Cédrick T Bonnet
email: cedrick.bonnet@univ-lille.fr

Boris Cheval

Sitting vs. standing: an urgent need to rebalance our world

Keywords: Excessive sitting, health problems, standing position, performance, productivity

During their activities of daily living, humans run, walk, stand, sit, and lie down. Recent changes in our environment have favored sedentary behavior over more physically active behavior to such a degree that our health is in danger. Here, we sought to address the problem of excessive time spent seated from various theoretical viewpoints, including postural control, human factors engineering, human history and health psychology. If nothing is done now, the high prevalence of sitting will continue to increase. We make a case for the standing position by demonstrating that spending more time upright can mitigate the physiological and psychological problems associated with excessive sitting without lowering task performance and productivity. The psychological literature even highlights potential benefits of performing certain tasks in the standing position. We propose a number of recommendations on spending more time (but not too much) in the standing position and on more active, nonambulatory behaviors. There is a need to inform people about (i) harmful consequences of excessive sitting and (ii) benefits of spending more time performing active, nonambulatory behaviors. One clear benefit is to reduce detrimental health consequences of excessive sitting and to provide potential additional benefits in terms of productivity and performance.

benches; Grimsurd, 1990) but were still very physically active every day [START_REF] Levine | Health-chair reform : Your chair: comfortable but deadly[END_REF][START_REF] Levine | Sick of sitting[END_REF]. It is only since the industrial revolution (i.e. approximately 250 years ago) that chairs started to be used in urban homes and schools (Grimsurd, 1990;[START_REF] Levine | Sick of sitting[END_REF]. During this period, work was facilitated by the technical progress, transportation and mechanical power provided by the industrial revolution. More recently (i.e. since the early 20 th century), various social, environmental and individual factors have prompted people to increase the time spent passively sitting [START_REF] Egger | Estimating historical changes in physical activity levels[END_REF].

Sitting more was used to avoid standing for long period of time because the later has always been known to trigger health problems, such as back pain, lower limb pain, muscle fatigue, and circulatory problems [START_REF] Baker | A detailed description of the short-term musculoskeletal and cognitive effects of prolonged standing for office computer work[END_REF]. We also sit because people around us sit, and social norms encouraged people to adopt the same behaviors [START_REF] Hadgraft | Models for Understanding Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Melvin | Population health measurement of social norms for sedentary behaviour : A systematic review[END_REF]. Social norms also favored the sitting position to recover from certain diseases [START_REF] Lee | Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide : An analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy[END_REF].

Environment at home have changed in the last hundred years. The introduction of various domestic devices and machines (TVs, washing machines, dryers, dishwashers, etc.) encouraged people to move less during activities of daily living at home [START_REF] Bergouignan | Effect of frequent interruptions of prolonged sitting on self-perceived levels of energy, mood, food cravings and cognitive function[END_REF][START_REF] Ng | Time Use and Physical Activity : A Shift Away from Movement across the Globe[END_REF]. Likewise, people could find food in their refrigerator and drinking water on tap in their kitchen; they did not need to move as far as their ancestors did to find food and drink [START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF]. From the occupational standpoint, there has been a gradual transition toward more sedentary, less physically demanding jobs [START_REF] Owen | Too Much Sitting : The Population-Health Science of Sedentary Behavior[END_REF]. People are also generally seated during transportation, which can sometimes account for a nonnegligible proportion of the day [START_REF] Bauman | The Descriptive Epidemiology of Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Hadgraft | Models for Understanding Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF]. As a result, people in highincome countries sit for almost twice as long as people in low-income countries [START_REF] Dempsey | New global guidelines on sedentary behaviour and health for adults : Broadening the behavioural targets[END_REF].

Environment at work has also changed. Chairs were used extensively in the workplace after World War II [START_REF] Levine | Sick of sitting[END_REF]. In the 20 th century, physical activity was thought to have a negative impact on intellectual work [START_REF] Lee | Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide : An analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy[END_REF]. It is still often thought today that seated intellectual work is more productive than upright intellectual work [START_REF] Bergouignan | Effect of frequent interruptions of prolonged sitting on self-perceived levels of energy, mood, food cravings and cognitive function[END_REF][START_REF] Gilson | Occupational sitting time : Employees? perceptions of health risks and intervention strategies[END_REF][START_REF] Hadgraft | Models for Understanding Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF]. As societal pressure to increase productivity and profits grows, companies and organizations will not encourage people to stand more unless the change improves (or at least does not worsen) these economic variables [START_REF] Labonté-Lemoyne | Does Reducing Sedentarity With Standing Desks Hinder Cognitive Performance[END_REF]. This is a social norm: spending more time seated is thought to be the best strategy for being productive [START_REF] Bergouignan | Effect of frequent interruptions of prolonged sitting on self-perceived levels of energy, mood, food cravings and cognitive function[END_REF].

The Internet has been changing how lives and work are organized since the 2000s. People increasingly use networked communication technologies (e.g. smartphones), digital media (television, cable TV, web sites, etc.), hi-tech display screens, and computer-based entertainment devices [START_REF] Ng | Time Use and Physical Activity : A Shift Away from Movement across the Globe[END_REF][START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF][START_REF] Wang | The associations between screen time-based sedentary behavior and depression : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], most of which are primarily used in the sitting position. Exposure to media doubled between 1960 and 2009 [START_REF] Biddle | Sedentary Behaviors and Adiposity in Young People : Causality and Conceptual Model[END_REF].

Although attempts to reduce the time spent seated have been made [START_REF] Gardner | How to reduce sitting time? A review of behaviour change strategies used in sedentary behaviour reduction interventions among adults[END_REF][START_REF] Landais | Choice architecture interventions to change physical activity and sedentary behavior : A systematic review of effects on intention, behavior and health outcomes during and after intervention[END_REF][START_REF] Michie | The behaviour change wheel : A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions[END_REF], passive sitting is everywhere: in workplaces, meeting rooms, [video] conference rooms, classrooms, public transportation, private transportation, individual homes, video game playing, computer use, reading, watching TV, cinemas, concerts, music lessons, places of worship, waiting rooms, and many other public and private areas. Even if people did want to stand more, modern society and public norms would prevent them from doing so. Passive sitting is now the default modern lifestyle in most societies [START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF]. It constitutes the dominant body position in activities of daily living [START_REF] De Craemer | Data on Determinants Are Needed to Curb the Sedentary Epidemic in Europe. Lessons Learnt from the DEDIPAC European Knowledge Hub[END_REF] and is an omnipresent, mass phenomenon [START_REF] Jochem | Introduction to Sedentary Behaviour Epidemiology[END_REF].

Other unexpected events can modify the time spent seated. For example, the periods of lockdown imposed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021 might have accentuated sitting [START_REF] Cheval | Relationships Between Changes in Self-Reported Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviours and Health During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic in France and Switzerland[END_REF]. Specifically, it has been shown that lockdown is associated with more time spent seated in front of a screen [START_REF] Amiri | Sedentary behavior in young people and related complications : An international challenge[END_REF][START_REF] Meyer | Changes in physical activity and sedentary behaviour due to the COVID-19 outbreak and associations with mental health in 3,052 US adults[END_REF] and more (often sedentary) teleworking (Belzunegui-Eraso & Erro-Garcés, 2020).

More time spent seated, as justified by the psychology literature

In this section, we briefly present three (though overlapping) types of theoretical model that investigate and try to understand changes in the time spent seated: sociocognitive models, dual-process models, and socioecological models. Note that this section is not intended to be exhaustive, but aimed to highlight prominent models mobilized in the existing literature to understand health-related behaviors including physical activity and sedentary behaviors.

The sociocognitive models have been used to investigate the motivational precursors of sedentary behaviors [START_REF] Biddle | Fit or sit? Is there a psychology of sedentary behaviour?[END_REF]. The models are based on the hypothesis whereby goals are the first precursors of behavior [START_REF] Brand | Theories to Explain Exercise Motivation and Physical Inactivity : Ways of Expanding Our Current Theoretical Perspective[END_REF]. Consistently with this sociocognitive approach, when people are motivated to sit less, they do succeed in spending less time seated [START_REF] Aulbach | A dual process model to predict adolescents' screen time and physical activity[END_REF][START_REF] Maher | Within-day time-varying associations between motivation and movement-related behaviors in older adults[END_REF].

To account for the difficulties of the dominant socio-cognitive models to explain the gap between conscious goals and actionthe so-called "intention-behavior gap" [START_REF] Sheeran | The Intention-Behavior Gap[END_REF], dualprocess models have gained traction. In brief, these models argue that physical activity behaviors are governed not only by controlled processes (e.g. attitudes and intentions) but also by automatic processes (e.g. spontaneous approach-avoidance reactions and habits) (Cheval, Radel, et al., 2018;[START_REF] Conroy | Automatic Affective Evaluations of Physical Activity[END_REF]. On one hand, controlled processes are slow as they require cognitive resources and involve conscious awareness. On the other hand, automatic processes are faster as they are initiated unintentionally, they do not require conscious awareness and they rely on well-learned associations and heuristic cues. Some recent studies have shown that a stronger habit for sedentary behaviors was associated with more time spent seated [START_REF] Aulbach | A dual process model to predict adolescents' screen time and physical activity[END_REF][START_REF] Maher | Dual-process model of older adults' sedentary behavior : An ecological momentary assessment study[END_REF].

