Localization of the subjective vertical during roll, pitch, and recumbent yaw body tilt

Body Pitch Together With Translational Body Motion Biases the Subjective Haptic Vertical

Accurate perception of verticality is critical for postural maintenance and successful physical interaction with the world. Although previous research has examined the independent influences of body orientation and self-motion under well-controlled laboratory conditions, these factors are constantly changing and interacting in the real world. In this study, we examine the subjective haptic vertical in a real-world scenario. Here, we report a bias of verticality perception in a field experiment on the Hong Kong Peak Tram as participants traveled on a slope ranging from 6° to 26°. Mean subjective haptic vertical (SHV) increased with slope by as much as 15°, regardless of whether the eyes were open (Experiment 1) or closed (Experiment 2). Shifting the body pitch by a fixed degree in an effort to compensate for the mountain slope failed to reduce the verticality bias (Experiment 3). These manipulations separately rule out visual and vestibular inputs about absolute body pitch as contributors to our observed bias. Observations collected on a tram traveling on level ground (Experiment 4A) or in a static dental chair with a range of inclinations similar to those encountered on the mountain tram (Experiment 4B) showed no significant deviation of the subjective vertical from gravity. We conclude that the SHV error is due to a combination of large, dynamic body pitch and translational motion. These observations made in a real-world scenario represent an incentive to neuroscientists and aviation experts alike for studying perceived verticality under field conditions and raising awareness of dangerous misperceptions of verticality when body pitch and translational self-motion come together.

Efficacy of lateral truncal tilt training with a wedge on postural vertical and activities of daily living in recovery phase after stroke: A randomized crossover trial

BACKGROUND: The subjective postural vertical (SPV) is affected by training that requires participants to maintain balance; training to achieve sitting balance may also help SPV recovery and activities of daily living (ADLs). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the medium-term effects of balance training on the postural vertical (PV) and ADLs in patients with stroke. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with stroke were enrolled in this randomized crossover trial. The outcomes were SPV, SPV with eyes opened (SPV-EO), and the Functional Independent Measure (FIM) after the 14-day intervention of experimental or control training. Experimental training consisted of a maximum lateral truncal tilt to the paretic side at 0.25 Hz with or without a 10° wedge, repeated 60 times. Repeated-measures two-way analysis of variance was performed with two factors: intervention and the intervention period. RESULTS: There was no interaction between the control condition and the PV, but there was interaction between the intervention period and using a wedge for SPV variability errors. FIM showed an interaction between the intervention period and the use of a wedge. CONCLUSIONS: Balance training while sitting with a wedge significantly improved the SPV and FIM. This improved cognition and perception, which facilitate difficult dynamic tasks in ADLs.

Psychophysical Haptic Measurement of Vertical Perception: Elucidating a Hand Sensory Bias

The primary sensory modality for probing spatial perception can vary among psychophysical paradigms. In the subjective visual vertical (SVV) task, the brain must account for the position of the eye within the orbit to generate an estimate of a visual line orientation, whereas in the subjective haptic vertical (SHV) task, the position of the hand is used to sense the orientation of a haptic bar. Here we investigated whether a hand sensory bias can affect SHV measurement. We measured SHV in 12 subjects (6 left-handed and 6 right-handed) with a forced-choice paradigm using their left and right hands separately. The SHV measurement was less accurate than the SVV measurements (-0.6 ± 0.7) and it was biased in the direction of the hand used in the task but was not affected by handedness; SHV left hand -6.8 ± 2.1° (left-handed -7.9 ± 3.6°, right-handed -5.8 ± 2.5°) and right hand 9.8 ± 1.5° (left-handed 7.4 ± 2.2°, right-handed 12.3 ± 1.8°). SHV measurement with the same hand was also affected by the haptic bar placement on the left or right side versus midline, showing a side effect (left vs midline -2.0 ± 1.3°, right vs midline 3.8 ± 1.7°). Midline SHV measures using the left and right hands were different, confirming a laterality effect (left hand -4.5 ± 1.7°, right hand 6.4 ± 2.0°). These results demonstrate a sensory bias in SHV measurement related to the effects of both hand-in-body (i.e., right vs left hand) and hand-in-space positions. Such modality-specific bias may result in disparity between SHV and SVV measurements, and therefore cannot be generalized to vertical or spatial perception.

Multisensory Interactions in Head and Body Centered Perception of Verticality

Percepts of verticality are thought to be constructed as a weighted average of multisensory inputs, but the observed weights differ considerably between studies. In the present study, we evaluate whether this can be explained by differences in how visual, somatosensory and proprioceptive cues contribute to representations of the Head In Space (HIS) and Body In Space (BIS). Participants (10) were standing on a force plate on top of a motion platform while wearing a visualization device that allowed us to artificially tilt their visual surroundings. They were presented with (in)congruent combinations of visual, platform, and head tilt, and performed Rod & Frame Test (RFT) and Subjective Postural Vertical (SPV) tasks. We also recorded postural responses to evaluate the relation between perception and balance. The perception data shows that body tilt, head tilt, and visual tilt affect the HIS and BIS in both experimental tasks. For the RFT task, visual tilt induced considerable biases (≈ 10° for 36° visual tilt) in the direction of the vertical expressed in the visual scene; for the SPV task, participants also adjusted platform tilt to correct for illusory body tilt induced by the visual stimuli, but effects were much smaller (≈ 0.25°). Likewise, postural data from the SPV task indicate participants slightly shifted their weight to counteract visual tilt (0.3° for 36° visual tilt). The data reveal a striking dissociation of visual effects between the two tasks. We find that the data can be explained well using a model where percepts of the HIS and BIS are constructed from direct signals from head and body sensors, respectively, and indirect signals based on body and head signals but corrected for perceived neck tilt. These findings show that perception of the HIS and BIS derive from the same sensory signals, but see profoundly different weighting factors. We conclude that observations of different weightings between studies likely result from querying of distinct latent constructs referenced to the body or head in space.

