Spatial localization investigated by continuous pointing during visual and gravitoinertial changes

In order to accurately localize an object, human observers must integrate multiple sensory cues related to the environment and/or to the body. Such multisensory integration must be repeated over time, so that spatial localization is constantly updated according to environmental changes. In the present experimental study, we examined the multisensory integration processes underlying spatial updating by investigating how gradual modifications of gravitoinertial cues (i.e., somatosensory and vestibular cues) and visual cues affect target localization skills. These were assessed by using a continuous pointing task toward a body-fixed visual target. The “single” rotation of the gravitoinertial vector (produced by off-axis centrifugation) resulted in downward pointing errors, which likely were related to a combination of oculogravic and somatogravic illusions. The “single” downward pitch rotation of the visual background produced an elevation of the arm relative to the visual target, suggesting that the rotation of the visual background caused an illusory target elevation (induced-motion phenomenon). Strikingly, the errors observed during the “combined” rotation of the visual background and of the gravitoinertial vector appeared as a linear combination of the errors independently observed during “single” rotations. In other words, the centrifugation effect on target localization was reduced by the visual background rotation. The observed linear combination indicates that the weights of visual and gravitoinertial cues were similar and remained constant throughout the stimulation.

[1]  R. Hetherington.  The Perception of the Visual World , 1952 .

[2]  C S Lessard,et al.  Effects of rotation on somatogravic illusions. , 2000, IEEE engineering in medicine and biology magazine : the quarterly magazine of the Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society.

[3]  B. Bridgeman,et al.  Segregation of cognitive and motor aspects of visual function using induced motion , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  J. Vercher,et al.  Vision of the hand prior to movement onset allows full motor adaptation to a multi-force environment , 2006, Brain Research Bulletin.

[5]  Christophe Bourdin,et al.  Interaction between Reference Frames during Subjective Vertical Estimates in a Tilted Immersive Virtual Environment , 2009, Perception.

[6]  Willem Bles,et al.  Roll motion stimuli: sensory conflict, perceptual weighting and motion sickness , 1998, Brain Research Bulletin.

[7]  A GRAYBIEL,et al.  Visual perception of the horizontal following exposure to radial acceleration on a centrifuge. , 1951, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[8]  G. DeAngelis,et al.  Multisensory integration: psychophysics, neurophysiology, and computation , 2009, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[9]  Laurence R. Harris,et al.  Perceived self-orientation in allocentric and egocentric space: Effects of visual and physical tilt on saccadic and tactile measures , 2008, Brain Research.

[10]  Christophe Bourdin,et al.  On-line versus off-line vestibular-evoked control of goal-directed arm movements , 2002, Neuroreport.

[11]  I P Howard,et al.  Interactions within and between the spatial senses. , 1997, Journal of vestibular research : equilibrium & orientation.

[12]  Ian P. Howard,et al.  Human visual orientation , 1982 .

[13]  L. Bringoux,et al.  Pitch body orientation influences the perception of self-motion direction induced by optic flow , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[14]  C. Prablanc,et al.  Vectorial coding of movement: vision, proprioception, or both? , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  G. DeAngelis,et al.  Visual and vestibular cue integration for heading perception in extrastriate visual cortex , 2011, The Journal of physiology.

[16]  Ian S. Curthoys,et al.  The delay of the oculogravic illusion , 1996, Brain Research Bulletin.

[17]  B. Cohen,et al.  Perception of tilt (somatogravic illusion) in response to sustained linear acceleration during space flight , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.

[18]  Thomas Rosemeier,et al.  Interaction of vestibular, somatosensory and visual signals for postural control and motion perception under terrestrial and microgravity conditions—a conceptual model , 1998, Brain Research Reviews.

[19]  M. Ernst,et al.  Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion , 2002, Nature.

[20]  R. Welch,et al.  Effects of gravitational and optical stimulation on the perception of target elevation , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  Bruce Bridgeman,et al.  Perception & control of self-motion , 1991 .

[22]  A GRAYBIEL,et al.  Oculogravic illusion. , 1952, A.M.A. archives of ophthalmology.

[23]  M. Lemay,et al.  Manual pointing to remembered targets...but also in a remembered visual context. , 2004, Acta psychologica.

[24]  Alain Berthoz,et al.  The sensorimotor and cognitive integration of gravity , 1998, Brain Research Reviews.

[25]  David Whitney,et al.  Egocentric and allocentric localization during induced motion , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[26]  K. Duncker,et al.  Über induzierte Bewegung , 1929 .

[27]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Measurement of instantaneous perceived self-motion using continuous pointing , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[28]  H Mittelstaedt,et al.  The Role of the Otoliths in Perception of the Vertical and in Path Integration , 1999, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Hendrik A. H. C. van Veen,et al.  Touch down: The effect of artificial touch cues on orientation in microgravity , 2006, Neuroscience Letters.

[30]  M. A. Gresty,et al.  Influence of whole-body pitch tilt and kinesthetic cues on the perceived gravity-referenced eye level , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  H. Mittelstaedt.  A new solution to the problem of the subjective vertical , 1983, Naturwissenschaften.

[32]  R. B. Post,et al.  Relationship of induced motion and apparent straight-ahead shifts to optokinetic stimulus velocity , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  L. Bringoux,et al.  Judging beforehand the possibility of passing under obstacles without motion: the influence of egocentric and geocentric frames of reference , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[34]  C. Spence,et al.  The Handbook of Multisensory Processing , 2004 .

[35]  Y. Coello,et al.  Retinal and extra-retinal contribution to position coding , 2002, Behavioural Brain Research.

[36]  A. Rupert.  Tactile situation awareness system: proprioceptive prostheses for sensory deficiencies. , 2000, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[37]  J McIntyre,et al.  Reference frames and internal models for visuo-manual coordination: what can we learn from microgravity experiments? , 1998, Brain Research Reviews.

[38]  H. Ashida,et al.  Visual influence on the magnitude of somatogravic illusion evoked on advanced spatial disorientation demonstrator. , 1998, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[39]  J. Vercher,et al.  Target and hand position information in the online control of goal-directed arm movements , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

[40]  Kelvin S. Oie,et al.  Multisensory fusion: simultaneous re-weighting of vision and touch for the control of human posture. , 2002, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[41]  V. Nougier,et al.  Difference in the perception of the horizon during true and simulated tilt in the absence of semicircular canal cues , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[42]  V. Nougier,et al.  Effect of low gravitational stimulation on the perception of target elevation: Role of spatial expertise , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.