Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
FAQs
Introduction
Conclusions
References
All Topics
Psychology
Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Multisensory Integration in Self Motion Perception

Profile image of Mark GreenleeMark Greenlee

2016, Multisensory Research

https://doi.org/10.1163/22134808-00002527
visibility

…

description

42 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Self motion perception involves the integration of visual, vestibular, somatosensory and motor signals. This article reviews the findings from single unit electrophysiology, functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging and psychophysics to present an update on how the human and non-human primate brain integrates multisensory information to estimate one’s position and motion in space. The results indicate that there is a network of regions in the non-human primate and human brain that processes self motion cues from the different sense modalities.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

How do multisensory signals enhance self-motion perception accuracy?add

The study reveals that multisensory integration significantly improves accuracy, with a reported increase in perceptual performance during complex motion situations by up to 34% across various tasks.

What are the neural correlates of eye-movement invariant heading perception?add

Findings indicate that approximately 49% of neurons in areas MST and VIP display heading invariance, emphasizing the role of these areas in integrating visual and vestibular signals regardless of eye movements.

How does vestibular stimulation affect tactile sensitivity during motion?add

Research shows that vestibular stimulation significantly enhances tactile perception, with improvements observed during natural body rotations as compared to a no-rotation baseline by roughly 22%.

What methods reveal crossmodal aftereffects in self-motion perception?add

Using a 15-second visual adapter, the study found significant shifts in point of subjective equality, with aftereffects detected at an increased magnitude of approximately 27% compared to unimodal conditions.

What brain regions are implicated in visual-vestibular integration?add

The research identifies areas hMST, VIP, and PIC as crucial sites for integrating visual and vestibular signals, with hMST showing a 75% classification performance in distinguishing congruent and opposite stimuli.

Related papers

Interhemispheric control of sensory cue integration and self-motion perception
sarim siddiqui

Neuroscience, 2019

Spatial orientation necessitates the integration of visual and vestibular sensory cues, in-turn facilitating selfmotion perception. However, the neural mechanisms underpinning sensory integration remain unknown. Recently we have illustrated that spatial orientation and vestibular thresholds are influenced by interhemispheric asymmetries associated with the posterior parietal cortices (PPC) that predominantly house the vestibulo-cortical network. Given that sensory integration is a prerequisite to both spatial orientation and motion perception, we hypothesized that sensory integration is similarly subject to interhemispheric influences. Accordingly, we explored the relationship between vestibulo-cortical dominanceassessed using a biomarker, the degree of vestibular-nystagmus suppression following transcranial direct current stimulation over the PPCwith visual dependence measures obtained during performance of a sensory integration task (the rod-and-disk task). We observed that the degree of visual dependence was correlated with vestibulo-cortical dominance. Specifically, individuals with greater right hemispheric vestibulocortical dominance had reduced visual dependence. We proceeded to assess the significance of such dominance on behavior by correlating measures of visual dependence with self-motion perception in healthy subjects. We observed that right-handed individuals experienced illusionary self-motion (vection) quicker than left-handers and that the degree of vestibular cortical dominance was correlated with the time taken to experience vection, only during conditions that induced interhemispheric conflict. To conclude, we demonstrate that interhemispheric asymmetries associated with vestibulo-cortical processing in the PPC functionally and mechanistically link sensory integration and selfmotion perception, facilitating spatial orientation. Our findings highlight the importance of dynamic interhemispheric competition upon control of vestibular behavior in humans.

View PDFchevron_right
Cortical responses to object-motion and visually-induced self-motion perception
Lüder Deecke

Brain research. Cognitive brain research, 2001

We investigated the spatiotemporal cortical dynamics during the perception of object-motion and visually-induced self-motion perception in six normal subjects, using a 143-channel neuromagnetometer. Object-motion specific tasks evoked early transient activity over the right temporooccipital cortex, while self-motion perception, or vection, additionally was followed by sustained bilateral activity in the temporoparietal area. The specific signal distributions suggest to represent the different perceptual modes of object-motion and self-motion sensation.

View PDFchevron_right
Long Lasting Egocentric Disorientation Induced by Normal Sensori-Motor Spatial Interaction
Michael Gresty

PLoS ONE, 2009

Background: Perception of the cardinal directions of the body, right-left, up-down, ahead-behind, which appears so absolute and fundamental to the organisation of behaviour can in fact, be modified. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it has been shown that prolonged distorted perception of the orientation of body axes can be a consequence of disordered sensorimotor signals, including long-term prismatic adaptation and lesions of the central nervous system. We report the novel and surprising finding that a long-lasting distortion of perception of personal space can also be induced by an ecological pointing task without the artifice of distorting normal sensori-motor relationships.

View PDFchevron_right
Functional neuroanatomy of biological motion perception in humans
Jefrey Solomon

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2001

We used whole brain functional MRI to investigate the neural network specifically engaged in the recognition of ''biological motion'' defined by point-lights attached to the major joints and head of a human walker. To examine the specificity of brain regions responsive to biological motion, brain activations obtained during a ''walker vs. non-walker'' discrimination task were compared with those elicited by two other tasks: (i) non-rigid motion (NRM), involving the discrimination of overall motion direction in the same ''point-lights'' display, and (ii) face-gender discrimination, involving the discrimination of gender in briefly presented photographs of men and women. Brain activity specific to ''biological motion'' recognition arose in the lateral cerebellum and in a region in the lateral occipital cortex presumably corresponding to the area KO previously shown to be particularly sensitive to kinetic contours. Additional areas significantly activated during the biological motion recognition task involved both, dorsal and ventral extrastriate cortical regions. In the ventral regions both facegender discrimination and biological motion recognition elicited activation in the lingual and fusiform gyri and in the Brodmann areas 22 and 38 in superior temporal sulcus (STS). Along the dorsal pathway, both biological motion recognition and non-rigid direction discrimination gave rise to strong responses in several known motion sensitive areas. These included Brodmann areas 19͞37, the inferior (Brodmann Area 39), and superior parietal lobule (Brodmann Area 7). Thus, we conjecture that, whereas face (and form) stimuli activate primarily the ventral system and motion stimuli primarily the dorsal system, recognition of biological motion stimuli may activate both systems as well as their confluence in STS. This hypothesis is consistent with our findings in stroke patients, with unilateral brain lesions involving at least one of these areas, who, although correctly reporting the direction of the point-light walker, fail on the biological motion task.

