7 research outputs found

    Framing visual roll-motion affects postural sway and the subjective visual vertical

    Get PDF
    Effects of visual roll-motion on postural sway and the subjective visual vertical (SVV) often is studied using mechanical devices, whereas electronic displays offer cheaper and more flexible alternatives. These devices typically emit and reflect light scattered by the edges of the screen, providing Earth-fixed cues of verticality. These cues may decrease the effects of rotating stimuli, a possibility that has not been studied explicitly before in one experimental design. We exposed 16 participants to a visual dot pattern, either stationary, or rotating in roll, that was or was not surrounded by a visible Earth-fixed reference frame. To eliminate unintended visual cues, the experiment was performed in complete darkness and participants wore neutral density goggles passing only 1% of light. Postural sway was measured using a force platform. SVV measurements were obtained from a visible rod. To monitor the participants, motion sickness severity was obtained with an 11-point rating scale. Results showed that the presence of an Earth-fixed frame significantly decreased the effect of the rotating pattern on postural sway and SVV deviations. Therefore, when studying subjective verticality related effects of visual stimuli, it is imperative that all visual Earth-fixed cues are not just minimized but completely eliminated. The observation that an Earth-fixed frame significantly decreased the effect of the rotating pattern on both postural sway and the SVV points towards a common neural origin, possibly involving a neural representation of verticality. Finally, we showed that an electronic screen can yield similar effect sizes as those taken from the literature using mechanical devices

    Interaction between Depth Order and Density Affects Vection and Postural Sway.

    No full text
    Vection, a feeling of self-motion while being physically stationary, and postural sway can be modulated by various visual factors. Moreover, vection and postural sway are often found to be closely related when modulated by such visual factors, suggesting a common neural mechanism. One well-known visual factor is the depth order of the stimulus. The density, i.e. number of objects per unit area, is proposed to interact with the depth order in the modulation of vection and postural sway, which has only been studied to a limited degree.We therefore exposed 17 participants to 18 different stimuli containing a stationary pattern and a pattern rotating around the naso-occipital axis. The density of both patterns was varied between 10 and 90%; the densities combined always added up to 100%. The rotating pattern occluded or was occluded by the stationary pattern, suggesting foreground or background motion, respectively. During pattern rotation participants reported vection by pressing a button, and postural sway was recorded using a force plate.Participants always reported more vection and swayed significantly more when rotation was perceived in the background and when the rotating pattern increased in density. As hypothesized, we found that the perceived depth order interacted with pattern density. A pattern rotating in the background with a density between 60 and 80% caused significantly more vection and postural sway than when it was perceived to rotate in the foreground.The findings suggest that the ratio between fore- and background pattern densities is an important factor in the interaction with the depth order, and it is not the density of rotating pattern per se. Moreover, the observation that vection and postural sway were modulated in a similar way points towards a common neural origin regulating both variables

    a. Median vection duration, b. median vection latency, and c. the number of participants that reported vection for all combinations of pattern density and perceived depth structure.

    No full text
    <p>The error bars represent the 25% and 75% quantiles. Significant differences at <i>p</i> < .05 are indicated with *. Significant differences at <i>p</i> < .01 are indicated with **.</p

    Combinations of patterns used to study the interaction between depth order and pattern densities.

    No full text
    <p>The number of dots per pattern, i.e., the pattern density, was varied in steps of 10% between 10 and 90% of the total number of dots. The densities of both patterns combined always added up to 100%. Of each combination, one of the patterns rotated in roll, in front of or behind the other that remained stationary. The inset shows a dot occluding another dot so that the black (outside) border became visible. The black borders of the dots were clearly visible when one of the patterns was rotating with respect to the other, since the background was black as well.</p

    Mean (±SE) sway path length (SPL, left), moving window standard deviation (MWSD, middle) and lean (right) for all combinations of density and perceived depth structure.

    No full text
    <p>Significant differences at <i>p</i> < .05 are indicated with *. Significant differences at <i>p</i> < .01 are indicated with **. Significant differences at <i>p</i> < .001 are indicated with ***.</p
    corecore