ORCID Profile
0000-0001-7113-2842
Current Organisation
The University of Newcastle
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2021
Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
Date: 30-08-2022
DOI: 10.3389/FPSYG.2022.957551
Abstract: The core dimensions of cognitive fitness, such as attention and cognitive control, are emerging through a transdisciplinary expert consensus on what has been termed the Cognitive Fitness Framework (CF2). These dimensions represent key drivers of cognitive performance under pressure across many occupations, from first responders to sport, performing arts and the military. The constructs forming the building blocks of CF2 come from the RDoC framework, an initiative of the US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) aimed at identifying the cognitive processes underlying normal and abnormal behavior. Similar to physical conditioning, cognitive fitness can be improved with deliberate practice. This paper reports the development of a prototype cognitive fitness training program for competitive athletes and the protocol for its evaluation. The program is focused on primary cognitive capacities and subtending skills for adjusting training rhythms and enhancing readiness for competition. The project is driven by the Australian Psychological Society’s College of Sport & Exercise Psychology and includes the development of a Cognitive Gym program for a smartphone app-enhanced implementation. Its key building blocks are training protocols (drills) connected by a periodized training plan. A website with background supporting resources has also been developed as part of the project. National-level training squads will participate in a three-week pilot evaluation protocol, assessing the program’s efficacy and usability through gamified cognitive assessment of participants’ training gains and coaching staff evaluations, respectively. Both near and far transfer of training effects will be examined.
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 02-06-2023
DOI: 10.3390/SU15119016
Abstract: Drawing on the emerging area of workplace sustainability, this study sought to measure the effects of multimodal physical and cognitive fitness training on sustaining mental health and job readiness via impacts on subjective burnout, mental wellbeing, and resilience in a military cohort. Volunteer participants were block randomised into either a standard 4-week resilient mind program (RMP) intervention or an RMP combined with self-paced functional imagery practice (RMP+FI). Self-reported burnout, mental wellbeing, and resilience were measured at baseline and at the end of the 4-week intervention using the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS), Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), and the World Health Organization’s WHO-5 Well-Being Index (WHO-5), respectively. A total of 78 participants were enrolled in the study and 72 (92%) completed the program. Repeated measures ANOVAs showed significant effects of the RMP intervention, with both the RMP and RMP+FI groups reporting improved resilience (F(1, 70) = 13.08, p 0.001, partial ω2 = 0.00086) and mental wellbeing (F(1, 70) = 41.86, p 0.001, partial ω2 = 0.36). Both groups also reported improved burnout markers for professional efficacy (F(1, 70) = 6.25, p 0.002, partial ω2 = 0.02), as well as reduced emotional exhaustion (F(1, 70) = 31.84, p 0.001, partial ω2 = 0.02) and job cynicism (F(1, 70) = 8.80, p 0.005, partial ω2 = 0.005). The FI practice produced no significant improvement in the RMP-only condition. Our results support the efficacy of RMP intervention in reducing burnout symptoms and improving self-reported mental wellbeing and resilience in a cohort of serving Navy aviators.
Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
Date: 18-01-2023
DOI: 10.3389/FPSYG.2022.1017675
Abstract: The ability to perform optimally under pressure is critical across many occupations, including the military, first responders, and competitive sport. Despite recognition that such performance depends on a range of cognitive factors, how common these factors are across performance domains remains unclear. The current study sought to integrate existing knowledge in the performance field in the form of a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive mechanisms that underlie performance under pressure. International experts were recruited from four performance domains [(i) Defense (ii) Competitive Sport (iii) Civilian High-stakes and (iv) Performance Neuroscience]. Experts rated constructs from the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework (and several expert-suggested constructs) across successive rounds, until all constructs reached consensus for inclusion or were eliminated. Finally, included constructs were ranked for their relative importance. Sixty-eight experts completed the first Delphi round, with 94% of experts retained by the end of the Delphi process. The following 10 constructs reached consensus across all four panels (in order of overall ranking): (1) Attention (2) Cognitive Control—Performance Monitoring (3) Arousal and Regulatory Systems—Arousal (4) Cognitive Control—Goal Selection, Updating, Representation, and Maintenance (5) Cognitive Control—Response Selection and Inhibition/Suppression (6) Working memory—Flexible Updating (7) Working memory—Active Maintenance (8) Perception and Understanding of Self—Self-knowledge (9) Working memory—Interference Control, and (10) Expert-suggested—Shifting. Our results identify a set of transdisciplinary neuroscience-informed constructs, validated through expert consensus. This expert consensus is critical to standardizing cognitive assessment and informing mechanism-targeted interventions in the broader field of human performance optimization.
No related grants have been discovered for Paul Taylor.