Literature DB >> 27226452

Does gravity influence the visual line bisection task?

A Drakul1, C J Bockisch2, A A Tarnutzer3.   

Abstract

The visual line bisection task (LBT) is sensitive to perceptual biases of visuospatial attention, showing slight leftward (for horizontal lines) and upward (for vertical lines) errors in healthy subjects. It may be solved in an egocentric or allocentric reference frame, and there is no obvious need for graviceptive input. However, for other visual line adjustments, such as the subjective visual vertical, otolith input is integrated. We hypothesized that graviceptive input is incorporated when performing the LBT and predicted reduced accuracy and precision when roll-tilted. Twenty healthy right-handed subjects repetitively bisected Earth-horizontal and body-horizontal lines in darkness. Recordings were obtained before, during, and after roll-tilt (±45°, ±90°) for 5 min each. Additionally, bisections of Earth-vertical and oblique lines were obtained in 17 subjects. When roll-tilted ±90° ear-down, bisections of Earth-horizontal (i.e., body-vertical) lines were shifted toward the direction of the head (P < 0.001). However, after correction for vertical line-bisection errors when upright, shifts disappeared. Bisecting body-horizontal lines while roll-tilted did not cause any shifts. The precision of Earth-horizontal line bisections decreased (P ≤ 0.006) when roll-tilted, while no such changes were observed for body-horizontal lines. Regardless of the trial condition and paradigm, the scanning direction of the bisecting cursor (leftward vs. rightward) significantly (P ≤ 0.021) affected line bisections. Our findings reject our hypothesis and suggest that gravity does not modulate the LBT. Roll-tilt-dependent shifts are instead explained by the headward bias when bisecting lines oriented along a body-vertical axis. Increased variability when roll-tilted likely reflects larger variability when bisecting body-vertical than body-horizontal lines.
Copyright © 2016 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  otolith organs; perception; spatial orientation; vestibular signal

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27226452      PMCID: PMC4982904          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00312.2016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  58 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.  Asymmetric Influence of Egocentric Representation onto Allocentric Perception.

Authors:  Yang Zhou; Yining Liu; Wangzikang Zhang; Mingsha Zhang
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  On the nature of near space: effects of tool use and the transition to far space.

Authors:  Matthew R Longo; Stella F Lourenco
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2005-10-21       Impact factor: 3.139

4.  The subjective visual vertical and the perceptual upright.

Authors:  Richard T Dyde; Michael R Jenkin; Laurence R Harris
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-03-21       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Gravity and hemineglect.

Authors:  L Pizzamiglio; G Vallar; F Doricchi
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  1995-12-29       Impact factor: 1.837

6.  Altitudinal neglect following traumatic brain injury: a case report.

Authors:  C M Butter; J Evans; N Kirsch; D Kewman
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 4.027

7.  Visual spatial aftereffect from prolonged head-tilt.

Authors:  R H Day; N J Wade
Journal:  Science       Date:  1966-12-02       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Asymmetrical representation of body orientation.

Authors:  Michael Barnett-Cowan; Heather L Jenkin; Richard T Dyde; Michael R Jenkin; Laurence R Harris
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 2.240

9.  Relative role of visual and non-visual cues in determining the direction of "up": experiments in the York tilted room facility.

Authors:  H L Jenkin; R T Dyde; M R Jenkin; I P Howard; L R Harris
Journal:  J Vestib Res       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.435

10.  A biological walker is faster and better recognized when aligned with body axis observer.

Authors:  Guillaume Barbieri; Florent Fouque; Thierry Pozzo; Dominic Pérennou
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 2.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.