## 4 Discussion
These psychological factors can significantly alter the attention distribution and movement precision, potentially exacerbating the biomechanical alterations observed [47], which can consequently impact the movement accuracy and stability. Differences in Motor Control Between Individuals with FAI and Healthy Individuals During Cognitive Task Execution  
This study's findings indicate no significant differences in biomechanical characteristics between individuals with FAI and a healthy control group under the influence of a cognitive task. This observation suggests that individuals with FAI exhibit a certain level of adaptability in motor control under these conditions, contradicting Hypothesis 2 of this study. At the baseline, the affected side in individuals with FAI demonstrated a reduced ankle joint plantar flexion angle upon landing when compared to the healthy population. However, this distinction was not apparent under the influence of the cognitive task, implying a possible alteration in the allocation of cognitive resources during movement. This reallocation could encompass the synchronized motion of the lower-limb joints and the subtle modulation of force and stability. The reason for this observed adaptability may be attributed to the compensatory mechanisms that the FAI group might have developed, enhancing their motor control strategies despite their proprioceptive deficits [37]. When confronted with the simultaneous challenges of a cognitive task and physical movement, these individuals might increasingly utilize visual or vestibular sensory integration to reinforce their postural stability [48]. Additionally, there may be an intensified cognitive effort dedicated to movement regulation, enabling them to sustain biomechanical patterns comparable to those of the control group. This adaptive response could signify a sophisticated interplay between the cognitive and motor systems, allowing individuals with FAI to adeptly manage cognitive loads and execute motor tasks without markedly compromising their biomechanical efficiency. Nevertheless, this does not suggest that individuals with FAI have achieved a motor control level equivalent to that of the healthy population [49]. The compensatory movement strategies employed by individuals with FAI are likely a result of long-term movement practice and learning, indicating an ability to activate established movement patterns to address current challenges amidst movement and cognitive demands. While this pattern is formed in the absence of a cognitive load, it is preserved under the influence of cognitive tasks [9]. However, the maintenance of this pattern during cognitive tasks might imply trade-offs in movement efficiency. While we cannot conclusively attribute this to an elevated injury risk from this study alone, it is a consideration for future research. Furthermore, significant disparities in biomechanical indicators, such as the knee flexion and valgus angles, peak vGRF, T-vGRF, and LR, were observed between individuals with FAI and the healthy control group. Although the absolute differences were minor, considering the FAI group as a unique population with functional rather than structural impairments, these individuals may exhibit subtle differences compared to healthy individuals. This leads to the phenomenon where, despite their statistical significance, the absolute differences observed are small. These observed differences suggest a tendency for individuals with FAI to employ alternative movement strategies during landing, both under baseline conditions and when subjected to cognitive influences. The hip, knee, and ankle joints, as integral components of the lower-limb kinetic chain, play crucial roles in executing targeted movements. When dysfunction occurs in one of these joints, the body unconsciously alters its movement pattern to accomplish the intended action.