The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Psychological Indicators of Balance Confidence: Relationship to Actual and Perceived Abilities
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study compares several psychological indicators of balance confidence in relation to physical performance, past and current experience, gender bias, and other perceptions of daily functioning. METHODS: Sixty community-dwelling ambulatory elders (aged 65-95) were administered the Falls Efficacy Scale (FES), the Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC), and three dichotomous questions on fear of falling, activity avoidance, and perceived need for personal assistance to ambulate outdoors. Performance measures on walking (average speed) and balance (static posturography) were obtained on a subsample of 21 subjects. RESULTS: Balance confidence assessed by the ABC and self-perceived need for personal assistance with outdoor ambulation were the only indicators significantly associated with the performance measures. As expected, perceived balance capabilities were more strongly related to current behavior (frequency of doing specific activities) than to past experience (fall history). Gender differences in self-report emerged for the global fear-of-falling indicator but not for the two efficacy ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological indicators of balance confidence are important to measure both in conjunction with balance test performance and as a legitimate focus of rehabilitation. Of the various indicators assessed here, the dichotomous fear-of-falling question appears to have the least utility. Perceived need for personal assistance to ambulate outdoors has merit as an initial clinical screening question for discriminating persons on the basis of both physical ability and confidence. The ABC scale appears to have the greatest utility as an evaluative index for older persons at a moderate to high level of functioning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency
Bandura, A. (1982) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122 · Cited by 15,975
Cited by
Friedman, S. M., Munoz, B., West, S. K., Rubin, G. S., & Fried, L. P. (2002) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50352.x · Cited by 1,050
Lajoie, Y., & Gallagher, S. P. (2004) · Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics · doi:10.1016/s0167-4943(03)00082-7 · Cited by 929
Lachman, M. E., Howland, J., Tennstedt, S., Jette, A., Assmann, S., & Peterson, E. W. (1998) · The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences · doi:10.1093/geronb/53b.1.p43 · Cited by 622
Properties of the ‘Timed Up and Go’ Test: More than Meets the Eye
Herman, T., Giladi, N., & Hausdorff, J. M. (2011) · Gerontology · doi:10.1159/000314963 · Cited by 572
Yardley, L., & Smith, H. (2002) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/42.1.17 · Cited by 566
Metadata
- Authors
- Myers, A. M., Powell, L. E., Maki, B. E., Holliday, P. J., Brawley, L. R., & Sherk, W.
- Venue
- The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996-01-01
- Volume
- 51A
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- M37-M43
- ISSN
- 1079-5006 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-535X
- OpenAlex
- W2169526637
- Cited by
- 400
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Psychological Indicators of Balance Confidence: Relationship to Actual and Perceived Abilities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/gerona/51a.1.m37
- The paper
- Myers, A. M., Powell, L. E., Maki, B. E., Holliday, P. J., Brawley, L. R., & Sherk, W. (1996). Psychological Indicators of Balance Confidence: Relationship to Actual and Perceived Abilities. The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/51a.1.m37
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.