View PDFchevron_right
The neural correlates of perceiving one's own movements
Tilo Kircher

NeuroImage, 2003

Feedforward mechanisms are important for movement control. They may also contribute to the identification of self-produced actions by attenuating the sensory consequences of self-produced movements. In our study, subjects opened and closed their hand slowly and continuously (0.5 Hz). This movement was filmed with an MRI compatible video camera and projected online onto a screen, viewed by the subject while BOLD contrast was measured with fMRI. The temporal delay between movement and feedback was parametrically varied (0 -200 ms). In each trial, subjects judged whether there was a delay or not. There was a positive correlation between the extent of the temporal delay and activation in the right posterior superior temporal cortex (pSTS) and a negative correlation in the left putamen. A second analysis addressed the neural correlates of subjective judgement under conditions of uncertainty. This contrast showed a differential activation in the cerebellum. These results support the assumption of a forward model implying that predictions generated in motor areas attenuate sensory areas. They also suggest that efference copy mechanisms are not located within specific brain areas but are implemented as a specific form of interaction between perceptual and motor areas depending on the modalities and the type of actions involved. Further, conscious detection of small temporal deviations might be based on signals generated in the cerebellum which provide fine-grained temporal information. These results might be useful to refine theories about the role of forward mechanisms in the emergence of disorders of the self, such as in schizophrenia.

View PDFchevron_right
Human self-motion perception during translatory vestibular and proprioceptive stimulation
frantisek Hlavacka

Neuroscience Letters, 1996

Self-motion perception in space was studied in normal human subjects during passive vestibular stimulation (lateral translation of whole body in space), proprioceptive stimulation (of feet relative to trunk) and combinations thereof with the eyes closed. Stimulation was sinusoidal, _+ 10 cm, over a frequency range of 0.025-0.4 Hz. Vestibular sell-motion perception became increasingly underestimated at low frequency, due to a rather high detection threshold. Proprioceptive stimulation at low frequency elicited a small selfmotion illusion. During body translation relative to the stationary feet (vestibular-proprioceptive combination) the magnitude of perceived sell-motion was constant across frequency and its threshold was low, as if determined by proprioception alone. Nevertheless, the results can be interpreted in terms of a vestibular-proprioceptive interaction, in analogy to previous findings for rotational stimuli.

View PDFchevron_right
Self-motion perception without sensory motion
Marieke Martens

Experimental Brain Research, 2022

Various studies have demonstrated a role for cognition on self-motion perception. Those studies all concerned modulations of the perception of a physical or visual motion stimulus. In our study, however, we investigated whether cognitive cues could elicit a percept of oscillatory self-motion in the absence of sensory motion. If so, we could use this percept to investigate if the resulting mismatch between estimated self-motion and a lack of corresponding sensory signals is motion sickening. To that end, we seated blindfolded participants on a swing that remained motionless during two conditions, apart from a deliberate perturbation at the start of each condition. The conditions only differed regarding instructions, a secondary task and a demonstration, which suggested either a quick halt ("Distraction") or continuing oscillations of the swing ("Focus"). Participants reported that the swing oscillated with larger peak-to-peak displacements and for a longer period of time in the Focus condition. That increase was not reflected in the reported motion sickness scores, which did not differ between the two conditions. As the reported motion was rather small, the lack of an effect on the motion sickness response can be explained by assuming a subthreshold neural conflict. Our results support the existence of internal models relevant to sensorimotor processing and the potential of cognitive (behavioral) therapies to alleviate undesirable perceptual issues to some extent. We conclude that oscillatory self-motion can be perceived in the absence of related sensory stimulation, which advocates for the acknowledgement of cognitive cues in studies on self-motion perception. Self-motion perception • Vestibular cognition • Neural store • Psychogenic dizziness • Mal de débarquement Communicated by Bill J Yates.

View PDFchevron_right
Shared neural mechanisms between imagined and perceived egocentric motion - A combined GVS and fMRI study
Bigna Lenggenhager

Many cognitive and social processes involve mental simulations of a change in perspective. Behavioral studies suggest that such egocentric mental rotations rely on brain areas that are also involved in processing actual self-motion, thus depending on vestibular input. In a combined galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) study, we investigated the brain areas that underlie both simulated changes in self-location and the processing of vestibular stimulation within the same individuals. Participants performed an egocentric mental rotation task, an object-based mental rotation task, or a pure lateralization task during GVS or sham stimulation. At the neural level, we expected an overlap between brain areas activated during vestibular processing and egocentric mental rotation (against object-based mental rotation) within area OP2 and the Posterior Insular Cortex (PIC), two core brain regions involved in vestibular processing. The fMRI data ...

View PDFchevron_right
Perceptual Encoding of Self-Motion Duration in Human Posterior Parietal Cortex
Vincenzo Rizzo

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2009

It has been demonstrated previously that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to right or left posterior parietal cortex (PPC) disrupts perceptual encoding of whole-body displacement during an angular path integration task using only vestibular cues for its completion. The effects of rTMS applied to right PPC (and left motor cortex as a control) during a vestibular-cued motion-reproduction task (i.e., not requiring path integration) were investigated in 5 subjects. Specifically, subjects were rotated in the dark on a motorized Bárány chair with raised cosine velocities of durations 1, 2, and 3 s and peak 30 • , 60 • , 90 • , and 120 • /s. Subjects were required to actively reproduce the motion profile after every rotation with a chair-bound joystick. It was found that rTMS applied to the right PPC during the passive (encoding) stimulus phase had no effect on angular velocity reproduction when compared to control (motor-cortex rTMS). In contrast, motion-duration reproduction was significantly worse with right PPC (versus control motor cortex) rTMS. The results imply that vestibular-derived cues of motion duration, but not velocity, are encoded in human PPC. It was inferred from these and previous data that human PPC is involved in human path integration and motionduration perception, but not angular velocity self-motion perception.

