It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Besides anthropometric variables, high-order body representations have been hypothesised to influence postural control. However, this has not been directly tested before. Moreover, some studies indicate that sex moderates the relationship of anthropometry and postural control. Therefore, as a proof of concept we investigated the association of body representations with postural control as well as the influence of participants’ sex/gender. Body image measures were assessed with a figural drawing task. Body schema was tested by a covert and an overt task. Body sway was measured during normal bipedal quiet standing with eyes closed (with/without neck extended). Statistical analysis consisted of hierarchical multiple linear regressions with the following regression steps: (1) sensory condition, (2) sex/gender, (3) age, (4) anthropometry, (5) body schema, (6) body image, (7) sex/gender-interactions. Across 36 subjects (19 females), body schema was significantly associated with body sway variability and open-loop control, in addition to commonly known influencing factors, such as sensory condition, gender, age and anthropometry. While in females, also body image dissatisfaction substantially was associated with postural control, this was not the case in males. Sex differences and possible causes why high-order body representations may influence concurrent sensorimotor control of body sway are discussed.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Technical University of Munich (TUM), Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (EI), Human-centered Assistive Robotics (HCR), Munich, Germany (GRID:grid.6936.a) (ISNI:0000000123222966)
2 RWTH Aachen University, Institute of Psychology, Cognitive and Experimental Psychology, Aachen, Germany (GRID:grid.1957.a) (ISNI:0000 0001 0728 696X); Technical University of Munich (TUM), Department of Sport and Health Sciences, Human Movement Science, Munich, Germany (GRID:grid.6936.a) (ISNI:0000000123222966)
3 Technical University of Munich (TUM), Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (EI), Human-centered Assistive Robotics (HCR), Munich, Germany (GRID:grid.6936.a) (ISNI:0000000123222966); German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics, Weßling, Germany (GRID:grid.7551.6) (ISNI:0000 0000 8983 7915)