaries, target articles, and book reviews. When warranted, an entire issue may be devoted to a specific topic within the area of motor control.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书