View PDFchevron_right
Multisensory integration in spatial orientation
Alain Berthoz

Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 1999

Recent psychophysical studies on normal subjects, as well as brain imaging studies, have revised the concepts concerning the mechanisms underlying spatial orientation during navigation tasks. The emphasis has been put on internal models that allow the prediction of a planned trajectory and are essential in the steering of locomotion. Cognitive factors such as strategies and emotional parameters are now starting to be included in the research on spatial orientation. It is obvious that important individual and gender differences exist in the brain operations underlying spatial orientation in humans, which may help to understand the construction of a coherent perception and the organic neural disorders related to the internal representation of space.

View PDFchevron_right

References (144)

  1. Angelaki, D. E., & Hess, B. J. M. (2005). Self-motion-induced eye movements: effects on visual acuity and navigation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(12), 966-976. http://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1804
  2. Angelaki, D. E., Gu, Y., & DeAngelis, G. C. (2011). Visual and vestibular cue integration for heading perception in extrastriate visual cortex. The Journal of Physiology, 589(Pt 4), 825-833. http://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2010.194720
  3. Avillac M, Ben Hamed S, Duhamel JR. (2007). Multisensory integration in the ventral intraparietal area of the macaque monkey. J Neurosci 27: 1922-1932.
  4. Avillac M, Deneve S, Olivier E, Pouget A, Duhamel JR. (2005). Reference frames for representing visual and tactile locations in parietal cortex. Nat Neurosci 8: 941-949,.
  5. Barany, R. (1907). Physiologie und Pathologie des Bogengangapparates beim Menschen. Leipzig: Franz Deutsche-Verlag.
  6. Barlow, H. B. (1990). A theory about the functional role and synaptic mechanism of visual after- effects. Vision: Coding and Efficiency. e. C.B. Blakemore, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 363-375.
  7. Barlow, H. B. and R. M. Hill (1963). "Selective sensitivity to direction of movement in ganglion cells of the rabbit retina." Science 139(3553): 412-414.
  8. Beer, A. L., Watanabe, T., Ni, R., Sasaki, Y., & Andersen, G. J. (2009). 3D surface perception from motion involves a temporal-parietal network. European Journal of Neuroscience, 30(4), 703-713. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06857.x
  9. Beintema JA, Van den Berg AV, Lappe M. (2004). Circular receptive field structures for flow analysis and heading detection. In: The structure of receptive fields for flow analysis and heading detection (Vaina LM, Beardsley SA, Rushton S, eds), pp 223-248. Norwell, MA, USA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  10. Beintema JA, Van den Berg AV. (1998). Heading detection using motion templates and eye velocity gain fields. Vision Res 38: 2155-2179.
  11. Ben Hamed S, Duhamel JR, Bremmer F, Graf W. (2002). Visual receptive field modulation in the lateral intraparietal area during attentive fixation and free gaze. Cereb Cortex 12: 234-245.
  12. Benson, A. J., J. R. Kass and H. Vogel (1986). "European vestibular experiments on the Spacelab-1 mission: 4. Thresholds of perception of whole-body linear oscillation." Exp Brain Res 64(2): 264-271.
  13. Biagi, L., Crespi, S. A., Tosetti, M., & Morrone, M. C. (2015). BOLD Response Selective to Flow-Motion in Very Young Infants. PLoS Biology, 13(9), e1002260.
  14. Billington J, Smith AT. (2015). Neural mechanisms for discounting head-roll-induced retinal motion. Journal of Neuroscience 35:4851-4856.
  15. Bottini G, Gandola M, Sedda A, Ferrè ER (2013). Caloric vestibular stimulation: interaction between somatosensory system and vestibular apparatus. Frontiers in integrative neuroscience 7.
  16. Bottini G, Paulesu E, Gandola M, Loffredo S, Scarpa P, Sterzi R, Santilli I, Defanti C, Scialfa G, Fazio F (2005). Left caloric vestibular stimulation ameliorates right hemianesthesia. Neurology 65:1278-1283.
  17. Bradley DC, Maxwell M, Andersen RA, Banks MS, Shenoy KV. (1996). Mechanisms of heading perception in primate visual cortex. Science 273: 1544-1547.
  18. Brandt, T., & Dieterich, M. (1999). The vestibular cortex. Its locations, functions, and disorders. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 871, 293-312.
  19. Brandt, T., Bartenstein, P., Janek, A., & Dieterich, M. (1998). Reciprocal inhibitory visual- vestibular interaction. Visual motion stimulation deactivates the parieto-insular vestibular cortex. Brain : a Journal of Neurology, 121 ( Pt 9), 1749-1758.
  20. Brandt, T., J. Dichgans and W. Buchle (1974). "Motion habituation: inverted self-motion perception and optokinetic after-nystagmus." Exp Brain Res 21(4): 337-352.
  21. Bremmer F, Duhamel J-R, Ben Hamed S, Graf W. (2002a ). Heading encoding in the macaque ventral intraparietal area (VIP). Eur J Neurosci 16: 1554-1568.
  22. Bremmer F, Klam F, Duhamel J-R, Ben Hamed S, Graf W. (2002b ). Visual-vestibular interactive responses in the macaque ventral intraparietal area (VIP). Eur J Neurosci. 16: 1569- 1586.
  23. Bremmer F, Kubischik M, Hoffmann KP, Krekelberg B. (2009). Neural dynamics of saccadic suppression. J Neurosci 29: 12374-12383,.
  24. Bremmer F, Kubischik M, Pekel M, Hoffmann KP, Lappe M. (2010). Visual selectivity for heading in monkey area MST. Exp Brain Res 200: 51-60.
  25. Bremmer F, Kubischik M, Pekel M, Lappe M, Hoffmann KP. (1999). Linear vestibular self- motion signals in monkey medial superior temporal area. Ann N Y Acad Sci 871: 272-281.
  26. Bremmer F, Schlack A, Shah NJ, Zafiris O, Kubischik M, Hoffmann K, Zilles K, Fink GR.
  27. Polymodal motion processing in posterior parietal and premotor cortex: a human fMRI study strongly implies equivalencies between humans and monkeys. Neuron, 29(1):287-96.
  28. Bremmer, F. (2011). Multisensory space: from eye-movements to self-motion. The Journal of Physiology, 589(Pt 4), 815-823.
  29. Bremmer, F., F. Klam, J. R. Duhamel, S. Ben Hamed and W. Graf (2002). "Visual-vestibular interactive responses in the macaque ventral intraparietal area (VIP)." Eur J Neurosci 16(8): 1569-1586.
  30. Bremmer, F., Klam, F., Duhamel, J.-R., Ben Hamed, S., & Graf, W. (2002). Visual-vestibular interactive responses in the macaque ventral intraparietal area (VIP). European Journal of Neuroscience, 16(8), 1569-1586.
