Fig 1.
Conditions performed at normal and slow walking speeds.
Fig 2.
Shoe with an ankle moment constraint (width of the ridge is 1 cm).
Fig 3.
Mean regression coefficients of the foot placement model (1).
Standard deviations are represented by error bars. Panels A and B represent the results for respectively normal and slow walking speed. The beta coefficients were tested at mid-swing and terminal swing, demonstrating extreme evidence (BF10 > 100) for inclusion of the predictors.
Fig 4.
Median gluteus medius activity across legs and participants.
Panels A and B show the results for respectively normal and slow walking speed. For each participant strides were divided over medial and lateral steps, of which the median was taken respectively. For the median lateral step, there was a higher burst in gluteus medius activity during early swing (60–80%) of the gait cycle. The depicted EMG traces are normalized to average stride peak activity for each speed respectively. The figure serves as a dichotomous illustration of the relationship established through regression and does not show values that were statistically tested.
Fig 5.
Median adductor longus activity across legs and participants.
Panels A and B represent the results for respectively normal and slow walking speed. For each participant strides were divided over medial and lateral steps, of which the median was taken respectively. When comparing medial to lateral steps during early swing (60–80% of the gait cycle), higher EMG activity appears to be associated with more medial steps. This is more prominent at slow walking speed. The depicted EMG traces are normalized to average stride peak activity for each speed, respectively. The figure serves as a dichotomous illustration of the relationship established through regression and does not show values that were statistically tested.
Fig 6.
Mean regression coefficients of the muscle model (2).
Standard deviations are represented by error bars. Panels A and B represent the results for respectively normal and slow walking speed. Moderate to extreme evidence (BF10_al > 3 & BF10 _gm> 100) supports the inclusion of the predictors at normal walking speed. Extreme evidence (BF10 > 100) supports the inclusion of the predictors at slow walking speed.
Fig 7.
Relative explained variance (R2) of the foot placement model (1) during walking in the steady-state walking and ankle moment constrained condition.
Shaded areas depict the standard deviation. Panels A and B represent the results for respectively normal and slow walking speed. A step was defined from toe-off until subsequent heel strike.
Fig 8.
Mean relative explained variance (R2) of the muscle model (2) in the steady-state walking and the ankle moment constrained condition.
Standard deviations are represented by error bars. It remains inconclusive whether there is compensatory muscle activity in the ankle moment constrained condition.
Fig 9.
Relative explained variance (R2) of the foot placement model (1) in the steady-state walking and foot placement constrained condition.
Shaded areas depict the standard deviation. Panels A and B represent the results for respectively normal and slow walking speed. A step was defined from toe-off until subsequent heel strike.