Finally, adopting a broader perspective in order to better understand the multiple levels of influence on people behaviors, ecological models of sedentary behavior have been developed. These models, which was first introduced by [START_REF] Owen | Adults' Sedentary Behavior : Determinants and Interventions[END_REF], argue that sedentary behaviors are jointly driven by multiple determinants. These factors can be classed as intrapersonal (individuals), interpersonal (social) and environmental [START_REF] O'donoghue | A systematic review of correlates of sedentary behaviour in adults aged 18-65 years : A socioecological approach[END_REF]. Specifically, demographic factors (e.g., sex, age), healthrelated factors (e.g., body mass index, cardiorespiratory fitness), motivational factors (e.g., intentions, attitudes) and socio-professional factors (e.g., type of job) are intrapersonal variables. The socioecological models seek to integrate automatic, controlled motivational precursors into a broader network [START_REF] Rhodes | Theories of physical activity behaviour change : A history and synthesis of approaches[END_REF][START_REF] Sniehotta | Complex systems and individual-level approaches to population health : A false dichotomy[END_REF]. To date, most of the studies that used socioecological models to understand sedentary behaviors focused on demographic and health-related factors [START_REF] Chastin | Meta-analysis of the relationship between breaks in sedentary behavior and cardiometabolic health[END_REF][START_REF] O'donoghue | A systematic review of correlates of sedentary behaviour in adults aged 18-65 years : A socioecological approach[END_REF]. For example, it has been reported that old age, a higher BMI, and male sex were associated with more time spent seated [START_REF] Maltagliati | I Sit but I Don't Know Why : Investigating the Multiple Precursors of Leisure-Time Sedentary Behaviors[END_REF][START_REF] Saidj | Descriptive study of sedentary behaviours in 35,444 French working adults : Cross-sectional findings from the ACTI-Cités study[END_REF]. Studies of socioprofessional variables showed that people who spent a lot of time seated at work tended to be seated during their leisure time [START_REF] Maltagliati | I Sit but I Don't Know Why : Investigating the Multiple Precursors of Leisure-Time Sedentary Behaviors[END_REF][START_REF] Stamatakis | Objectively-assessed and self-reported sedentary time in relation to multiple socioeconomic status indicators among adults in England : A cross-sectional study[END_REF], though this association was not consistently observed [START_REF] Tigbe | A physically active occupation does not result in compensatory inactivity during out-of-work hours[END_REF][START_REF] Vandelanotte | Associations between occupational indicators and total, work-based and leisure-time sitting : A cross-sectional study[END_REF]. With regard to interpersonal precursors, individuals with a higher number of children were seen to engage in less sedentary leisuretime activities, suggesting that family commitments can protect against long sedentary behaviors [START_REF] Uffelen | Correlates of Sitting Time in Working Age Australian Women : Who Should Be Targeted With Interventions to Decrease Sitting Time[END_REF]. Lastly, environmental variables are also associated with more leisure time spent seated, such as the day of the week [START_REF] Maltagliati | I Sit but I Don't Know Why : Investigating the Multiple Precursors of Leisure-Time Sedentary Behaviors[END_REF][START_REF] Thorp | Prolonged sedentary time and physical activity in workplace and non-work contexts : A cross-sectional study of office, customer service and call centre employees[END_REF], the weather [START_REF] Chan | Assessing the effects of weather conditions on physical activity participation using objective measures[END_REF][START_REF] Maltagliati | I Sit but I Don't Know Why : Investigating the Multiple Precursors of Leisure-Time Sedentary Behaviors[END_REF], housing type and size, neighborhood safety and accessibility [START_REF] Bauman | The Descriptive Epidemiology of Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF]. The way the environment is setup affects the time spent seated, as also discussed by [START_REF] Hadgraft | Models for Understanding Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF] and [START_REF] Gorely | Sedentary Behaviour and the Social and Physical Environment[END_REF].

Another reason for long sedentary behaviors is poor individual awareness of the latter's impact on health in general and non-communicable diseases in particular. For example, one study showed that the majority of people were barely aware or not at all aware of any advice related to sedentary behavior [START_REF] Carson | Paediatricians' awareness of, agreement with and use of the new Canadian Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for children and youth zero to 17 years of age[END_REF]. Only 17 (5%) of the 331 people were well aware of these guidelines, and 106 (32%) were barely familiar with them [START_REF] Carson | Paediatricians' awareness of, agreement with and use of the new Canadian Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for children and youth zero to 17 years of age[END_REF].

Finally, according to the theory of effort minimization in physical activity (Cheval & Boisgontier, 2021), humans have an automatic tendency to minimize effort. This automatic tendency has been recently evidenced by multiple behavioral and EEG studies demonstrating that avoiding sedentary opportunities was associated with higher inhibitory control [START_REF] Cheval | Higher inhibitory control is required to escape the innate attraction to effort minimization[END_REF]Cheval et al., 2021;[START_REF] Cheval | Avoiding sedentary behaviors requires more cortical resources than avoiding physical activity : An EEG study[END_REF]. For example, Cheval et al. (2018) study showed that participants showed more ample evoked-related potentials in the medial frontal cortex and frontocentral cortex, which have been related to conflict monitoring and inhibition, respectively. Likewise, the second study (Cheval et al., 2021) showed that, relative to stimuli depicting physical activity, participants exhibited greater inhibiting responses to stimuli depicting physical inactivity as indicated by more ample evoked-related potentials in the frontocentral cortex. In sum, these behavioral and EEG results suggested that inhibitory control is required to avoid physical inactivity stimuli. Accordingly, in a modern environment in which opportunities to minimize effort are ubiquitous, this automatic tendency toward effort minimization can largely explain why individuals may spontaneously prefer sedentary behaviors over more physically active ones. Likewise, when the environment affords opportunities both for physically active and inactive behaviors, the decision-making processes may automatically favor the inactive solution, the engagement in the more active requiring additional cortical resources (Cheval et al., 2021;[START_REF] Cheval | Avoiding sedentary behaviors requires more cortical resources than avoiding physical activity : An EEG study[END_REF].

More time spent seated, as justified by the literature on postural control

People in the standing position sway and so need to control their balance continuously (Bonnet & Baudry, 2016a;[START_REF] Ivanenko | Human Postural Control[END_REF]. They sway because of internal constraints (the heart beating, the lungs filling and emptying, etc.), external constraints (e.g., gravity, wind, ground stability), and goal constraints (e.g. moving their hands to grab objects, or moving the head to look around) [START_REF] Bonnet | revision in Gait and Posture: ID # GAIPOS-S-22-00824). Beneficial effects of standing and swaying on task performance in goal-directed visual tasks: A systematic review Bonnet[END_REF]Bonnet & Baudry, 2016a). Since the middle of the 19 th century, researchers in the field of postural control have mostly considered postural sway to be a negative consequence of the standing position -a negative consequence that the brain needs to monitor and reduce. Increases and decreases in postural sway are considered to be markers of worse postural stability (Bonnet & Baudry, 2016b, 2016a;[START_REF] Mitra | Postural costs of suprapostural task load[END_REF][START_REF] Mitra | Divergent effects of cognitive load on quiet stance and tasklinked postural coordination[END_REF] and better postural stability, respectively (Bonnet & Baudry, 2016b, 2016a). Taken as a whole and after more than 150 years of research in the literature on postural control, none of the models of postural control predict better task performance when standing than when sitting. Supposedly, the literature on postural control has influenced people to sit (rather than stand) when performing tasks.

Models in the literature on postural control are mostly interested in the capacity of the brain to maintain balance. Therefore, task performance when standing or even when standing is only analyzed as a secondary variable of interest. Some models even do not anticipate, i.e. do not propose hypotheses, whether task performance can be better or worse when standing vs. when sitting. This is so for example for the ecological model [START_REF] Riccio | Affordances as constraints on the control of stance[END_REF][START_REF] Stoffregen | Postural stabilization of looking[END_REF], the synergistic model (Bonnet & Baudry, 2016a), the synergistic approach to motor control [START_REF] Latash | Synergy[END_REF]. Other models, however, such as the dominant cognitive models do suggest worse task performance when standing than when sitting if postural control (considered as the main task; [START_REF] Woollacott | Attention and the control of posture and gait : A review of an emerging area of research[END_REF] and/or the cognitive task (considered as the secondary task) are difficult enough. In fact, these dual-task models expect that attention is divided when an individual performs a so-called "dual task", i.e. when they perform a dual-task in the standing position. In the past, the main dual-task theories (capacity-sharing theories, bottleneck theories, the time-sharing theory, and the cross-talk theory (see [START_REF] Bayot | The interaction between cognition and motor control : A theoretical framework for dual-task interference effects on posture, gait initiation, gait and turning[END_REF] and their sub-theories all considered that the brain's attentional resources are limited during the performance of dual tasks; performance in at least one of the dual tasks should be impaired if the other is sufficiently challenging. All these models therefore logically expect that task performance and/or postural control should be worse during a challenging dual task than during separate (single) tasks (e.g. sitting and performing a cognitive task or standing and not doing anything). Exactly as for the models for sedentary behaviors, this discussion of the models in postural control was not intended to be exhaustive. It simply aimed to highlight prominent models used in the literature either showing no influence of bad influence of standing on task performance.

