Neurophysiological markers of cognitive workload under altered gravity conditions using a gamified dual-task paradigm

Badalì, Constance; Wollseiffen, Petra; Puck, Lennart; Klein, Timo; Schneider, Stefan · 2026 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-34426-0

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates how altered gravity conditions affect cognitive workload and neurophysiological markers during a dual-task paradigm, addressing the critical need to maintain astronaut performance in space. The motivation stems from the risk that stress and workload impair executive functions, threatening mission success. The research aimed to understand the distribution of cognitive resources when combining a continuous, gamified primary task with a discrete secondary task, a structure more representative of real operational scenarios than previous studies using discrete tasks. The experiment was conducted during parabolic flights, with 18 healthy participants performing a dual-task protocol across three gravity levels: Earth gravity (1 G), hypergravity (1.8 G), and microgravity (0 G). The primary task was a continuous navigation game (Pac-Man), while the secondary task was an auditory oddball paradigm requiring participants to respond to target tones. Data were collected over 25 consecutive parabolas per participant. Neurophysiological data included 32-channel EEG recordings, analyzed for electrocortical activity (via LORETA) and event-related potentials (ERPs). Behavioral data comprised reaction times and error rates. Statistical analyses used repeated measures ANOVA and non-parametric tests to compare conditions. Key findings revealed no significant differences in electrocortical activity or primary task performance (collision rate) across gravity levels. However, a significant interaction effect was found for the error rate in the secondary task: participants exhibited a significantly higher error rate in microgravity compared to both 1 G and 1.8 G. Electrophysiological analysis showed a pronounced N100-P200 complex, indicating perception-related processing, and an N200 component (interpreted as mismatch negativity) triggered by both tones, with no gravity-dependent differences. Notably, the P300 component, associated with higher cognitive processing, was absent. This absence suggests that cognitive resources were predominantly allocated to the demanding continuous primary task, limiting the discrimination of auditory stimuli in the secondary task. These results highlight that cognitive bottlenecks can easily arise in demanding environments where resources are limited, particularly when continuous tasks compete with discrete ones. The findings imply that effective task prioritization and training-based automation are essential for sustaining performance in spaceflight. Furthermore, given individual variability, personalized workload-management strategies may be crucial for ensuring mission safety. The study underscores the importance of considering task structure in cognitive workload assessments and calls for further research into cognitive resource management in extreme environments.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

StageOutcomeToolModelPromptAttemptsCompleted
discover success Crossref 1 2026-08-09
archive success canonical_url 1 2026-08-09
extract success cached 4 2026-08-23
clean success clean 1 2026-08-09
chunk success chunk 1 2026-08-09
embed success embed Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B 1 2026-08-09
promote success 1 2026-08-09
summarize success llm qwen3.8-27b-gittensor summ-v5 3 2026-08-23
tag success vector_similarity 11 2026-08-11
verify success 2 2026-08-09

Summary generated by qwen3.8-27b-gittensor on 2026-08-23; verification: pending re-verification.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).