Literature DB >> 19415246

Head roll dependent variability of subjective visual vertical and ocular counterroll.

Alexander A Tarnutzer1, Christopher J Bockisch, Dominik Straumann.   

Abstract

We compared the variability of the subjective visual vertical (SVV) and static ocular counterroll (OCR), and hypothesized a correlation between the measurements because of their shared macular input. SVV and OCR were measured simultaneously in various whole-body roll positions [upright, 45 degrees right-ear down (RED), and 75 degrees RED] in six subjects. Gains of OCR were -0.18 (45 degrees RED) and -0.12 (75 degrees RED), whereas gains of compensation for body roll in the SVV task were -1.11 (45 degrees RED) and -0.96 (75 degrees RED). Normalized SVV and OCR variabilities were not significantly different (P > 0.05), i.e., both increased with increasing roll. Moreover, a significant correlation (R(2) = 0.80, slope = 0.29) between SVV and OCR variabilities was found. Whereas the gain of OCR is different from the gain of SVV, trial-to-trial variability of OCR follows the same roll-dependent modulation observed in SVV variability. We propose that the similarities in variability reflect a common otolith input, which, however, is subject to distinct central processing for determining the gain of SVV and OCR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19415246     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-009-1823-4

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


  37 in total

1.  The role of somatosensory input for the perception of verticality.

Authors:  D Anastasopoulos; A Bronstein; T Haslwanter; M Fetter; J Dichgans
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  1999-05-28       Impact factor: 5.691

2.  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

3.  Three-dimensional eye position during static roll and pitch in humans.

Authors:  C J Bockisch; T Haslwanter
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Static ocular counterroll is implemented through the 3-D neural integrator.

Authors:  J Douglas Crawford; Douglas B Tweed; Tutis Vilis
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Contribution of somatosensory information to perception of the visual vertical with body tilt and rotating visual field.

Authors:  L Yardley
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-08

6.  Ocular torsion during voluntary blinks in humans.

Authors:  Oliver Bergamin; Sandra Bizzarri; Dominik Straumann
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  Considerations on Listing's Law and the primary position by means of a matrix description of eye position control.

Authors:  W Haustein
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 2.086

8.  Interaction of labyrinthine and somatoreceptor inputs as determinants of the subjective vertical.

Authors:  S Lechner-Steinleitner
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1978-03-03

9.  Eye torsion and the apparent horizon under head tilt and visual field rotation.

Authors:  B H Merker; R Held
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Human ocular counterroll: assessment of static and dynamic properties from electromagnetic scleral coil recordings.

Authors:  H Collewijn; J Van der Steen; L Ferman; T C Jansen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  30 in total

1.  The motor vertical in the absence of gravicentric cues.

Authors:  Otmar Bock; Nils Bury
Journal:  NPJ Microgravity       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 4.415

2.  Gravity dependence of the effect of optokinetic stimulation on the subjective visual vertical.

Authors:  Bryan K Ward; Christopher J Bockisch; Nicoletta Caramia; Giovanni Bertolini; Alexander Andrea Tarnutzer
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Visually guided adjustments of body posture in the roll plane.

Authors:  A A Tarnutzer; C J Bockisch; D Straumann
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-03-28       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Does gravity influence the visual line bisection task?

Authors:  A Drakul; C J Bockisch; A A Tarnutzer
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Visual perception of upright: Head tilt, visual errors and viewing eye.

Authors:  Amir Kheradmand; Grisel Gonzalez; Jorge Otero-Millan; Adrian Lasker
Journal:  J Vestib Res       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.435

6.  Temporal constancy of perceived direction of gravity assessed by visual line adjustments.

Authors:  A A Tarnutzer; D P Fernando; A Kheradmand; A G Lasker; D S Zee
Journal:  J Vestib Res       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.435

7.  Psychophysical Haptic Measurement of Vertical Perception: Elucidating a Hand Sensory Bias.

Authors:  Min Jung Kim; Jorge Otero-Millan; Jing Tian; Amir Kheradmand
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 3.590

8.  Dissociating vestibular and somatosensory contributions to spatial orientation.

Authors:  Bart B G T Alberts; Luc P J Selen; Giovanni Bertolini; Dominik Straumann; W Pieter Medendorp; Alexander A Tarnutzer
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  The role of vestibular cues in postural sway.

Authors:  Faisal Karmali; Adam D Goodworth; Yulia Valko; Tania Leeder; Robert J Peterka; Daniel M Merfeld
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-01-27       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Test-retest reliability of subjective visual vertical measurements with lateral head tilt in virtual reality goggles.

Authors:  Chia-Han Wang; Ariel A Winnick; Yu-Hung Ko; Zheyu Wang; Tzu-Pu Chang
Journal:  Tzu Chi Med J       Date:  2021-01-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.