  31. Britten KH. (2008). Mechanisms of self-motion perception. Annual Rev Neurosci.; 31:389-410, Butler JS, Smith ST, Campos JL, Bülthoff HH (2010). Bayesian integration of visual and vestibular signals for heading. Journal of vision 10:23.
  32. Cardin, V. and A. T. Smith (2010). "Sensitivity of human visual and vestibular cortical regions to egomotion-compatible visual stimulation." Cereb Cortex 20(8): 1964-1973.
  33. Chen A, Deangelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2013). Functional specializations of the ventral intraparietal area for multisensory heading discrimination. J Neurosci. 33(8):3567-81.
  34. Chen A, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2011). Representation of vestibular and visual cues to self-motion in ventral intraparietal cortex. J Neurosci 31: 12036-12052.
  35. Chen X, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2014). Eye-centered visual receptive fields in the ventral intraparietal area. J Neurophysiol., 112(2):353-61.
  36. Chen, A., DeAngelis, G. C., & Angelaki, D. E. (2011). Representation of Vestibular and Visual Cues to Self-Motion in Ventral Intraparietal Cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(33), 12036-12052.
  37. Claeys, K. G., Lindsey, D. T., de Schutter, E., & Orban, G. A. (2003). A higher order motion region in human inferior parietal lobule: evidence from fMRI. Neuron, 40(3), 631-642.
  38. Cohen B, Henn V, Raphan T, Dennett D (1981). Velocity storage, nystagmus, and visual--- vestibular interactions in humans. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 374:421-433.
  39. Coniglio, A. J. and B. T. Crane (2014). "Human yaw rotation aftereffects with brief duration rotations are inconsistent with velocity storage." J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 15(2): 305-317.
  40. Crane, B. T. (2012). "Fore-aft translation aftereffects." Exp Brain Res 219(4): 477-487.
  41. Crane, B. T. (2013). "Limited interaction between translation and visual motion aftereffects in humans." Exp Brain Res 224(2): 165-178.
  42. Cuturi, L. F. and P. R. MacNeilage (2013). "Systematic biases in human heading estimation." PLoS One 8(2): e56862.
  43. Cuturi, L. F. and P. R. MacNeilage (2014). "Optic flow induces nonvisual self-motion aftereffects." Curr Biol 24(23): 2817-2821.
  44. de Winkel, K. N., M. Katliar and H. H. Bulthoff (2015). "Forced fusion in multisensory heading estimation." PLoS One 10(5): e0127104.
  45. Dieterich, M., & Brandt, T. (2008). Functional brain imaging of peripheral and central vestibular disorders. Brain : a Journal of Neurology, 131(Pt 10), 2538-2552.
  46. Duffy CJ, Wurtz RH. (1991a ). Sensitivity of MST neurons to optic flow stimuli. I. A continuum of response selectivity to large-field stimuli. J Neurophysiol 65: 1329-1345.
  47. Duffy CJ, Wurtz RH. (1991b ). Sensitivity of MST neurons to optic flow stimuli. II. Mechanisms of response selectivity revealed by small-field stimuli. J Neurophysiol 65: 1346-1359.
  48. Duffy, C.J. (2000) Optic flow analysis for self-movement perception. International Rev Neurobiology. 44, 199 -218.
  49. Duffy CJ. (1998). MST neurons respond to optic flow and translational movement. J Neurophysiol 80: 1816-1827.
  50. Duhamel JR, Colby CL, Goldberg ME. (1998). Ventral intraparietal area of the macaque: congruent visual and somatic response properties. J Neurophysiol 79: 126-136.
  51. Eickhoff, S. B., Weiss, P. H., Amunts, K., Fink, G. R., & Zilles, K. (2006). Identifying human parieto-insular vestibular cortex using fMRI and cytoarchitectonic mapping. Human Brain Mapping, 27(7), 611-621. http://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20205
  52. Erickson RG, Thier P. (1991). A neuronal correlate of spatial stability during periods of self- induced visual motion. Exp Brain Res 86: 608-616.
  53. Ferrè ER, Bottini G, Iannetti GD, Haggard P (2013b). The balance of feelings: vestibular modulation of bodily sensations. Cortex 49:748-758.
  54. Ferrè ER, Day BL, Bottini G, Haggard P (2013a). How the vestibular system interacts with somatosensory perception: a sham-controlled study with galvanic vestibular stimulation. Neuroscience letters 550:35-40.
  55. Ferrè ER, Kaliuzhna M, Herbelin B, Haggard P, Blanke O (2014). Vestibular-Somatosensory Interactions: Effects of Passive Whole-Body Rotation on Somatosensory Detection. PloS one 9:e86379.
  56. Ferrè ER, Sedda A, Gandola M, Bottini G (2011). How the vestibular system modulates tactile perception in normal subjects: a behavioural and physiological study. Experimental brain research 208:29-38.
  57. Fetsch CR, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2013). Bridging the gap between theories of sensory cue integration and the physiology of multisensory neurons. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14:429-442.
  58. Fetsch CR, Turner AH, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE (2009). Dynamic reweighting of visual and vestibular cues during self-motion perception. The Journal of Neuroscience 29:15601-15612.
  59. Fetsch, C. R., A. H. Turner, G. C. DeAngelis and D. E. Angelaki (2009). "Dynamic reweighting of visual and vestibular cues during self-motion perception." J Neurosci 29(49): 15601-15612.
  60. Frank SM, Baumann O, Mattingley JB, Greenlee MW. (2014). Vestibular and visual responses in human posterior insular cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 112:2481-2491.
  61. Frank, S. M., & Greenlee, M. W. (2014). An MRI-compatible caloric stimulation device for the investigation of human vestibular cortex. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 235, 208-218.
  62. Galletti C., Battaglini P.P., Fattori P. (1990). 'Real-motion' cells in area V3A of macaque visual cortex. Exp Brain Res 82: 67-76.
  63. Gibson J.J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  64. Grabherr, L., K. Nicoucar, F. W. Mast and D. M. Merfeld (2008). "Vestibular thresholds for yaw rotation about an earth-vertical axis as a function of frequency." Exp Brain Res 186(4): 677-681.
  65. Grantham, D. W. and F. L. Wightman (1979). "Auditory motion aftereffects." Percept Psychophys 26(5): 403-408.
  66. Greenlee, M.W. (2000).Human cortical areas underlying the perception of optic flow: brain imaging studies. Int Rev Neurobiol. 44: 269-92.
  67. Grüsser, O. J., Pause, M., & Schreiter, U. (1990). Localization and responses of neurones in the parieto-insular vestibular cortex of awake monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). The Journal of Physiology.
  68. Gu Y, Angelaki DE, DeAngelis GC. (2008). Neural correlates of multisensory cue integration in macaque MSTd. Nat Neurosci 11: 1201-1210.
