Skip to content

Walking while doing a thinking task affects gait and task accuracy

A meta-analysis in healthy people found interference in walking measures and cognitive-task accuracy, but no clear effect on reaction time.

By 100HP editorialAbstract-based explanation checked

Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.

The 30-second takeaway

The review found evidence of interference when healthy people combined walking with a cognitive task, affecting gait measures and task accuracy. Reaction times did not show an overall effect, and the analysis detected no age-group effect. Because tasks and measurements varied substantially, the abstract cannot identify a single test that best captures this interference.

Keep in mind

The abstract provides no pooled effect sizes, confidence intervals or detailed participant characteristics. It also describes considerable variation in tasks and measurements, limiting interpretation of the magnitude and consistency of interference.

THE RESULT, WITH CONTEXT

What researchers found

Interference detected

Gait measures and cognitive-task accuracy

Combined walking and cognitive tasks versus tasks performed separately; experimental task duration was not reported. No numerical pooled effect estimate was provided.

Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2026 · Original source ↓

What the researchers compared

The analysis covered overground walking and examined walking patterns, including spatial and timing measures, alongside cognitive performance. This addresses performance during combined tasks, without establishing changes in disease risk or everyday independence.

Why the null findings matter

Reaction time and accuracy are different aspects of cognitive performance, so an accuracy finding does not imply slower responses. Likewise, failure to detect an age-group effect does not establish that interference is identical across ages.

CHECK THE ORIGINAL

The original publication

Effects of cognitive-motor interference during walking: A meta-analysis on healthy individuals.

Maiocchi C, Milanesi M, Canessa N et al.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev · 2026

PubMed ID
41308968
Record checked

AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.