Literature DB >> 33406125

When gravity is not where it should be: How perceived orientation affects visual self-motion processing.

Meaghan McManus1, Laurence R Harris1.   

Abstract

Human perception is based on expectations. We expect visual upright and gravity upright, sensed through vision, vestibular and other sensory systems, to agree. Equally, we expect that visual and vestibular information about self-motion will correspond. What happens when these assumptions are violated? Tilting a person from upright so that gravity is not where it should be impacts both visually induced self-motion (vection) and the perception of upright. How might the two be connected? Using virtual reality, we varied the strength of visual orientation cues, and hence the probability of participants experiencing a visual reorientation illusion (VRI) in which visual cues to orientation dominate gravity, using an oriented corridor and a starfield while also varying head-on-trunk orientation and body posture. The effectiveness of the optic flow in simulating self-motion was assessed by how much visual motion was required to evoke the perception that the participant had reached the position of a previously presented target. VRI was assessed by questionnaire When participants reported higher levels of VRI they also required less visual motion to evoke the sense of traveling through a given distance, regardless of head or body posture, or the type of visual environment. We conclude that experiencing a VRI, in which visual-vestibular conflict is resolved and the direction of upright is reinterpreted, affects the effectiveness of optic flow at simulating motion through the environment. Therefore, any apparent effect of head or body posture or type of environment are largely indirect effects related instead, to the level of VRI experienced by the observer. We discuss potential mechanisms for this such as reinterpreting gravity information or altering the weighting of orientation cues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33406125      PMCID: PMC7787374          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243381

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  43 in total

1.  Visually induced reorientation illusions.

Authors:  I P Howard; G Hu
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.490

2.  Perception of tilt (somatogravic illusion) in response to sustained linear acceleration during space flight.

Authors:  G Clément; S T Moore; T Raphan; B Cohen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  THE EFFECT OF GRAVITY ON GASTRIC EMPTYING WITH VARIOUS TEST MEALS.

Authors:  J N HUNT; M T KNOX; A OGINSKI
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1965-05       Impact factor: 5.182

4.  Natural visual-field features enhance vection.

Authors:  Andrea Bubka; Frederick Bonato
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 1.490

5.  Attentional load inhibits vection.

Authors:  Takeharu Seno; Hiroyuki Ito; Shoji Sunaga
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Influence of head orientation and viewpoint oscillation on linear vection.

Authors:  Pearl S Guterman; Robert S Allison; Stephen Palmisano; James E Zacher
Journal:  J Vestib Res       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 2.435

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

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

8.  Postural strategies associated with somatosensory and vestibular loss.

Authors:  F B Horak; L M Nashner; H C Diener
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  The effect of long-term exposure to microgravity on the perception of upright.

Authors:  Laurence R Harris; Michael Jenkin; Heather Jenkin; James E Zacher; Richard T Dyde
Journal:  NPJ Microgravity       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 4.415

10.  Reliability-Based Weighting of Visual and Vestibular Cues in Displacement Estimation.

Authors:  Arjan C ter Horst; Mathieu Koppen; Luc P J Selen; W Pieter Medendorp
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Body Orientation Affects the Perceived Size of Objects.

Authors:  John J-J Kim; Meaghan E McManus; Laurence R Harris
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 1.490

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.