Today, too many people spend too much time seated 2.1. Objective time spent in the sitting position in published studies

Many objective measures of the time spent seated (based on accelerometers and/or inclinometers) have shown that the vast majority of healthy adults (aged 18-65) worldwide spend between 50% and 75% of their waking time in the sitting position. To the best of our knowledge, and after a deep search of all published manuscripts respecting these criteria, we only identified eight relevant studies [START_REF] Carson | Patterns of sedentary time and cardiometabolic risk among Canadian adults[END_REF][START_REF] Gibson | An examination of objectively-measured sedentary behavior and mental well-being in adults across week days and weekends[END_REF][START_REF] Halim | Associations between objectively assessed and selfreported sedentary time with mental health in adults : An analysis of data from the Health Survey for England[END_REF][START_REF] Healy | Sedentary time and cardio-metabolic biomarkers in US adults : NHANES 2003-06[END_REF][START_REF] Loyen | Sedentary Time and Physical Activity Surveillance Through Accelerometer Pooling in Four European Countries[END_REF][START_REF] Matthews | Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004[END_REF][START_REF] Smith | Weekday and weekend patterns of objectively measured sitting, standing, and stepping in a sample of office-based workers : The active buildings study[END_REF][START_REF] Vallance | Associations of objectively-assessed physical activity and sedentary time with depression : NHANES (2005-2006)[END_REF]. In this selection, we have also considered the bibliography of all selected manuscript. We have avoided discussing studies of the seated position based on self-reports because this subjective approach might provide inaccurate data and might underestimate the time truly spent sitting [START_REF] Compernolle | Effectiveness of interventions using self-monitoring to reduce sedentary behavior in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Gardner | Is sitting invisible? Exploring how people mentally represent sitting[END_REF][START_REF] Prince | A comparison of self-reported and device measured sedentary behaviour in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Stamatakis | Is the time right for quantitative public health guidelines on sitting? A narrative review of sedentary behaviour research paradigms and findings[END_REF]. Depending on the study in question, the objective time spent in the sitting position equated to an average of 8.44 hours per day (h/d) [START_REF] Healy | Sedentary time and cardio-metabolic biomarkers in US adults : NHANES 2003-06[END_REF], 8.5 h/d both in the USA [START_REF] Matthews | Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004[END_REF], 8.5 h/d [START_REF] Vallance | Associations of objectively-assessed physical activity and sedentary time with depression : NHANES (2005-2006)[END_REF] and 10.8 h/d both in Canada [START_REF] Carson | Patterns of sedentary time and cardiometabolic risk among Canadian adults[END_REF], 8.8 h/d in four European countries (England, Norway, Portugal, and Sweden) [START_REF] Loyen | Sedentary Time and Physical Activity Surveillance Through Accelerometer Pooling in Four European Countries[END_REF], between 9 and 9.5 h/day in the UK [START_REF] Gibson | An examination of objectively-measured sedentary behavior and mental well-being in adults across week days and weekends[END_REF]), 9.6 h/d (Hamer et al., 2014), and 10.6 h/day both in England [START_REF] Smith | Weekday and weekend patterns of objectively measured sitting, standing, and stepping in a sample of office-based workers : The active buildings study[END_REF]. Overall, more than 50% of the 16-h waking day is spent seated (i.e. 8 h). Desk workers spend even more objective time in the sitting position (from 65% to 82% of their waking hours, depending on the study) [START_REF] Gupta | Are temporal patterns of sitting associated with obesity among blue-collar workers? A cross sectional study using accelerometers[END_REF][START_REF] Hadgraft | Office workers' objectively assessed total and prolonged sitting time : Individual-level correlates and worksite variations[END_REF]. Furthermore, the time spent seated is socioeconomically patternedpeople with higher socioeconomical status have an occupation that often involves more time spent seated [START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF]. Older (over-65) adults and people with comorbidities like heart disease, obesity, and pulmonary diseases spend even more time seated than members of the general population [START_REF] Bauman | The Descriptive Epidemiology of Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Dogra | Correlates of extended sitting time in older adults : An exploratory cross-sectional analysis of the Canadian Community Health Survey Healthy Aging Cycle[END_REF][START_REF] Ekelund | Joint associations of accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary time with all-cause mortality : A harmonised meta-analysis in more than 44 000 middle-aged and older individuals[END_REF].

Can we define a general threshold for excessive passive sitting?

We recognize that recent studies cautiously suggested not to provide thresholds for excessive passive sitting as not enough studies have been published in the literature to highlight any accurate threshold [START_REF] Chaput | Public health guidelines on sedentary behaviour are important and needed : A provisional benchmark is better than no benchmark at all[END_REF][START_REF] Dempsey | New global guidelines on sedentary behaviour and health for adults : Broadening the behavioural targets[END_REF][START_REF] Stamatakis | Is the time right for quantitative public health guidelines on sitting? A narrative review of sedentary behaviour research paradigms and findings[END_REF]. We agree that the definition of subtle thresholds for excessive passive sitting is inappropriate and should not be provided, e.g. thresholds related to age, to gender, to countries, to jobs, to breaks of prolonged sitting behaviors, to physical activity and to many other influential factors. However, without any referential value, anyone may not feel concerned by general recommendations of any organization [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Chaput | Public health guidelines on sedentary behaviour are important and needed : A provisional benchmark is better than no benchmark at all[END_REF] and may not search for alert signals [START_REF] Compernolle | Effectiveness of interventions using self-monitoring to reduce sedentary behavior in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF]. For this reason, in [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF], we performed an extensive review of the literature to search for the highest limit or threshold not to cross for anyone in the world. We found and discussed that any individual should not sit more than 8 h/d [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF]. With caution, we explained that individuals may still be in danger for their health if they sit less than 8 h/d (e.g. 6-7 hours). Accordingly, many researchers have suggested lower thresholds than 8 h/d in specific contexts, such as sitting on the sofa watching TV [START_REF] Ekelund | Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women[END_REF][START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF]. In [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF], we only suggested that sitting more than 8 h/d on a regular basis could be dangerous for health in any context and for any population. Consistently, [START_REF] Ekelund | Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women[END_REF] suggested that sitting down passively for more than a 8 h/day was associated with a strikingly elevated risk of all-cause mortalityputting people in a so-called "danger zone". Furthermore, all studies objectively measuring the time spent seated have found that sitting for more than 6 to 8 h/d is associated with the development of health problems in healthy adults [START_REF] Chau | Daily Sitting Time and All-Cause Mortality : A Meta-Analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Dunstan | Too much sitting-A health hazard[END_REF][START_REF] Gibson | An examination of objectively-measured sedentary behavior and mental well-being in adults across week days and weekends[END_REF][START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF][START_REF] Pitanga | Physical Activity And Reducing Sedentary Behavior During The Coronavirus Pandemic[END_REF][START_REF] Rangul | The associations of sitting time and physical activity on total and site-specific cancer incidence : Results from the HUNT study, Norway[END_REF]. Also, some studies objectively measuring the time spent seated even showed that health problems come even at 6 or 7 h/d when people sit in sofas [START_REF] Ekelund | Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women[END_REF][START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF]. We need to mention that 8 h/d is not an evidencebased definitive value. Further research should confirm or update this initial value, exactly as values of physical activity have been updated recently [START_REF] Ekelund | Joint associations of accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary time with all-cause mortality : A harmonised meta-analysis in more than 44 000 middle-aged and older individuals[END_REF]. At the practical level, this value is easy to remember as it corresponds to one third of the total day (24h/3) and half of a usual waking day (16h/2).

In section 2.1 we highlighted that more than half of the population worldwide spent too much time in the seated position and objective measures consistently showed that people spent more than 8 h/d in the sitting position. In section 2.2, we discussed that spending more than 8 h/d in the sitting position could be dangerous for health. In the coming section 2.3, we elaborate more on discussing health-related problems caused by excessive sitting, i.e. by spending more than 8 h/d in the sitting position.

