Literature DB >> 12698225

Reciprocal error behavior in estimated body position and subjective visual vertical.

K Jaggi-Schwarz1, M Ortega, B J M Hess.   

Abstract

This study investigated the reciprocal relation between estimation of body tilt and visual vertical by using self-controlled passive body tilts at constant velocity (slow tilts with no semicircular canal activation) or constant acceleration (rapid tilts with canal activation). In both conditions, the visual vertical was overestimated in the luminous line setting paradigm, whereas body tilt was underestimated in the position estimation paradigm. These errors were larger after slow than rapid tilts. During slow tilts, the range of actually reached positions was on average underestimated by about 25% with respect to the desired positions. Interestingly, there were no significant differences in the estimated positions for tilts in the roll and pitch plane. Most remarkably, in the range of +/-45 degrees the resulting means of position and luminous line setting errors of the velocity and acceleration paradigms as a function of the desired roll positions were close to zero. Furthermore, the resulting means of the two paradigms showed a high correlation in the tested range of +/-90 degrees. We conclude that: (a). the otoliths provide the main information for the spatial reference for both the estimation of body positions and the luminous line settings, at least in the range of about +/-45 degrees where the resulting mean errors between the two paradigms are close to zero, and (b). coactivation of semicircular canals improves the estimations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12698225     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-003-1430-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  7 in total

1.  Properties of the internal representation of gravity inferred from spatial-direction and body-tilt estimates.

Authors:  A D Van Beuzekom; J A Van Gisbergen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Influence of dynamic tilts on the perception of earth-vertical.

Authors:  Karin Jaggi-Schwarz; Bernhard J M Hess
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-02-12       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Somatic versus vestibular gravity reception in man.

Authors:  H Mittelstaedt
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  1992-05-22       Impact factor: 5.691

4.  Perceived body position and the visual horizontal.

Authors:  F Mast; T Jarchow
Journal:  Brain Res Bull       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.077

5.  The effect of semicircular cana stimulation during tilting on the subsequent perception of the visual vertical.

Authors:  C W Stockwell; F E Guedry
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1970-09       Impact factor: 1.494

6.  A new solution to the problem of the subjective vertical.

Authors:  H Mittelstaedt
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  1983-06

7.  Dissociation between the perception of body verticality and the visual vertical in acute peripheral vestibular disorder in humans.

Authors:  D Anastasopoulos; T Haslwanter; A Bronstein; M Fetter; J Dichgans
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  1997-09-19       Impact factor: 3.046

  7 in total
  4 in total

1.  Direction specific error patterns during continuous tracking of the subjective visual vertical.

Authors:  S Keusch; B J M Hess; K Jaggi-Schwarz
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Roll rotation cues influence roll tilt perception assayed using a somatosensory technique.

Authors:  Sukyung Park; Claire Gianna-Poulin; F Owen Black; Scott Wood; Daniel M Merfeld
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-03-29       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 3.  Perception of Upright: Multisensory Convergence and the Role of Temporo-Parietal Cortex.

Authors:  Amir Kheradmand; Ariel Winnick
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 4.003

4.  Plantar cutaneous afferents influence the perception of Subjective Visual Vertical in quiet stance.

Authors:  A Foisy; Z Kapoula
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.