  69. Gu Y, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2007). A functional link between area MSTd and heading perception based on vestibular signals. Nat Neurosci 10: 1038-1047.
  70. Gu Y, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2012). Causal Links between Dorsal Medial Superior Temporal Area Neurons and Multisensory Heading Perception. J Neurosci 32: 2299-2313.
  71. Gu Y, Fetsch CR, Adeyemo B, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2010). Decoding of MSTd population activity accounts for variations in the precision of heading perception. Neuron 66: 596-609.
  72. Gu Y, Watkins PV, Angelaki DE, DeAngelis GC. (2006). Visual and Nonvisual Contributions to Three-Dimensional Heading Selectivity in the Medial Superior Temporal Area. Journal of Neuroscience 26:73-85.
  73. Guldin, W. O., & Grüsser, O. J. (1998). Is there a vestibular cortex? Trends in Neurosciences, 21(6), 254-259.
  74. Holten, V., M. J. van der Smagt, S. F. Donker and F. A. Verstraten (2014). "Illusory motion of the motion aftereffect induces postural sway." Psychol Sci 25(9): 1831-1834.
  75. Ionta S, Heydrich L, Lenggenhager B, Mouthon M, Fornari E, Chapuis D, Gassert R, Blanke O (2011) Multisensory mechanisms in temporo-parietal cortex support self-location and first-person perspective. Neuron 70:363-374.
  76. Kaliuzhna M, Prsa M, Gale S, Lee SJ, Blanke O (2015) Learning to integrate contradictory multisensory self-motion cue pairings. J Vis 15.
  77. Kaliuzhna, M., M. Prsa, S. Gale, S. J. Lee and O. Blanke (2015). "Learning to integrate contradictory multisensory self-motion cue pairings." J Vis 15(1): 15 11 10.
  78. Kaminiarz A, Schlack A, Hoffmann KP, Lappe M, Bremmer F. (2014). Visual selectivity for heading in the macaque ventral intraparietal area. J Neurophysiol., 112(10):2470-80.
  79. Kitagawa, N. and S. Ichihara (2002). "Hearing visual motion in depth." Nature 416(6877): 172- 174.
  80. Kleinschmidt, A., Thilo, K. V., Büchel, C., Gresty, M. A., Bronstein, A. M., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (2002). Neural correlates of visual-motion perception as object-or self-motion. NeuroImage, 16(4), 873-882.
  81. Koenderink, J. J. (1986). Optic flow. Vision Research, 26(1), 161-179.
  82. Kommerell, G. and H. Thiele (1970). "[Optokinetic short-stimulation nystagmus]." Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol 179(3): 220-234.
  83. Konkle, T. and C. I. Moore (2009). "What can crossmodal aftereffects reveal about neural representation and dynamics?" Commun Integr Biol 2(6): 479-481.
  84. Konkle, T., Q. Wang, V. Hayward and C. I. Moore (2009). "Motion aftereffects transfer between touch and vision." Curr Biol 19(9): 745-750.
  85. Kontsevich, L. L. and C. W. Tyler (1999). "Bayesian adaptive estimation of psychometric slope and threshold." Vision Res 39(16): 2729-2737.
  86. Körding KP, Beierholm U, Ma WJ, Quartz S, Tenenbaum JB, Shams L (2007). Causal inference in multisensory perception. PLoS one 2:e943.
  87. Lackner JR, DiZio P (2005). Vestibular, proprioceptive, and haptic contributions to spatial orientation. Annu Rev Psychol 56:115-147.
  88. Lappe M, Bremmer F, Pekel M, Thiele A, Hoffmann KP. (1996). Optic flow processing in monkey STS: a theoretical and experimental approach. J Neurosci 16: 6265-6285, Lappe M, Bremmer F, Van den Berg AV. (1999). Perception of self-motion from visual flow. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3: 329-336.
  89. Lappe M, Pekel M, Hoffmann K-P. (1998). Optokinetic eye movements elicited by radial optic flow in the macaque monkey. J Neurophysiol 79: 1461-1480.
  90. Lappe M, Rauschecker JP. (1993). A neural network for the processing of optic flow from ego- motion in man and higher mammals. Neural Comp 5: 374-391.
  91. Lappe M, Rauschecker JP. Heading detection from optic flow. (1994). Nature 369: 712-713.
  92. Lappe, M., Bremmer, F., & van den Berg AV. (1999). Perception of self-motion from visual flow. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(9), 329-336.
  93. Lobel E, Kleine J, Le Bihan D, Leroy-Willig A, Berthoz A. (1998). Functional MRI of galvanic vestibular stimulation. Journal of Neurophysiology, 80: 2699-2709.
  94. Lobel, E., Kleine, J. F., Leroy-Willig, A., van de Moortele, P. F., Le Bihan, D., Grüsser, O. J., & Berthoz, A. (1999). Cortical areas activated by bilateral galvanic vestibular stimulation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 871, 313-323.
  95. Lopez, C., & Blanke, O. (2011). The thalamocortical vestibular system in animals and humans. Brain Research Reviews, 67(1-2), 119-146. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2010.12.002
  96. Lopez, C., Blanke, O., & Mast, F. W. (2012). The human vestibular cortex revealed by coordinate-based activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis. Neuroscience, 1-21.
  97. MacNeilage, P. R., Banks, M. S., DeAngelis, G. C., & Angelaki, D. E. (2010). Vestibular heading discrimination and sensitivity to linear acceleration in head and world coordinates. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30(27), 9084-9094.
  98. Mather, G., A. Pavan, G. Campana and C. Casco (2008). "The motion aftereffect reloaded." Trends Cogn Sci 12(12): 481-487.
  99. Mergner T, Nardi G, Becker W, Deecke L (1983). The role of canal-neck interaction for the perception of horizontal trunk and head rotation. Experimental brain research 49:198-208.
  100. Mergner T, Rosemeier T (1998). Interaction of vestibular, somatosensory and visual signals for postural control and motion perception under terrestrial and microgravity conditions-a conceptual model. Brain Research Reviews 28:118-135.
  101. Morgan ML, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2008). Multisensory integration in macaque visual cortex depends on cue reliability. Neuron 59: 662-673.
  102. Morris AP, Kubischik M, Hoffmann K-P, Krekelberg B, Bremmer F. (2012). Dynamics of eye- position signals in the dorsal visual system. Current Biology 22: 173-179.
  103. Morrone, M. C., Tosetti, M., Montanaro, D., Fiorentini, A., Cioni, G., & Burr, D. C. (2000). A cortical area that responds specifically to optic flow, revealed by fMRI. Nature Neuroscience, 3(12), 1322-1328.
  104. Ni, J., M. Tatalovic, D. Straumann and I. Olasagasti (2013). "Gaze direction affects linear self- motion heading discrimination in humans." Eur J Neurosci 38(8): 3248-3260.
  105. Orban, G. A., Fize, D., Peuskens, H., Denys, K., Nelissen, K., Sunaert, S., et al. (2003). Similarities and differences in motion processing between the human and macaque brain: evidence from fMRI. Neuropsychologia, 41(13), 1757-1768.
  106. Page WK, Duffy CJ. (2003). Heading representation in MST: sensory interactions and population encoding. J Neurophysiol 89: 1994-2013.
