» Articles » PMID: 17680240

Translational Motion Perception and Vestiboocular Responses in the Absence of Non-inertial Cues

Overview
Journal Exp Brain Res
Specialty Neurology
Date 2007 Aug 8
PMID 17680240
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Path integration studies in humans show that we have the ability to accurately reproduce our path in the absence of visual information. It has been suggested that this ability is supported by acceleration signals, as transduced by the otolith organs, which may then be integrated twice to produce path excursion. Vestibuloocular responses to linear translations (LVOR), however, show considerable frequency dependence, with substantial attenuation in response to low frequency translational motion. If otolith information were processed similarly by path integration mechanisms, the resulting signal would not be sufficient to account for robust path integration for stimuli typically used in such studies. We hypothesized that such behavior relies upon cognitive skill and transient otolith cues, typically combined with non-directional cues of motion, such as vibration and noise produced by the mechanics apparatus used to produce linear motion. Continuous motion estimation tasks were used to assess translation perception, while eye movement recordings revealed LVOR responses, in 12 normal and 2 vestibulopathic human subjects while riding on a sled designed to specifically minimize non-directional motion cues. In the near absence of such cues, perceptual responses, like the LVOR, showed high-pass characteristics. This implies that otolith signals are not sufficient to support previously observed path integration behaviors, which must be supplemented by non-directional motion cues.

Citing Articles

Influence of sensory modality and control dynamics on human path integration.

Stavropoulos A, Lakshminarasimhan K, Laurens J, Pitkow X, Angelaki D Elife. 2022; 11.

PMID: 35179488 PMC: 8856658. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.63405.


Effects of motion paradigm on human perception of tilt and translation.

Clement G, Beaton K, Reschke M, Wood S Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):1430.

PMID: 35082357 PMC: 8792002. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-05483-6.


Perception of the dynamic visual vertical during sinusoidal linear motion.

Pomante A, Selen L, Medendorp W J Neurophysiol. 2017; 118(4):2499-2506.

PMID: 28814635 PMC: 5646200. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00439.2017.


Perception of rotation, path, and heading in circular trajectories.

Nooij S, Nesti A, Bulthoff H, Pretto P Exp Brain Res. 2016; 234(8):2323-37.

PMID: 27056085 PMC: 4923114. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-016-4638-0.


Podokinetic circular vection: characteristics and interaction with optokinetic circular vection.

Becker W, Kliegl K, Kassubek J, Jurgens R Exp Brain Res. 2016; 234(7):2045-2058.

PMID: 26965438 DOI: 10.1007/s00221-016-4604-x.


References
1.
Au Yong N, Paige G, Seidman S . Multiple sensory cues underlying the perception of translation and path. J Neurophysiol. 2006; 97(2):1100-13. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00694.2006. View

2.
Grossman G, Leigh R, Bruce E, Huebner W, Lanska D . Performance of the human vestibuloocular reflex during locomotion. J Neurophysiol. 1989; 62(1):264-72. DOI: 10.1152/jn.1989.62.1.264. View

3.
Merfeld D, CHRISTIE J, Young L . Perceptual and eye movement responses elicited by linear acceleration following spaceflight. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1994; 65(11):1015-24. View

4.
Barnes G . Head-eye co-ordination: visual and nonvisual mechanisms of vestibulo-ocular reflex slow-phase modification. Prog Brain Res. 1988; 76:319-28. DOI: 10.1016/s0079-6123(08)64519-7. View

5.
Wertheim A, Mesland B, Bles W . Cognitive suppression of tilt sensations during linear horizontal self-motion in the dark. Perception. 2001; 30(6):733-41. DOI: 10.1068/p3092. View