Health-related problems caused by excessive sitting

Today, the literature suggests that excessive sitting is unhealthy [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Levine | Health-chair reform : Your chair: comfortable but deadly[END_REF][START_REF] Levine | Sick of sitting[END_REF][START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF]. In fact, excessive passive sitting in comfortable chairs or on comfortable sofas has been linked to at least 35 disorders and conditions [START_REF] Levine | Sick of sitting[END_REF]. For example, excessive passive sitting was shown to be related to premature mortality [START_REF] Compernolle | Effectiveness of interventions using self-monitoring to reduce sedentary behavior in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Ekelund | Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women[END_REF][START_REF] Jones | Too Much Workplace Sitting : A Brief Historical Perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Sedentary Behavior and Health : Update from the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee[END_REF][START_REF] Labonté-Lemoyne | Does Reducing Sedentarity With Standing Desks Hinder Cognitive Performance[END_REF][START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF][START_REF] Prince | A comparison of self-reported and device measured sedentary behaviour in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], type 2 diabetes [START_REF] Compernolle | Effectiveness of interventions using self-monitoring to reduce sedentary behavior in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Jones | Too Much Workplace Sitting : A Brief Historical Perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Sedentary Behavior and Health : Update from the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee[END_REF][START_REF] Labonté-Lemoyne | Does Reducing Sedentarity With Standing Desks Hinder Cognitive Performance[END_REF][START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF][START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF][START_REF] Melvin | Population health measurement of social norms for sedentary behaviour : A systematic review[END_REF][START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF][START_REF] Wang | The associations between screen time-based sedentary behavior and depression : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], cancers [START_REF] Jones | Too Much Workplace Sitting : A Brief Historical Perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Sedentary Behavior and Health : Update from the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee[END_REF][START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF][START_REF] Melvin | Population health measurement of social norms for sedentary behaviour : A systematic review[END_REF][START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF][START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF], cardiovascular disease [START_REF] Compernolle | Effectiveness of interventions using self-monitoring to reduce sedentary behavior in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Jones | Too Much Workplace Sitting : A Brief Historical Perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Sedentary Behavior and Health : Update from the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee[END_REF][START_REF] Labonté-Lemoyne | Does Reducing Sedentarity With Standing Desks Hinder Cognitive Performance[END_REF][START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF][START_REF] Melvin | Population health measurement of social norms for sedentary behaviour : A systematic review[END_REF][START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF][START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF][START_REF] Prince | A comparison of self-reported and device measured sedentary behaviour in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Wang | The associations between screen time-based sedentary behavior and depression : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], stroke [START_REF] Stanczykiewicz | Sedentary behaviors and anxiety among children, adolescents and adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], chronic inflammatory diseases [START_REF] Levine | Health-chair reform : Your chair: comfortable but deadly[END_REF][START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF], musculoskeletal disorders such as lower back pain and knee/hip arthritis [START_REF] Jones | Too Much Workplace Sitting : A Brief Historical Perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF], poor muscle endurance and loss of force [START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF][START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF], physiological problems such as sleep disorders [START_REF] Wang | The associations between screen time-based sedentary behavior and depression : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], and immune and endocrine impairments [START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF]. Excessive sitting is also associated with a drop in arterial blood pressure, which can promote orthostatic intolerance [START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF]. Furthermore, excessive sitting is associated with hemodynamic and vascular problems (causing atherogenesis) [START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF], the impairment of normal function in many cells and tissues, a decrement in the mitochondrial concentration in skeletal muscles, impaired metabolic flexibility [START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF], and decrements in triglyceride hydrolysis and glucose evacuation [START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF]. Excessive passive sitting was also related to impairments in cognitive performance executive function and decision-making [START_REF] Chandrasekaran | Does breaking up prolonged sitting improve cognitive functions in sedentary adults? A mapping review and hypothesis formulation on the potential physiological mechanisms[END_REF][START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF][START_REF] Verhavert | The Association between Energy Balance-Related Behavior and Burn-Out in Adults : A Systematic Review[END_REF]. Moreover, excessive passive sitting was associated with mental health problems such as anxiety [START_REF] Stanczykiewicz | Sedentary behaviors and anxiety among children, adolescents and adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Wang | The associations between screen time-based sedentary behavior and depression : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], demotivation, discomfort [START_REF] Finch | Taking a Stand : The Effects of Standing Desks on Task Performance and Engagement[END_REF]Kar & Hedge, 2016a), and depression [START_REF] Verhavert | The Association between Energy Balance-Related Behavior and Burn-Out in Adults : A Systematic Review[END_REF][START_REF] Wang | The associations between screen time-based sedentary behavior and depression : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF]. Some researchers have even suggested that depressive symptoms and time spent seated are reciprocally interlinked [START_REF] Stanczykiewicz | Sedentary behaviors and anxiety among children, adolescents and adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF]. More time spent seated is associated with more severe depressive symptoms, and the latter is associated with more time spent seated. It is important is to note that these problems might interact and cumulate their negative effects. Sitting deteriorates the will to stand [START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF] and therefore creates a self-reinforcing vicious circle [START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Standing and mortality in a prospective cohort of Canadian adults[END_REF]. The aforementioned associations are likely to be bidirectional, since the development of physical and mental health conditions can increase the time spent sitting [START_REF] Bauman | The Descriptive Epidemiology of Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Rosenberger | Sedentary behavior : Target for change, challenge to assess[END_REF][START_REF] Stanczykiewicz | Sedentary behaviors and anxiety among children, adolescents and adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF]. Taken as a whole, health-related issues of excessive sitting exist at multiple levels, i.e. at microscopic and macroscopic levels of the body. The body seems to be broken down at any, or many, of these levels. All these problems might be due to the fact that the human body did not evolve to sit passively [START_REF] Grimsrud | Humans were not created to sit-And why you have to refurnish your life[END_REF][START_REF] Jochem | Introduction to Sedentary Behaviour Epidemiology[END_REF].

Making a case for more standing behavior for health

For million years, our ancestors were highly physically active; sitting for long periods is only a recent phenomenon [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Jochem | Introduction to Sedentary Behaviour Epidemiology[END_REF]. Individuals have to avoid excessive sitting and therefore have to spend more time in standing to prevent as best as possible all these health concerns. Accordingly, many manuscripts discuss health-related benefits to spend more time in the standing position: their main message is 'stand up for your health' [START_REF] Garland | Stand Up to Work : Assessing the health impact of adjustable workstations[END_REF][START_REF] Gibbs | Reducing sedentary behaviour to decrease chronic low back pain : The stand back randomised trial[END_REF][START_REF] Jeal | Protecting the health of sex workers : Will the real agenda please stand up[END_REF][START_REF] Sjögren | Stand up for health-avoiding sedentary behaviour might lengthen your telomeres : Secondary outcomes from a physical activity RCT in older people[END_REF]. Important is to consider that in spending more time in the standing position, and therefore less time in the sitting position, is the easiest manner to limit and potentially to avoid the long list of health-related issues caused by excessive sitting. This is the main reason explaining that we make a case for more standing (but not too much or too abruptly), here for health concern.

Making a case for more standing behavior also for work productivity and task performance 3.1. Work productivity when standing vs. when sitting

On the long-term basis (for months and years) and for work productivity 1 , one can expect that if individuals are affected by any or many of the aforementioned disease (see section 2.3), they may work less efficiently than if they were healthy [START_REF] Brown | Objectively measured sedentary behavior and physical activity in office employees : Relationships with presenteeism[END_REF]. On this basis, work productivity may be negatively impacted to reach long-term objectives for months and years. So many issues are associated with sitting, at both physical and cognitive levels [START_REF] Chandrasekaran | Does breaking up prolonged sitting improve cognitive functions in sedentary adults? A mapping review and hypothesis formulation on the potential physiological mechanisms[END_REF] that it is unlikely to expect better work productivity when using excessive sitting than any other, more balanced body position. Accordingly, many studies have reported lower work productivity and/or work engagement among people who spend excessive time in the seated position [START_REF] Chandrasekaran | Does breaking up prolonged sitting improve cognitive functions in sedentary adults? A mapping review and hypothesis formulation on the potential physiological mechanisms[END_REF][START_REF] Hendriksen | Longitudinal Relationship Between Sitting Time on a Working Day and Vitality, Work Performance, Presenteeism, and Sickness Absence[END_REF][START_REF] Munir | Work engagement and its association with occupational sitting time : Results from the Stormont study[END_REF][START_REF] Puig-Ribera | Self-reported sitting time and physical activity : Interactive associations with mental well-being and productivity in office employees[END_REF]. In line with our argumentation, it has been suggested that spending too much time seated can be negative (or at least not beneficial) for work vitality, job satisfaction, and work performance [START_REF] Van Dommelen | Objectively Measured Total and Occupational Sedentary Time in Three Work Settings[END_REF]. Furthermore, spending more time in the standing position might also reduce the incidence of more subtle health consequences of sitting, such as sleepiness [START_REF] Hosteng | Uninterrupted Classroom Sitting is Associated with Increased Discomfort and Sleepiness Among College Students[END_REF] low back pain [START_REF] Greene | Transient perceived back pain induced by prolonged sitting in a backless office chair : Are biomechanical factors involved?[END_REF], and discomfort [START_REF] Waongenngarm | Perceived body discomfort and trunk muscle activity in three prolonged sitting postures[END_REF]. Standing meetings have been shown to be shorter but involve the same amount of information sharing than traditional seated meeting [START_REF] Danquah | Standing Meetings Are Feasible and Effective in Reducing Sitting Time among Office Workers-Walking Meetings Are Not : Mixed-Methods Results on the Feasibility and Effectiveness of Active Meetings Based on Data from the « Take a Stand! » Study[END_REF]. Also, [START_REF] Bergouignan | Effect of frequent interruptions of prolonged sitting on self-perceived levels of energy, mood, food cravings and cognitive function[END_REF] showed that standing and walking 5 min every hours led people to feel lower levels of fatigue and higher energy during the day, it also improved their mood and vigor. We should also note that the reviews by [START_REF] Karakolis | The impact of sit-stand office workstations on worker discomfort and productivity : A review[END_REF] and [START_REF] Sui | The effects of sedentary behaviour interventions on work-related productivity and performance outcomes in real and simulated office work : A systematic review[END_REF] were more positive than negative to show that the standing position could benefit work productivity. The researchers suggested that productivity tended to be higher when seated but that performance, presenteeism and other positive feelings (e.g. willingness to perform work) were more prominent when standing and/or being active at work [START_REF] Sui | The effects of sedentary behaviour interventions on work-related productivity and performance outcomes in real and simulated office work : A systematic review[END_REF]. Furthermore, the standing position improves task engagement (i.e. interest and enthusiasm) [START_REF] Finch | Taking a Stand : The Effects of Standing Desks on Task Performance and Engagement[END_REF].