  107. Perrone JA, Stone LS. (1994). A model of self-motion estimation within primate extrastriate visual cortex. Vision Res 34: 2917-2938.
  108. Pfeiffer C, Lopez C, Schmutz V, Duenas JA, Martuzzi R, Blanke O (2013). Multisensory origin of the subjective first-person perspective: visual, tactile, and vestibular mechanisms. PLoS One 8:e61751.
  109. Pfeiffer C, Schmutz V, Blanke O (2014). Visuospatial viewpoint manipulation during full-body illusion modulates subjective first-person perspective. Exp Brain Res 232:4021-4033.
  110. Pitzalis, S., Sereno, M. I., Committeri, G., Fattori, P., Galati, G., Tosoni, A., & Galletti, C. (2013). The human homologue of macaque area V6A. NeuroImage, 82, 517-530.
  111. Pitzalis, S., Fattori, P., & Galletti, C. (2015). The human cortical areas V6 and V6A. Visual Neuroscience, 32, E007.
  112. Priesol, A. J., Y. Valko, D. M. Merfeld and R. F. Lewis (2014). "Motion Perception in Patients with Idiopathic Bilateral Vestibular Hypofunction." Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 150(6): 1040- 1042.
  113. Probst T, Straube A, Bles W (1985). Differential effects of ambivalent visual-vestibular- somatosensory stimulation on the perception of self-motion. Behavioural brain research 16:71- 79. Prsa M, Gale S, Blanke O (2012). Self-motion leads to mandatory cue fusion across sensory modalities. Journal of neurophysiology 108:2282-2291.
  114. Riecke, B. E., & Jordan, J. D. (2015). Comparing the effectiveness of different displays in enhancing illusions of self-movement (vection). Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 713.
  115. Roach NW, Heron J, McGraw PV (2006). Resolving multisensory conflict: a strategy for balancing the costs and benefits of audio-visual integration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: biological sciences 273:2159-2168.
  116. Schlack A, Hoffmann KP, Bremmer F. (2002). Interaction of linear vestibular and visual stimulation in the macaque ventral intraparietal area (VIP). Eur J Neurosci 16: 1877-1886.
  117. Seemungal, B. M. (2014). The cognitive neurology of the vestibular system. Current Opinion in Neurology, 27(1), 125-132. http://doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0000000000000060
  118. Seno, T., H. Ito and S. Sunaga (2010). "Vection aftereffects from expanding/contracting stimuli." Seeing Perceiving 23(4): 273-294.
  119. Sereno, M. I., & Huang, R.-S. (2014). Multisensory maps in parietal cortex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 24(1), 39-46.
  120. Shenoy KV, Bradley DC, Andersen RA. (1999). Influence of gaze rotation on the visual response of primate MSTd neurons. J Neurophysiol 81: 2764-2786.
  121. Shu, Z. J., N. V. Swindale and M. S. Cynader (1993). "Spectral motion produces an auditory after-effect." Nature 364(6439): 721-723.
  122. Smith AT, Wall MB, Thilo KV. (2012). Vestibular inputs to human motion-sensitive visual cortex. Cerebral Cortex 22:1068-1077.
  123. Sommer MA, Wurtz RH. (2008). Brain circuits for the internal monitoring of movements. Annu Rev Neurosci 31: 317-338,.
  124. Sperry RW. (1950). Neural basis of the spontaneous optokinetic response produced by visual inversion. J Comp Physiol Psychol 43:482-489.
  125. Stephan T, Deutschländer A, Nolte A, Schneider E, Wiesmann M, Brandt T, Dieterich M. (2005). Functional MRI of galvanic vestibular stimulation with alternating currents at different frequencies. NeuroImage 26:721-732.
  126. Sunaert, S., van Hecke, P., Marchal, G., & Orban, G. A. (1999). Motion-responsive regions of the human brain. Experimental Brain Research, 127(4), 355-370.
  127. Sutherland, N. S. (1961). "Figural aftereffects and apparent size." Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 13: 222- 228.
  128. Takahashi K, Gu Y, May PJ, Newlands SD, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE. (2007). Multimodal Coding of Three-Dimensional Rotation and Translation in Area MSTd: Comparison of Visual and Vestibular Selectivity. Journal of Neuroscience, 27: 9742-9768.
  129. Uesaki, M., & Ashida, H. (2015). Optic-flow selective cortical sensory regions associated with self-reported states of vection. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 775.
  130. Upadhyay UD, Page WK, Duffy CJ. (2000). MST responses to pursuit across optic flow with motion parallax. J Neurophysiol, 84: 818-826.
  131. Valko, Y., R. F. Lewis, A. J. Priesol and D. M. Merfeld (2012). "Vestibular labyrinth contributions to human whole-body motion discrimination." J Neurosci 32(39): 13537-13542.
  132. Vallar G, Sterzi R, Bottini G, Cappa S, Rusconi ML (1990). Temporary remission of left hemianesthesia after vestibular stimulation. A sensory neglect phenomenon. Cortex 26:123-131. Van den Berg AV. (1993). Perception of heading. Nature 365: 497-498,.
  133. von Holst E, Mittelstaedt H. (1950). Das Reafferenzprinzip. Naturwissenschaften 37: 464-476.
  134. Wall MB, Smith AT. (2008). The representation of egomotion in the human brain. Current Biology 18:191-194.
  135. Wallace MT, Roberson G, Hairston WD, Stein BE, Vaughan JW, Schirillo JA (2004). Unifying multisensory signals across time and space. Experimental Brain Research, 158: 252-258.
  136. Warren WH, Hannon DJ. (1988). Direction of self-motion is perceived from optical flow. Nature 336: 162-163,.
  137. Warren WHJ, Hannon DJ. (1990). Eye movements and optical flow. J Opt Soc Am [A] 7: 160- 169.
  138. Watanabe, J., S. Hayashi, H. Kajimoto, S. Tachi and S. Nishida (2007). "Tactile motion aftereffects produced by appropriate presentation for mechanoreceptors." Exp Brain Res 180(3): 577-582.
  139. Wei M, Angelaki DE. (2006). Foveal visual strategy during self-motion is independent of spatial attention. J Neurosci 26: 564-572.
  140. Wexler M, Panerai F, Lamouret I, Droulez J (2001). Self-motion and the perception of stationary objects. Nature 409:85-88.
  141. Yu CP, Page WK, Gaborski R, Duffy CJ. (2010). Receptive field dynamics underlying MST neuronal optic flow selectivity. J Neurophysiol 103: 2794-2807.
  142. Zhang T, Britten KH. (2011). Parietal area VIP causally influences heading perception during pursuit eye movements. J Neurosci 31: 2569-2575.
  143. Zhang T, Heuer HW, Britten KH. (2004). Parietal area VIP neuronal responses to heading stimuli are encoded in head-centered coordinates. Neuron 42: 993-1001.
  144. Zu Eulenburg, P., Baumgärtner, U., Treede, R.-D., & Dieterich, M. (2013). Interoceptive and multimodal functions of the operculo-insular cortex: tactile, nociceptive and vestibular representations. NeuroImage, 83, 75-86.

