In this article, we challenge the usefulness of “attention” as a unitary construct and/or neural system. We point out that the concept has too many meanings to justify a single term, and that...

Introduction: Regular aerobic exercise is associated with better executive function in older adults. It is unclear if high-intensity-interval-training (HIIT) elicits moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) or resistance training (RT). We hypothesized that HIIT would augment executive function more than MICT and RT. Methods: Sixty-nine older adults (age: 68 ± 7 years) performed six weeks (three days/week) of HIIT (2 × 20 min bouts alternating between 15 s intervals at 100% of peak power output (PPO) and passive recovery (0% PPO); n = 24), MICT (34 min at 60% PPO; n = 19), or whole-body RT (eight exercise superior improvements in executive function of older adults than moderate-intensity-continuous-training, 2 × 10 repetitions; n = 26). Cardiorespiratory fitness (i.e., $\dot{V}{O}_{2max}$) and executive function were assessed before and after each intervention via a progressive maximal cycle ergometer protocol and the Stroop Task, respectively. Results: The $\dot{V}{O}_{2max}$ findings revealed a significant group by time interaction (p = 0.001) in which all groups improved following training, but HIIT and MICT improved more than RT. From pre- to post-training, no interaction in the naming condition of the Stroop Task was observed (p > 0.10). However, interaction from pre- to post-training by group was observed, and only the HIIT group exhibited a faster reaction time (from 1250 ± 50 to 1100 ± 50 ms; p < 0.001) in switching (cognitive flexibility). Conclusion: Despite similar improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, HIIT, but not MICT nor RT, enhanced cognitive flexibility in older adults. Exercise programs should consider using HIIT protocols in an effort to combat cognitive decline in older adults.

Purpose: Over one billion people with disabilities (PWDs) and older adults with mobility impairment are currently in need of assistive technology devices (ATDs) and only 10% of those population have ordinarily access to them. The need for advancement in mobility-assistive technology is growing to address the gap in ATDs provision globally. The purpose of this review is to identify potential future areas of development and research in mobility-assistive technology. Method: Publications were identified using scientific and medical electronic databases. Also, a limited grey literature search was conducted to muster a variety of sources. A combination of keyword search terms was used, corresponding to the medical subject heading (MeSH) terms. Results: A total of 392 articles were identified, of which 75 were selected for detailed review. Twenty-eight articles were identified that met the review’s inclusion criteria. Future areas of research for mobility-assistive technology were identified by grouping the publications into four main categories. The findings of this review identified several areas of research and development in ATDs in general and mobility-assistive technology, in particular, with special attention to the importance of engaging users and stakeholders in the process of research and design. Conclusions: It is apparent that users’ needs and priorities vary between regions within countries. The majority of studies were noted to mainly identify consumers’ perspectives on a national basis. The authors, therefore, suggest that further research should be conducted on a global level to determine the knowledge and perspectives concerning future research and development needs and priorities in mobility-assistive technologies.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate display formats for an automated combat identification (CID) aid. Background: Verbally informing users of automation reliability improves reliance on automated CID systems. A display can provide reliability information in real time. Method: We developed and tested four visual displays that showed both target identity and system reliability information. Display type (pie, random mesh) and display proximity (integrated, separated) of identity and reliability information were manipulated. In Experiment 1, participants used the displays while engaging targets in a simulated combat environment. In Experiment 2, participants briefly viewed still scenes from the simulation. Results: Participants relied on the automation more appropriately with the integrated display than with the separated display. Participants using the random mesh display showed greater sensitivity than those using a pie chart. However, in Experiment 2, the sensitivity effects were limited to lower reliability levels. Conclusion: The integrated display format and the random mesh display were the most effective displays tested. Application: We recommend the use of the integrated format and a random mesh display to indicate identity and reliability information with an automated CID system.

Numerous studies have revealed that when people sit next to each other and complete separate parts of a Simon task, response times are shorter when the participants’ stimulus appears in front of them than when the stimulus appears in the opposite side of space. According to the action co-representation account of this joint Simon effect (JSE), participants represent each other's responses and the compatibility effects emerge because of a set of facilitatory and inhibitory processes that are similar to those that are activated when individuals perform the entire Simon task alone. D. Guagnano, E. Rusconi, and C. A. Umiltà (2010) argued against this account as the sole mechanism based on their finding that a JSE was not observed when participants sat outside of each other's peripersonal space. Notably, the task in the Guagnano et al.'s was a modified version of the conventional JSE task designed to increase the independence of the partners. Here, we reconsider the arguments of Guagnano et al. and report a study in which the authors failed to replicate their key finding. Considering the extant JSE literature, we conclude that the null effect in Guagnano et al.'s study may be an anomaly and that co-representation remains a leading candidate for the critical process underlying JSEs.