Highlights from the literature on human history

Creativity and consciousness are key human qualities [START_REF] Arons | Standing up for humanity : Upright body, creative instability, and spiritual balance[END_REF] and Homo sapiens is almost the only animal species that moves in the upright position at all times. This is why [START_REF] Arons | Standing up for humanity : Upright body, creative instability, and spiritual balance[END_REF] suggested that the standing position may have prompted humans' creative capacity and consciousness. When upright, humans can manipulate objects with their hands and invent tools, which can incite creativity. Standing also creates a wide range of verbal capacities and potential verbal agility. Furthermore, the brain became larger and more complex after hominids had used the bipedal stance. [START_REF] Arons | Standing up for humanity : Upright body, creative instability, and spiritual balance[END_REF] emphasized the high degree of genetic similarity between the chimpanzee and the human but also the radical differences in mental endowment and achievement. He concluded that one of the main physical differences between these two speciesthe standing positioncould have caused the cognitive differences. If we could use an image, we would suggest that 'standing is a smart behavior'.

Highlights from the psychology literature

A large body of evidence in the psychology literature suggests that the standing stance can be beneficial for task performance in various activities. In fact, Chajut and Algom [START_REF] Chajut | Selective attention improves under stress : Implications for theories of social cognition[END_REF] argued that a moderate level of stress restricts mental resources but also prompts the brain to focus the available resources on task-relevant elements and to ignore irrelevant elements. In other words, a moderate level of stress (e.g. such as that experienced in quiet standing) should enable more selective attention than a situation with a low level of stress (e.g. the seated position) [START_REF] Chajut | Selective attention improves under stress : Implications for theories of social cognition[END_REF]. If people are able to better focus their attention on an ongoing task, their performance might be better or at least not worse. Accordingly, two studies showed that a higher level of physiological arousal enhances attentional selectivity [START_REF] Rosenbaum | Stand by Your Stroop : Standing Up Enhances Selective Attention and Cognitive Control[END_REF][START_REF] Smith | Standing enhances cognitive control and alters visual search[END_REF]. In both studies, participants performed significantly better the modified Stroop task when standing than when sitting [START_REF] Rosenbaum | Stand by Your Stroop : Standing Up Enhances Selective Attention and Cognitive Control[END_REF][START_REF] Smith | Standing enhances cognitive control and alters visual search[END_REF]. We acknowledge that standing is not at all time beneficial for attentional selectivity, as shown by two recent research articles [START_REF] Caron | Does Posture Influence the Stroop Effect?[END_REF][START_REF] Straub | Does body posture reduce the Stroop effect? Evidence from two conceptual replications and a meta-analysis[END_REF]. Of note, these later researchers also failed to demonstrate that standing could lead to lower attentional selectivity. Another confirmation of [START_REF] Chajut | Selective attention improves under stress : Implications for theories of social cognition[END_REF] theory can be found in [START_REF] Barra | Postural control system influences intrinsic alerting state[END_REF]. In this study, the researchers used the attention network test in three body positions (sitting, standing with feet heel to toe, laying in a supine position). Participants either had an alerting priming or not. The results showed that participants were significantly faster with no alerting priming when they stood upright than in both other conditions. In other words, [START_REF] Barra | Postural control system influences intrinsic alerting state[END_REF] showed that participants exhibited higher level of alerting when standing than when sitting and lying. [START_REF] Chajut | Selective attention improves under stress : Implications for theories of social cognition[END_REF] theory was also highlighted in other publications [START_REF] Ebara | Effects of adjustable sit-stand VDT workstations on workers' musculoskeletal discomfort, alertness and performance[END_REF][START_REF] Kar | Effects of Sitting and Standing Work Postures on Short-Term Typing Performance and Discomfort[END_REF].

Other reasons can be discussed to explain why stance may be beneficial (at least indirectly) in ongoing activities. In fact, adoption of a more expansive posture seems to significantly increase the level of testosterone and decrease the level of cortisoleven after as little as two 1-minute trials [START_REF] Carney | Power Posing : Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance[END_REF]. A feeling of greater power is known to lead to many benefits, such as a greater access to resources, enhanced cognition [START_REF] Chajut | Selective attention improves under stress : Implications for theories of social cognition[END_REF]Kar & Hedge, 2016), more confidence, a more positive affect [START_REF] Andolfi | Opening the mind through the body : The effects of posture on creative processes[END_REF][START_REF] Carney | Power Posing : Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance[END_REF], greater task engagement, and greater endurance during a challenging task [START_REF] Andolfi | Opening the mind through the body : The effects of posture on creative processes[END_REF][START_REF] Carney | Power Posing : Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance[END_REF]. More expansive posture significantly increases and decreases the level of testosterone and cortisol, respectively, even with only two trials of 1 min [START_REF] Carney | Power Posing : Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance[END_REF]. [START_REF] Andolfi | Opening the mind through the body : The effects of posture on creative processes[END_REF] explained that open postures lead to open mental framework, resulting in the exploration of more options than when seated, thus opening the mindset [START_REF] Magnon | Sedentary Behavior at Work and Cognitive Functioning : A Systematic Review[END_REF]. [START_REF] Finch | Taking a Stand : The Effects of Standing Desks on Task Performance and Engagement[END_REF] also suggested that participants exhibit greater task engagement (i.e., interest, enthusiasm, and alertness) when standing than when sitting. Simply by spending time in the standing position, an individual is better prepared for difficult, stressful situations [START_REF] Carney | Power Posing : Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance[END_REF]. When standing, people are readier to change their posture, to move from one place to another, i.e. to be active, when they are upright than seated. We need to acknowledge that other studies failed to demonstrate any advantage of more open posture on power, as even suggested by Carney's publications [START_REF] Carney | Review and Summary of Research on the Embodied Effects of Expansive (vs. Contractive) Nonverbal Displays[END_REF][START_REF] Jonas | Power poses where do we stand?[END_REF]. However, as our society is always faster, the upright stance seems to be a modern posture to adopt in work places and even at home [START_REF] Baker | A detailed description of the short-term musculoskeletal and cognitive effects of prolonged standing for office computer work[END_REF]. At the general level, our biology is best adapted for the upright stance, not for the seated stance [START_REF] Grimsrud | Humans were not created to sit-And why you have to refurnish your life[END_REF][START_REF] Levine | Health-chair reform : Your chair: comfortable but deadly[END_REF][START_REF] Levine | Sick of sitting[END_REF][START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF]. [START_REF] Lovejoy | Evolution of Human Walking[END_REF] suggested that bipedalism is among the first anatomical characteristics to mark the ascent to cognitive life. Hence, the perspective to live seated may be detrimental for our cognitive life, as also largely illustrated by [START_REF] Chandrasekaran | Does breaking up prolonged sitting improve cognitive functions in sedentary adults? A mapping review and hypothesis formulation on the potential physiological mechanisms[END_REF]. In the coming section, we illustrate whether these aforementioned benefits of standing may facilitate task performance and work productivity.

3.

4. An extensive review of the literature on task performance when standing vs. when sitting or when less active to control the body position 3.4.1. Task performance when standing vs. when sitting in both postural control and human factors engineering For short-term task performance (lasting some seconds and/or minutes), we performed an extensive review to investigate whether individuals better perform a task when sitting or when standing. All selected studies were found in two literatures, i.e. the literature on postural control and the literature on human factors engineering. We separated discussion of these two types of literature because task performance is the main outcome in the literature on human factors engineering while it is only a secondary outcomeafter the discussion on postural controlin the literature on postural control. We studied only healthy young adults to avoid age-related and disease-related effects. We selected studies in which these participants performed any type of task such as purely cognitive tasks (e.g. counting in one's head), sensory tasks (e.g. visual task, auditory task, haptic task), or tasks requiring interaction with the environment (e.g. calling someone, taping on a keyboard). The key words used were: task performance, standing, sitting, attention, young adults. We used three websites (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) and the bibliography of all relevant manuscripts for our selection.