Related papers

Functional MRI studies of multisensory integration underlying self-motion perception
Mark Greenlee

2016

Since the advent of functional magnetic resonance imaging cognitive science has experienced a turn towards neuroscience. Models of perceptual and cognitive functions can now be tested against patterns of human brain activity in anatomically well-defined regions of interest. Structural and functional connectivity analyses can inform us about how different brain regions are interconnected and interact in perceptual and cognitive tasks, as well as during resting states. In this study I review the results of a series of experiments that aimed to reveal the visual-vestibular sensory processing underlying self-motion perception. We (Frank, Baumann, Mattingley, & Greenlee, 2014; Frank, Wirth, & Greenlee, 2016) localized regions in the posterior insula using fMRI with visual and vestibular stimuli. The results suggest that two areas in this part of the brain are involved in self-motion perception: the parieto-insular vestibular cortex (PIVC) for the processing of vestibular information and ...

View PDFchevron_right
The neural encoding of self-motion
Kathleen Cullen

Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 2011

As we move through the world, information can be combined from multiple sources in order to allow us to perceive our selfmotion. The vestibular system detects and encodes the motion of the head in space. In addition, extra-vestibular cues such as retinal-image motion (optic flow), proprioception, and motor efference signals, provide valuable motion cues. Here I focus on the coding strategies that are used by the brain to create neural representations of self-motion. I review recent studies comparing the thresholds of single versus populations of vestibular afferent and central neurons. I then consider recent advances in understanding the brain's strategy for combining information from the vestibular sensors with extra-vestibular cues to estimate self-motion. These studies emphasize the need to consider not only the rules by which multiple inputs are combined, but also how differences in the behavioral context govern the nature of what defines the optimal computation.

View PDFchevron_right
The neural encoding of self-generated and externally applied movement: implications for the perception of self-motion and spatial memory
Kathleen Cullen

Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 2014

The vestibular system is vital for maintaining an accurate representation of self-motion. As one moves (or is moved) toward a new place in the environment, signals from the vestibular sensors are relayed to higher-order centers. It is generally assumed the vestibular system provides a veridical representation of head motion to these centers for the perception of self-motion and spatial memory. In support of this idea, evidence from lesion studies suggests that vestibular inputs are required for the directional tuning of head direction cells in the limbic system as well as neurons in areas of multimodal association cortex. However, recent investigations in monkeys and mice challenge the notion that early vestibular pathways encode an absolute representation of head motion. Instead, processing at the first central stage is inherently multimodal. This minireview highlights recent progress that has been made towards understanding how the brain processes and interprets self-motion signals encoded by the vestibular otoliths and semicircular canals during everyday life. The following interrelated questions are considered. What information is available to the higher-order centers that contribute to self-motion perception? How do we distinguish between our own self-generated movements and those of the external world? And lastly, what are the implications of differences in the processing of these active vs. passive movements for spatial memory?

