This study evaluates accelerometer performance of three new state of the art smartphones and focuses on accuracy. The motivating research question was whether accelerator accuracy obtained with these off-the-shelf modern smartphone accelerometers was or was not statistically different from that of a gold-standard reference system. We predicted that the accuracy of the three modern smartphone accelerometers in human movement data acquisition do not differ from that of the Vicon MX motion capture system. To test this prediction, we investigated the comparative performance of three different commercially available current generation smartphone accelerometers among themselves and to a gold-standard Vicon MX motion capture system. A single subject design was implemented for this study. Pearson’s correlation coefficients^® were calculated to verify the validity of the smartphones’ accelerometer data against that of the Vicon MX motion capture system. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the smartphones’ accelerometer performance reliability compared to that of the Vicon MX motion capture system. Results demonstrated that (a) the tested smartphone accelerometers are valid and reliable devices for estimating accelerations and (b) there were not significant differences among the three current generation smartphones and the Vicon MX motion capture system’s mean acceleration data. This evidence indicates how well recent generation smartphone accelerometer sensors are capable of measuring human body motion. This study, which bridges a significant information gap between the accuracy of accelerometers measured close to production and their accuracy in actual smartphone research, should be interpreted within the confines of its scope, limitations and strengths. Further research is warranted to validate our arguments, suggestions, and results, since this is the first study on this topic.

The new smart insole PODOSmart^®, is introduced as a new tool for gait analysis against high cost laboratory based equipment. PODOSmart^® system measures walking profile and gait variables in real life conditions. PODOSmart^® insoles consists of wireless sensors, can be fitted into any shoe and offer the ability to measure spatial, temporal, and kinematic gait parameters. The intelligent insoles feature several sensors that detect and capture foot movements and a microprocessor that calculates gait related biomechanical data. Gait analysis results are presented in PODOSmart^® platform. This study aims to present the characteristics of this tool and to validate it comparing with a stereophotogrammetry-based system. Validation was performed by gait analysis for eleven healthy individuals on a six-meters walkway using both PODOSmart^® and Vicon system. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated for gait parameters. ICC for the validation ranged from 0.313 to 0.990 in gait parameters. The highest ICC was observed in cadence, circumduction, walking speed, stride length and stride duration. PODOSmart^® is a valid tool for gait analysis compared to the gold standard Vicon. As PODOSmart^®, is a portable gait analysis tool with an affordable cost it can be a useful novel tool for gait analysis in healthy and pathological population.

This study investigated lower limb laterality for stabilising and mobilising actions in 10 right- and 10 mixed-footed participants by determining, via the Waterloo Footedness Questionnaire – Revised (WFQ-R), the preferred foot in carrying out a range of stabilising and mobilising activities and by recording foot performance on standing balance and ball juggling. The log odds ratio (λ score) was used to quantify the degree of laterality in task performance. Differences between the stability and mobility scores and the two groups were analyzed using a 2 (Group)×2 (Task) ANOVA model with repeated measures on Task. Right- and mixed-footed participants differed significantly in the stability but not in the mobility items of the WFQ-R. No significant between-group differences were noted in either ball-juggling or standing balance performance. Mixed-footed participants had a significant right–left foot difference in standing balance, whereas both groups had a significant right–left foot difference in ball juggling. It is concluded that preference is not a steady attribute across the mobility and stability items of the WFQ-R and appears to be dependent on the behavioural context of a particular task. Results further indicated a lack of concordance between questionnaire and performance-based measures suggesting that these two methods of measuring laterality may be indicators of different underlying factors.

In the past two decades, laterality in sports has become clearly established. In particular, the concept of motoric dominance in sports has been a fertile area for laterality research. The literature is consistent with the view that in certain sporting skills, sporting competitors with specific motoric-dominance patterns enjoy an advantage over other competitors and are overrepresented in some sports. Two theoretical interpretations have been offered to explain this imbalance of motoric-dominance distribution among sporting individuals: hypotheses of “innate superiority” and “strategic advantage.” This paper presents an overview the two hypotheses, along with relevant work so far reported and identifies directions for further empirical research. The theoretical and practical implications of research on laterality in human motor performance are discussed.

An increasing number of studies, addressing the linguistic abilities of individuals with Down syndrome (DS) suggest that they exhibit strengths and weaknesses within the linguistic domain. This article critically reviews the literature on the linguistic profile of individuals with DS, with particular emphasis on the expression and reception of vocabulary and grammar, including nonverbal linguistic expression during infant development. In doing so, attention is given to recent comparative studies of the linguistic abilities of individuals with DS, Specific Language Impairment (SLI), and Williams syndrome (WS). The possibility that deficits in one cognitive system may have consequences in another cognitive system, and that these consequences may define the nature of the impairment in each clinical syndrome is further discussed with suggestions for future research.