On one hand, in the literature on postural control, studies of task performance in the standing vs. seated positions have provided contradictory findings. Some studies showed that individuals need more time to respond to unpredictable auditory stimuli when standing than when seated [START_REF] Remaud | Attentional Demands Associated With Postural Control Depend on Task Difficulty and Visual Condition[END_REF][START_REF] Vuillerme | Attentional demand for regulating postural sway : The effect of expertise in gymnastics[END_REF]. Logically, the researchers concluded that the standing position required more attentional resources than the seated position did [START_REF] Remaud | Attentional Demands Associated With Postural Control Depend on Task Difficulty and Visual Condition[END_REF]. These results did not mean that people would perform ongoing tasks worse when standing than when sitting but simply that performing these tasks in the standing position required barely more attentional resources. Other studies showed that performance in cognitive tasks (such as working memory tasks), verbal and visuospatial tasks [START_REF] Dault | Postural control and cognitive task performance in healthy participants while balancing on different support-surface configurations[END_REF], Brooks spatial and verbal tasks [START_REF] Ehrenfried | Posture and mental task performance when viewing a moving visual field[END_REF], and auditory-manual tasks [START_REF] Stephan | Influences of Postural Control on Cognitive Control in Task Switching[END_REF] was equivalent in the standing position and in the seated position. The latter findings did not validate the dual-task theories published in 1980s [START_REF] Navon | Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference[END_REF][START_REF] Schneider | Controlled & automatic processing : Behavior, theory, and biological mechanisms[END_REF]Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977;Shiffrin & Schneider, 1977) but, surprisingly, were not discussed as being disconcerting in this respect. On the other hand, the literature data on human factors engineering mainly show that task performance are equivalent when standing and when seated. The human factors studies of long periods of time at work and the use of sit-stand workstations (vs. sitting only) reviewed by [START_REF] Karakolis | The impact of sit-stand office workstations on worker discomfort and productivity : A review[END_REF] variously showed greater task performance (in 3 studies), no difference (in 4), or lower task performance (in 1). Likewise, [START_REF] Sui | The effects of sedentary behaviour interventions on work-related productivity and performance outcomes in real and simulated office work : A systematic review[END_REF] reviewed a large amount of data on sitting vs. standing and/or walking stances and did not find major differences. Overall, most of the studies showed primarily that the seated and standing positions are equivalent with regard to performance.

Task performance when standing and controlling or not controlling the body position

In a recent manuscript, we performed a systematic review of the literature specifically to discuss whether standing and/or swaying could be beneficial for task performance in visual tasks in healthy, young adults (Bonnet & Hajnal, in revision). First, we searched for manuscripts testing task performance when participants had to change their body position (from one trial to another) but were restrained to eliminate postural sway. We included both manuscripts in which healthy young adults stood in all conditions but were constrained not to sway (as for example in standing against a wall) and manuscripts in which participants had to change their body position (e.g. sitting vs. standing) but only if a head-mounted display was used (so that the visual display was identical in both body positions). We used three websites (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) and the bibliography of all relevant manuscripts for our selection. As a particularity, we studied young adults who performed exclusively a visual task (any type of visual task). The key words used were: task performance, visual task, attention, posture, body position, young adults. The full methodology and the flow chart are fully described in this study. In the first review, we did not find any study to include but discussed the study by [START_REF] Geuss | A balancing act : Physical balance, through arousal, influences size perception[END_REF]. In their six experiments, [START_REF] Geuss | A balancing act : Physical balance, through arousal, influences size perception[END_REF] showed that change in the level of arousal, but not change in the amount of postural sway, improved task performance in the perceived size of objects in the environment. In a second interrelated systematic review, we searched for manuscripts testing task performance when participants were constrained to sway more or less depending on the imposed body position. In this second review, selected studies included only studies with standing participants in which postural control was more or less challenged in various conditions. For example, participants could be required to place their feet in narrow stance (challenging condition increasing postural sway; [START_REF] Stoffregen | Stance Width Influences Postural Stability and Motion Sickness[END_REF] or stand more comfortably in wide stance (easier condition decreasing postural sway; [START_REF] Bonnet | Broad Stance Conditions Change Postural Control and Postural Sway[END_REF]. In this second systematic review, eleven studies were selected [START_REF] Doyon | Multifractality of posture modulates multisensory perception of stand-on-ability[END_REF][START_REF] Doyon | Effects of Surface Luminance and Texture Discontinuities on Reachableness in Virtual Reality[END_REF][START_REF] Geuss | A balancing act : Physical balance, through arousal, influences size perception[END_REF][START_REF] Hajnal | Fractality of body movements predicts perception of affordances : Evidence from stand-on-ability judgments about slopes[END_REF][START_REF] Hajnal | Complex Postural Sway is Related to Perception of Stand-on-Ability[END_REF][START_REF] Mark | What an Actor Must Do in Order to Perceive the Affordance for Sitting[END_REF][START_REF] Masoner | Complexity of postural sway affects affordance perception of reachability in virtual reality[END_REF][START_REF] Mitra | Postural costs of suprapostural task load[END_REF][START_REF] Mitra | Effects of explicit sway-minimization on postural-suprapostural dualtask performance[END_REF][START_REF] Palatinus | Fractal fluctuations in quiet standing predict the use of mechanical information for haptic perception[END_REF][START_REF] Palatinus | Haptic perceptual intent in quiet standing affects multifractal scaling of postural fluctuations[END_REF]. This second review showed that healthy young adults were either better (8/11 studies) or at least as good (3/11 studies), never worse, in performing visual tasks when standing as when sitting. Therefore, task performance in visual tasks seems to be higher when standing and swaying than when standing and not swaying. Hence, as individuals sway much more when standing than when sitting [START_REF] Roerdink | Center-of-pressure regularity as a marker for attentional investment in postural control : A comparison between sitting and standing postures[END_REF][START_REF] Vette | Posturographic measures in healthy young adults during quiet sitting in comparison with quiet standing[END_REF], we may expect that task performance could be better, not worse, when standing than when sitting.

Recommendations on finding a balance between excessive sitting and excessive standing 4.1. Recommendations on standing more but not too much

From a precautionary standpoint, we recall that our recommendation of spending more time in the standing position during the day primarily concerns people who sit passively for more than 8 h/d (e.g. desk workers, older adults, people with comorbidities). It does not concern people spending too much time in the standing position. In general, we recommend to reduce the time spent seated to get away from the danger zone. Even for those people who sit passively for more than 8 h/d, we certainly do not recommend to move from excessive sitting to excessive standing. Indeed, excessive standing is well known to create a variety of health problems reviewed elsewhere [START_REF] Anderson | Musculoskeletal disorders, foot health and footwear choice in occupations involving prolonged standing[END_REF][START_REF] Baker | A detailed description of the short-term musculoskeletal and cognitive effects of prolonged standing for office computer work[END_REF][START_REF] Halim | Associations between objectively assessed and selfreported sedentary time with mental health in adults : An analysis of data from the Health Survey for England[END_REF][START_REF] Shaikh | Studies Assessing the Effects of Prolonged Standing at Work : A Review[END_REF][START_REF] Wall | Associations between low back muscle activity, pelvic movement and low back discomfort development during prolonged standing -An exploratory laboratory study[END_REF]. People escaping from excessive sitting must not fall into the opposite issue and risk the problems associated with excessive standing.

Recommendations on making gradual changes in posture

The recommendation to spend more time in the standing position should be considered very carefully. To avoid creating health problems, people who want to increase their time spent standing should do so very gradually. For example, for someone used to sitting for 12 h/d, spending an additional hour per day in the standing position (i.e. 11 h/d sitting) would be considered as an exaggerated change because an additional hour can create many health problems [START_REF] Baker | A detailed description of the short-term musculoskeletal and cognitive effects of prolonged standing for office computer work[END_REF]. Standing up for 5 min/h might be a good initial recommendation [START_REF] Bergouignan | Effect of frequent interruptions of prolonged sitting on self-perceived levels of energy, mood, food cravings and cognitive function[END_REF][START_REF] Pitanga | Physical Activity And Reducing Sedentary Behavior During The Coronavirus Pandemic[END_REF]. Much useful advice on slightly increasing the time spent standing during the day has been published by other researchers [START_REF] Danquah | Standing Meetings Are Feasible and Effective in Reducing Sitting Time among Office Workers-Walking Meetings Are Not : Mixed-Methods Results on the Feasibility and Effectiveness of Active Meetings Based on Data from the « Take a Stand! » Study[END_REF][START_REF] Landais | Choice architecture interventions to change physical activity and sedentary behavior : A systematic review of effects on intention, behavior and health outcomes during and after intervention[END_REF].

Recommendations on frequently changing behaviors

An easy and effective way of increasing the time spent standing without causing the health problems linked to excessive standing is to alternate standing and sitting positions throughout the day. People could stand and perform their ongoing tasks while regularly changing their body position. Our modern world is dynamic and so we need to adopt (or rather readopt) an active posture. Also, any guidelines on spending more time in the standing position will depend on the country, the characteristics of the population, and the jobs performed. Indeed, standing up a little bit more during the day may not be easy for people with certain conditions [START_REF] Dempsey | New global guidelines on sedentary behaviour and health for adults : Broadening the behavioural targets[END_REF]. For example, the recent recommendations of the World Health Organization discussed the need for distinct recommendations for pregnant women, people with certain diseases (e.g. diabetes and cancer), and healthy older adults [START_REF] Dempsey | New global guidelines on sedentary behaviour and health for adults : Broadening the behavioural targets[END_REF]. However, on the physiological level, standing more is physiologically feasible. Indeed, our physiology enables anyone, especially healthy young adults to spend time in the standing position. In fact, humans are no less capable of activity than our ancestors. Moreover, humans become resistant to longer-term exercise once the body is habituated [START_REF] Pruimboom | Physical inactivity is a disease synonymous for a non-permissive brain disorder[END_REF]. In summary, we suggest a gradual move from excessive sitting to an intermediate pattern of behavior with more standing as long as it is comfortable [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF].

Recommendations on breaking excessive (prolonged) sitting behavior

The question whether it is beneficial or not for individuals to break their excessive sitting behavior is a question of debate. By break here, we simply mean standing or eventually walking around, in order to stop long periods of sitting behavior. On one hand in their review, [START_REF] Stamatakis | Is the time right for quantitative public health guidelines on sitting? A narrative review of sedentary behaviour research paradigms and findings[END_REF] suggested that breaks of prolonged sedentary behavior, alone, may not be beneficial for health. On the other hand, in their meta-analysis [START_REF] Chastin | Meta-analysis of the relationship between breaks in sedentary behavior and cardiometabolic health[END_REF] showed that breaking sitting may be beneficial to control adiposity and postprandial glycemia. Complementarily, in their review, [START_REF] Chandrasekaran | Does breaking up prolonged sitting improve cognitive functions in sedentary adults? A mapping review and hypothesis formulation on the potential physiological mechanisms[END_REF] discussed that breaking excessive sitting may be beneficial for cognitive functions (attention, executive functions, visuospatial skills, memory). Here, we cannot make an extensive review of the literature discussing the effects of breaking excessive sitting as so many articles analyzed characteristics of sedentary behavior and characteristics of breaks (cf. [START_REF] Boerema | Pattern measures of sedentary behaviour in adults : A literature review[END_REF]. The recent guidelines of the World Health Organization also suggested that there is not enough evidence to provide recommendations on the frequency and/or duration of breaks of sedentary behavior. However, as a general feedback, we still recommend breaking excessive sitting behavior i) to break prolonged sitting behavior, ii) to create more active waking behaviors and iii) because to the best of our knowledge, no researcher discussed negative health effects of breaking excessive sitting. Further research should be conducted to better determine what are the best frequency/duration of these sedentary breaks to increase the potential health benefits.

Various strategies can be used to break excessive sitting [START_REF] Hadgraft | Models for Understanding Sedentary Behaviour[END_REF] and to change the habit of excessive and prolonged sitting [START_REF] Dempsey | New global guidelines on sedentary behaviour and health for adults : Broadening the behavioural targets[END_REF][START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF]. For example, various interventional techniques for promoting more standing in the workplace (based on "prompting", "social influence", "feedback", and "anchoring", etc.) have been discussed over the last decade [START_REF] Landais | Choice architecture interventions to change physical activity and sedentary behavior : A systematic review of effects on intention, behavior and health outcomes during and after intervention[END_REF][START_REF] Michie | The behaviour change wheel : A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions[END_REF]. [START_REF] Landais | Choice architecture interventions to change physical activity and sedentary behavior : A systematic review of effects on intention, behavior and health outcomes during and after intervention[END_REF] reported that in 68% of the studies reviewed, the workers approved these behavioral interventions. For example, short stand-up meetings are becoming more common and are generally liked by desk workers [START_REF] Danquah | Standing Meetings Are Feasible and Effective in Reducing Sitting Time among Office Workers-Walking Meetings Are Not : Mixed-Methods Results on the Feasibility and Effectiveness of Active Meetings Based on Data from the « Take a Stand! » Study[END_REF]. Most office workers are in favor of interventions -even major ones -if the latter can improve their health [START_REF] Venema | I'm still standing : A longitudinal study on the effect of a default nudge[END_REF]. When travelling on a train, bus or metro or when waiting (e.g. for an appointment), people could stand (rather than sit) for these short periods of time. Any of these small changes would yield a few more minutes of standing a day. Everyone (and especially people in desk-based jobs) should feel confident enough to spend more time in the standing position during the working day. Specifically, for desk-based workers, the best way to increase the time spent in the standing position may be to use a sit-stand desk [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Chambers | The effect of sit-stand desks on office worker behavioral and health outcomes : A scoping review[END_REF][START_REF] Karakolis | The impact of sit-stand office workstations on worker discomfort and productivity : A review[END_REF][START_REF] Sui | The effects of sedentary behaviour interventions on work-related productivity and performance outcomes in real and simulated office work : A systematic review[END_REF]. In fact, these desks allow individuals to frequently alternate sitting and standing to both avoid excessive sitting and to comfortably increase the time spent standing. With sit-stand desk, it is easy to avoid discomfort and health problems related to excessive sitting and excessive standing and take advantage of more standing in still being able to sit at any time.

General recommendations on adopting more active nonambulatory behaviors

Until this section, we recommended spending more time in the standing position. However, this is not the only option that could improve health. May be that adopting more active nonambulatory behaviors, in general, could also benefit health. Our message is that it may be better for health to spend more time per day seated on a Pilates ball than on a knee chair, it may be better for health to spend more time on a knee chair than on a stool, also it may be better for health to spend more time on a stool than on a chair. Although direct epidemiological evidence comparing the effects on health on active vs. inactive position is lacking, indirect evidence from an evolutionary biology of human physical activity perspective has been recently suggested. Specifically, [START_REF] Raichlen | Sitting, squatting, and the evolutionary biology of human inactivity[END_REF] study has shown that hunter-gatherers living today -representative of our ancestors' behaviori) spent as much time doing nonambulatory behaviors as we do today but ii) spent significantly more time in more active nonambulatory behaviors (e.g. squatting, kneeling and ground sitting) than we do today. In other words, hunter-gatherers are more active in maintaining their balance than humans do today in passively sitting on their chair, hunter-gatherers contract more their muscles throughout the day than humans do today. We believe that this distinction is not trivial because today's hunter-gatherers are almost not affected by non-communicable diseases than people living in modern societies [START_REF] Levine | Health-chair reform : Your chair: comfortable but deadly[END_REF][START_REF] Raichlen | Sitting, squatting, and the evolutionary biology of human inactivity[END_REF]. With caution, hunter-gatherers also spend more time in physical activity than humans do today and it could directly explain why they are almost not affected by non-communicable diseases. Based on Raichlen et al.'s (2020) study, further research could test whether the more active the body to maintain balance, the better it could be for health. If true, a recommendation would be to be more active in general, throughout the waking day [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Greene | Transient perceived back pain induced by prolonged sitting in a backless office chair : Are biomechanical factors involved?[END_REF][START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Standing and mortality in a prospective cohort of Canadian adults[END_REF] to better match the physiology of the human body a body that has been used to physical activity for a million years [START_REF] Jochem | Introduction to Sedentary Behaviour Epidemiology[END_REF]. Further research is also required to investigate the effects of more active nonambulatory behaviors on on work productivity and task performance.

Recommendations on performing more physical activity in general

The literature already emphasized that physical inactivity caused a large variety of non-communicable diseases (e.g. [START_REF] Andersen | Update on the global pandemic of physical inactivity[END_REF][START_REF] Ding | The economic burden of physical inactivity : A global analysis of major non-communicable diseases[END_REF]. In the present manuscript, we did not discuss these problems as we focused on excessive sitting. Moreover, a large number of studies have shown that noncommunicable diseases caused by physical inactivity and problems associated with excessive sedentariness are independent factors. Accordingly, some epidemiological studies showed that health problems caused by excessive sitting are not greatly mitigated by physical activity [START_REF] Boerema | Pattern measures of sedentary behaviour in adults : A literature review[END_REF][START_REF] Compernolle | Effectiveness of interventions using self-monitoring to reduce sedentary behavior in adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Landais | Choice architecture interventions to change physical activity and sedentary behavior : A systematic review of effects on intention, behavior and health outcomes during and after intervention[END_REF][START_REF] Patterson | Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes : A systematic review and dose response metaanalysis[END_REF][START_REF] Stanczykiewicz | Sedentary behaviors and anxiety among children, adolescents and adults : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Verhavert | The Association between Energy Balance-Related Behavior and Burn-Out in Adults : A Systematic Review[END_REF][START_REF] Wang | The associations between screen time-based sedentary behavior and depression : A systematic review and meta-analysis[END_REF], except when the level of activity is very high (60-75 min/day or 420-525 min/week of moderate-intensity physical activity [START_REF] Ekelund | Joint associations of accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary time with all-cause mortality : A harmonised meta-analysis in more than 44 000 middle-aged and older individuals[END_REF][START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Sedentary Behavior and Health : Update from the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee[END_REF][START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF]. Health problems accumulate when people are inactive and also spend too much time seated [START_REF] Ekelund | Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women[END_REF][START_REF] Katzmarzyk | Sedentary Behavior and Health : Update from the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee[END_REF][START_REF] Owen | Sedentary Behavior and Public Health : Integrating the Evidence and Identifying Potential Solutions[END_REF]. Excessive sitting is only one problem that individuals are encountering in our modern societies and many other ones exist, such as physical inactivity also increasing dramatically [START_REF] Ng | Time Use and Physical Activity : A Shift Away from Movement across the Globe[END_REF].

In summary, if individuals spend excessive time sitting, performing physical activity would hardly compensate for health problems related to sitting. Otherwise, individuals would have to spend an unattainable amount of physical activity, which represent an illusory level to reach as the general population already struggle to attain the minimal recommendation and even exhibit a decrease in physical activity over the last decades [START_REF] Egger | Estimating historical changes in physical activity levels[END_REF][START_REF] Ng | Time Use and Physical Activity : A Shift Away from Movement across the Globe[END_REF]. In other words, effort to further increase the level of physical activity to compensate the detrimental health effect of the excessive time spend sitting would remain a wishful thinking. Targeting a reduction of the time spent passively seated is the only viable alternative.

Summary and conclusions

Worldwide, the economically active adult population (aged from 18 to 65) is increasingly sedentary [START_REF] Ng | Time Use and Physical Activity : A Shift Away from Movement across the Globe[END_REF], which represent a recent phenomenon in human history. Over the last 20 years, many objective studies have shown that people in various countries spend more than 8 h/d in the seated position [START_REF] Carson | Patterns of sedentary time and cardiometabolic risk among Canadian adults[END_REF][START_REF] Gibson | An examination of objectively-measured sedentary behavior and mental well-being in adults across week days and weekends[END_REF][START_REF] Halim | Associations between objectively assessed and selfreported sedentary time with mental health in adults : An analysis of data from the Health Survey for England[END_REF][START_REF] Healy | Sedentary time and cardio-metabolic biomarkers in US adults : NHANES 2003-06[END_REF][START_REF] Loyen | Sedentary Time and Physical Activity Surveillance Through Accelerometer Pooling in Four European Countries[END_REF][START_REF] Matthews | Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004[END_REF][START_REF] Smith | Weekday and weekend patterns of objectively measured sitting, standing, and stepping in a sample of office-based workers : The active buildings study[END_REF][START_REF] Vallance | Associations of objectively-assessed physical activity and sedentary time with depression : NHANES (2005-2006)[END_REF]. The research described here and previously in [START_REF] Bonnet | Health Issues Due to the Global Prevalence of Sedentariness and Recommendations towards Achieving a Healthier Behaviour[END_REF] both show that individuals all over the world (but especially those in high-income countries) are in the danger zone for their health if the time spent seated increases or even hold at least higher than 8 h/d. Individuals could still be in danger for their health in spending 7 h/d or even only 6 h/d in the sitting position but at least they are most certainly in the danger zone in spending 8 h/d in the sitting position.

After describing health problems related to excessive sitting, the present manuscript has discussed how spending more time in the standing position represents a viable solution to escape these health problems. First, we explained that the more active to control balance during the waking days, the better for health. With caution, we recommended spending more time (but not too much or too abruptly) in the standing position, especially for people using excessive sitting, to become more balanced between standing and sitting. Second, we also discussed and showed that more time spent standing may potentially benefit both work productivity and task performance, or at least not deteriorate those performance. Therefore, modern societies should actually be prompting and encouraging people to spend more time in the standing position. In our expectation, the more individuals actively control their balance, the better it could be for their health. This expectation should be confirmed in further research.

Overall, the present review makes a case for more active nonambulatory behaviors greatly for health and more moderately for work productivity and task performance. Overall, from an epidemiological and economical viewpoint, it is hard to understand why our societies have counterproductively and counterintuitively constrained individuals to sit more in passive ways [START_REF] Ng | Time Use and Physical Activity : A Shift Away from Movement across the Globe[END_REF].

Here and throughout the manuscript, we make the distinction between work productivity analyzed in long-term exclusively (weeks, months, years) and task performance analyzed in short-term exclusively (seconds, minutes, hours).

Acknowledgments None

Funding statement

This research did not receive any specific funding from agencies or organizations in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors

Conflicts of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest with regard to the present work


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Contrary to our expectations (H1), the benevolent sexist participants show more leniency towards the aggressor (Soto-Quevedo, 2012) and blame the male victims. Conversely, the more they are hostile sexists, the more severe they are with the perpetrator and disempower the victim, except when the latter is a man (Viki & Abrams, 2002) which validates H2.

We cautiously concluded that sexism predicts victimization of women and penalization of men, but more researches are needed.

Indeed, the ASI measures sexism against women when half of the perpetrators and victims were men. In addition, the ASI items embody a vision that has not necessarily taken into account the gradual, albeit slow, evolution of mentalities. Some proposals are no longer socially acceptable as they once were.

We identified other limitations such as the inadequacy of the ten-centimetre scale or the need to interview a panel of justice professionals who would participate in the maintenance of sexist speeches and behaviours (Léonard & Soubiran, 2011).

à Our study could serve as a basis and argument for raising the awareness of citizen jurors before the opening of the trial as well as continuing formation for legal professionals.

INTRODUCTION

If male accused are more subject to be convicted and to receive longer sentences than women (Mazzella & Feingold, 1994), it is more difficult for male victims to be taken into consideration by the authorities (Whatley & Riggio, 1993). According to the INSEE (2017), women represent 10% of those convicted but receive half the imprisonment. Their presence in a court appears to be abnormal because they do not correspond to the typical offender profile (Wilczynski, 1997). Women have always been seen, in the collective unconscious, as more victims than responsible [START_REF] Parent | La criminologie féministe et la question de la violence des femmes[END_REF].

Ambivalent sexism [START_REF] Glick | The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism[END_REF], namely benevolent or hostile, would reinforce the Belief of Just Word (Lerner, 1980). [START_REF] Lonsway | Attitudinal antecedents of rape myth acceptance: A theoretical and empirical re-examination[END_REF] have suggested that hostile sexist people are more likely to blame the rape victim and legitimize violence. [START_REF] Expósito | Social perception of violence against women: Individual and psychosocial characteristics of victims and abusers[END_REF] attributes benevolent sexism to a greater perceived seriousness, considering the victim as fragile and to be protected (Chapleau, Oswald & Russel, 2008).

OBJECTIVES

What could be the influence of the hypothetical sexism of jurors on their attributions of severity, responsibility and sanction?

-We postulated that : o Benevolent sexist attitudes would predict greater perceived gravity and heavier sanctions towards the perpetrator, especially when he is male (H1). o Hostile sexist attitudes would predict greater responsibility to victims, especially feminine (H2).

METHOD

  Influence of gender stereotypes on the attributions of gravity, responsibility and sanction Julien Alexandre, Nathalie Przygodzki-Lionet & Sabine De Bosscher University of Lille -PSITEC -URL 4072 -Villeneuve d'Ascq, France Contact julien.alexandre2.etu@univ-lille.fr RESULTS -Perception of the act severity o Aggressions are perceived to be more serious by women [F(1, 304) = 8.0390 ; p < .05]. o More seriousness is attributed to the facts by participants who have a low level benevolent sexism [F(1, 304) = 16,86 ; p < .05] or a low hostile sexism [F(1, 304) = 4,0994 ; p < .05]. -Attribution of responsibility to the perpetrator o More responsibility is attributed to the aggressor by those who have a low level of benevolent sexism [F(1, 304) = 20,350 ; p < .05] or a low hostile sexism [F(1, 304) = 10,434 ; p < .05].o The responsibility of the female abuser is lower when the respondent is a woman with a high level of hostile sexism and when the victim is also a woman (figure1).

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure1: Interaction between the respondent's sex, that of the perpetrator, of the victim and the level of hostile sexism of the female respondent on the responsibility attributed to the perpetrator

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Interaction between the aggressor's sex, that of the victim and the level of benevolent sexism of the respondents on the attribution of responsibility to the victim

-

  Participants: o 160 women and 160 men (M age = 35,43; SD age = 15,92) -Design: o Between-subjects design with participant's ambivalent sexism * participant's gender * perpetrator's gender * victim's gender * context (marital or professional) -Material: o Aggression scenario (perpetrator's gender * victim's gender * context) o Four questions with an open ten-centimetre scale for judgements o French version of the « Ambivalent Sexism Inventory » (ASI) (Glick & Fiske, 1996) by Dardenne, Delacollette, Grégoire & Lecocq (2006) o Gender, age and profession à control variables -Measures: o Judgement of act's seriousness, perpetrator's responsibility, of victim's responsibility and perpetrator's sanction