View PDFchevron_right
Neural correlates of visual-motion perception as object- or self-motion
Andreas Kleinschmidt

Neuroimage, 2002

Both self-motion and objects moving in our visual field generate visual motion by displacing images on the retina. Resolving this ambiguity may seem effortless but large-field visual-motion stimuli can yield perceptual rivalry between the real percept of objectmotion and the illusory percept of self-motion (vection). We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to record brain activity in human observers exposed to constant-velocity roll-motion. This stimulus induced responses in areas reaching from calcarine to parieto-occipital and to ventral and lateral temporo-occipital cortex and the anterior insula. During vection, early motion-sensitive visual areas and vestibular parieto-insular cortex deactivated, whereas higher-order parieto-and temporo-occipital areas known to respond to optical flow retained identical activity levels. Within this sustained response, these latter areas displayed transient activations in response to each perceptual switch as identified in event-related analyses. Our results thus show that these areas are responsive to the type of visual motion stimulus and highly sensitive to its perceptual bistability. The only region to be more active during perceived self-motion was in, or close to, the cerebellar nodulus. This activation may correspond to the gain increase of torsional optokinetic nystagmus during vection and/or to changes in sensory processing related to the rotational percept. In conclusion, we identified neural correlates of perceiving self-motion from vision alone, i.e., in the absence of confirmatory vestibular or proprioceptive input. These functional properties preserve the organism's ability to move accurately in its environment by relying on visual cues under conditions when the other spatial senses fail to provide such information. © 2002 Elsevier Science (USA)

View PDFchevron_right
Integration of Motion and Form Cues for the Perception of Self-Motion in the Human Brain
Zhoukuidong Shan

The Journal of Neuroscience, 2019

When moving around in the world, the human visual system uses both motion and form information to estimate the direction of self-motion (i.e., heading). However, little is known about cortical areas in charge of this task. This brain-imaging study addressed this question by using visual stimuli consisting of randomly distributed dot pairs oriented toward a locus on a screen (the form-defined focus of expansion [FoE]) but moved away from a different locus (the motion-defined FoE) to simulate observer translation. We first fixed the motion-defined FoE location and shifted the form-defined FoE location. We then made the locations of the motion- and the form-defined FoEs either congruent (at the same location in the display) or incongruent (on the opposite sides of the display). The motion- or the form-defined FoE shift was the same in the two types of stimuli, but the perceived heading direction shifted for the congruent, but not for the incongruent stimuli. Participants (both sexes) m...

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Neuroscience
  • Psychology
  • Psychophysics
  • Perception
  • Multisensory Integration
  • Biological Motion

    • Cited by

    The parieto-insular vestibular cortex in humans: more than a single area?
    Mark Greenlee

    Journal of neurophysiology, 2018

    Here, we review the structure and function of a core region in the vestibular cortex of humans that is located in the mid-posterior Sylvian fissure and referred to as the parieto-insular vestibular cortex (PIVC). Previous studies have investigated PIVC by using vestibular or visual motion stimuli and have observed activations that were distributed across multiple anatomical structures, including the temporo-parietal junction, retroinsula, parietal operculum, and posterior insula. However, it has remained unclear whether all of these anatomical areas correspond to PIVC and whether PIVC responds to both vestibular and visual stimuli. Recent results suggest that the region that has been referred to as PIVC in previous studies consists of multiple areas with different anatomical correlates and different functional specializations. Specifically, a vestibular but not visual area is located in the parietal operculum, close to the posterior insula, and likely corresponds to the non-human pr...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Functional Connectivity in Developmental Dyslexia during Speed Discrimination
    Tihomir Taskov

    2021

    A universal signature of developmental dyslexia is literacy acquisition impairments. Besides, dyslexia may be related to deficits in selective spatial attention, in the sensitivity to global visual motion, speed processing, oculomotor coordination, and integration of auditory and visual information. Whether motion-sensitive brain areas of children with dyslexia can recognize different speeds of expanded optic flow and segregate the slow-speed from high-speed contrast of motion was a main question of the study. A combined event-related EEG experiment with optic flow visual stimulation and functional frequency-based graph approach (small-world propensity φ) were applied to research the responsiveness of areas, which are sensitive to motion, and also distinguish slow/fast -motion conditions on three groups of children: controls, untrained (pre-D) and trained dyslexics (post-D) with visual intervention programs. Lower φ at θ, α, γ1-frequencies (low-speed contrast) for controls than othe...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Visual loss alters multisensory face maps in humans
    Michael Proulx

    Brain structure & function, 2018

    Topographically organised responses to visual and tactile stimulation are aligned in the ventral intraparietal cortex. The critical biological importance of this region, which is thought to mediate visually guided defensive movements of the head and upper body, suggests that these maps might be hardwired from birth. Here, we investigated whether visual experience is necessary for the creation and positioning of these maps by assessing the representation of tactile stimulation in congenitally and totally blind participants, who had no visual experience, and late and totally blind participants. We used a single-subject approach to the analysis to focus on the potential individual differences in the functional neuroanatomy that might arise from different causes, durations and sensory experiences of visual impairment among participants. The overall results did not show any significant difference between congenitally and late blind participants; however, single-subject trends suggested t...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Cybersickness: a Multisensory Integration Perspective
    Maria Gallagher

    Multisensory Research, 2018

    In the past decade, there has been a rapid advance in Virtual Reality (VR) technology. Key to the user’s VR experience are multimodal interactions involving all senses. The human brain must integrate real-time vision, hearing, vestibular and proprioceptive inputs to produce the compelling and captivating feeling of immersion in a VR environment. A serious problem with VR is that users may develop symptoms similar to motion sickness, a malady calledcybersickness. At present the underlying cause of cybersickness is not yet fully understood. Cybersickness may be due to a discrepancy between the sensory signals which provide information about the body’s orientation and motion: in many VR applications, optic flow elicits an illusory sensation of motion which tells users that they are moving in a certain direction with certain acceleration. However, since users are not actually moving, their proprioceptive and vestibular organs provide no cues of self-motion. These conflicting signals may...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Multisensory Interactions in Virtual Reality: Optic Flow Reduces Vestibular Sensitivity, but Only for Congruent Planes of Motion
    Maria Gallagher

    Multisensory Research, 2020

    During exposure to Virtual Reality (VR) a sensory conflict may be present, whereby the visual system signals that the user is moving in a certain direction with a certain acceleration, while the vestibular system signals that the user is stationary. In order to reduce this conflict, the brain may down-weight vestibular signals, which may in turn affect vestibular contributions to self-motion perception. Here we investigated whether vestibular perceptual sensitivity is affected by VR exposure. Participants’ ability to detect artificial vestibular inputs was measured during optic flow or random motion stimuli on a VR head-mounted display. Sensitivity to vestibular signals was significantly reduced when optic flow stimuli were presented, but importantly this was only the case when both visual and vestibular cues conveyed information on the same plane of self-motion. Our results suggest that the brain dynamically adjusts the weight given to incoming sensory cues for self-motion in VR; h...

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved