The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the association between self-reported physical fitness and performance-based measures of physical fitness in older adults. The specific components of physical fitness evaluated included aerobic endurance, muscular strength, and flexibility. Adults (25 men and 47 women) ranging in age from 56 to 92 years (M age=75 yr.) were recruited from the local community. Generally, the associations between self-reported and performance-based measures of physical fitness were low to moderate (r = 30-.01). Based on these findings, self-reports of physical fitness should not be used as substitutes for performance-based measures of physical fitness in older adults. Furthermore, present findings suggest that older adults, when asked to rate subcomponents of physical fitness, may not do so but rather evaluate a more general concept of physical fitness with aerobic endurance as the dominant factor.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of Power Balance® bands on strength, flexibility, and balance. Strength and flexibility were measured using the MicroFit system. Strength was measured via a bicep curl and flexibility via the sit-and-reach method. Balance was measured by the BIODEX System SD. There were 4 different conditions for the balance test: eyes open on a firm surface (EOFS), eyes closed on a firm surface (ECFS), eyes open on a foam surface (EOFoS), and eyes closed on a foam surface (ECFoS). There were 24 subjects in the study (10 men and 14 women). A counterbalance, double-blind, placebo, controlled within-subject design was used. Each of the subjects participated in 3 treatment sessions, consisting of Power Balance®, placebo band, and no band. An alpha level of p ≤ 0.05 was set a priori. There were no significant differences in strength, flexibility, or balance with regard to the treatments used. There was a significant difference between the conditions in the balance test (p = 0.000): EOFS (0.51), ECFS (0.68), EOFoS (0.99), and ECFoS (2.18); however, these were independent of the treatment conditions. The results indicate that the Power Balance® bands did not have an effect on strength, flexibility, or balance.

The effect of smoking abstinence on the dissociated components of a simple reaction-time response was investigated. 7 subjects completed two experimental sessions conducted one week apart. Each experimental session was comprised of two tests. The first test consisted of abstinent baseline measures, while the second test was administered after smoking either an investigator-supplied nicotinised or denicotinised cigarette. A within-subjects design was utilized which permitted each subject to be their own control. Interestingly, the smoking of either experimenter-controlled cigarette (nicotinised or denicotinised) reliably decreased the subjects' desire to smoke. More importantly, however, was that only the nicotinised cigarette had any influence on simple reaction time. Moreover, this decrease in reaction time was isolated within the premotor or cognitive processes. In fact, there was no evidence that the smoking of a nicotinised cigarette had any effect on the motor-time component of this task. These findings are relevant for two reasons, (1) performance decrements due to smoking abstinence were independent of the urge or craving to smoke and (2) nicotine affects cognitive and motor processes of a simple reaction-time task differently.

Recent evidence has indicated that nicotine, the active agent in tobacco, may affect mental abilities of smokers. To better understand the effects of nicotine on central processing, we used a basic chronometric approach to studying information processing. This chronometric approach allowed for the independent examination of nicotine's effects on two theoretically nonoverlapping information-processing stages, stimulus identification and response programming. Two stimulus intensity and four distance traversed conditions were used to affect the stimulus identification and response programming stages, respectively. The 11 subjects completed two experimental sessions (nicotinized and denicotinized), which were conducted 1 week apart. Each experimental session comprised two tests. The first test consisted of abstinent baseline measures, and the second test was administered after subjects smoked an investigator-supplied nicotinized or denicotinized cigarette. Data analysis revealed that the higher intensity stimulus elicited faster reaction times, as did the shorter movement distances, thus confirming successful manipulation of both the stimulus identification and response programming stages of the information-processing model. Furthermore, the significant improvement in reaction-time performance over baseline abstinent levels was consistent despite the manipulations made within the stimulus identification stage of processing, demonstrating that no interaction existed between stimulus intensity and the administration of nicotine. Interestingly, these data provide initial evidence that although nicotine may not affect the programming of very simple movements, it has a more pronounced effect on more complex movements. Although distance traversed had a reliable effect on movement time, nicotine had no observable effect.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.