Effect of head roll-tilt on the subjective visual vertical in healthy participants: Towards better clinical measurement of gravity perception

OBJECTIVE

Gravity perception is an essential function for spatial orientation and postural stability; however, its assessment is not easy. We evaluated the head-tilt perception gain (HTPG, that is, mean perceptual gain [perceived/actual tilt angle] during left or right head roll-tilt conditions) and head-upright subjective visual vertical (SVV) using a simple method developed by us to investigate the characteristics of gravity perception in healthy participants.

METHODS

We measured the SVV and head roll-tilt angle during head roll-tilt within ±30° of vertical in the sitting and standing positions while the participant maintained an upright trunk (sitting, 434 participants; standing, 263 participants). We evaluated the head-upright SVV, HTPG, and laterality of the HTPG.

RESULTS

We determined the reference ranges of the absolute head-upright SVV (<2.5°), HTPG (0.80-1.25), and HTPG laterality (<10%) for the sitting position. The head-upright SVV and HTPG laterality were not influenced by sex or age. However, the HTPG was significantly greater in women than in men and in middle-aged (30-64 years) and elderly (65-88 years) participants than in young participants (18-29 years). The HTPG, but not the head-upright SVV or HTPG laterality, was significantly higher in the standing vs sitting position.

CONCLUSION

The HTPG is a novel parameter of gravity perception involving functions of the peripheral otolith and neck somatosensory systems to the central nervous system. The HTPG in healthy participants is influenced by age and sex in the sitting position and immediately increases after standing to reinforce the righting reflex for unstable posture, which was not seen in the head-upright SVV, previously considered the only parameter.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Sensorimotor impairment from a new analog of spaceflight-altered neurovestibular cues

Exposure to microgravity during spaceflight causes central reinterpretations of orientation sensory cues in astronauts, leading to sensorimotor impairment upon return to Earth. Currently there is no ground-based analog for the neurovestibular system relevant to spaceflight. We propose such an analog, which we term the "wheelchair head-immobilization paradigm" (WHIP). Subjects lie on their side on a bed fixed to a modified electric wheelchair, with their head restrained by a custom facemask. WHIP prevents any head tilt relative to gravity, which normally produces coupled stimulation to the otoliths and semicircular canals, but does not occur in microgravity. Decoupled stimulation is produced through translation and rotation on the wheelchair by the subject using a joystick. Following 12 h of WHIP exposure, subjects systematically felt illusory sensations of self-motion when making head tilts and had significant decrements in balance and locomotion function using tasks similar to those assessed in astronauts postspaceflight. These effects were not observed in our control groups without head restraint, suggesting the altered neurovestibular stimulation patterns experienced in WHIP lead to relevant central reinterpretations. We conclude by discussing the findings in light of postspaceflight sensorimotor impairment, WHIP's uses beyond a spaceflight analog, limitations, and future work.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We propose, implement, and demonstrate the feasibility of a new analog for spaceflight-altered neurovestibular stimulation. Following extended exposure to the analog, we found subjects reported illusory self-motion perception. Furthermore, they demonstrated decrements in balance and locomotion, using tasks similar to those used to assess astronaut sensorimotor performance postspaceflight.

Body orientation contributes to modelling the effects of gravity for target interception in humans

KEY POINTS

It is known that interception of targets accelerated by gravity involves internal models coupled with visual signals. Non-visual signals related to head and body orientation relative to gravity may also contribute, although their role is poorly understood. In a novel experiment, we asked pitched observers to hit a virtual target approaching with an acceleration that was either coherent or incoherent with their pitch-tilt. Initially, the timing errors were large and independent of the coherence between target acceleration and observer's pitch. With practice, however, the timing errors became substantially smaller in the coherent conditions. The results show that information about head and body orientation can contribute to modelling the effects of gravity on a moving target. Orientation cues from vestibular and somatosensory signals might be integrated with visual signals in the vestibular cortex, where the internal model of gravity is assumed to be encoded.

ABSTRACT

Interception of moving targets relies on visual signals and internal models. Less is known about the additional contribution of non-visual cues about head and body orientation relative to gravity. We took advantage of Galileo's law of motion along an incline to demonstrate the effects of vestibular and somatosensory cues about head and body orientation on interception timing. Participants were asked to hit a ball rolling in a gutter towards the eyes, resulting in image expansion. The scene was presented in a head-mounted display, without any visual information about gravity direction. In separate blocks of trials participants were pitched backwards by 20° or 60°, whereas ball acceleration was randomized across trials so as to be compatible with rolling down a slope of 20° or 60°. Initially, the timing errors were large, independently of the coherence between ball acceleration and pitch angle, consistent with responses based exclusively on visual information because visual stimuli were identical at both tilts. At the end of the experiment, however, the timing errors were systematically smaller in the coherent conditions than the incoherent ones. Moreover, the responses were significantly (P = 0.007) earlier when participants were pitched by 60° than when they were pitched by 20°. Therefore, practice with the task led to incorporation of information about head and body orientation relative to gravity for response timing. Instead, posture did not affect response timing in a control experiment in which participants hit a static target in synchrony with the last of a predictable series of stationary audiovisual stimuli.

Psychophysical Evaluation of Sensory Reweighting in Bilateral Vestibulopathy

Perception of spatial orientation is thought to rely on the brain's integration of visual, vestibular, proprioceptive, and somatosensory signals, as well as internal beliefs. When one of these signals breaks down, such as the vestibular signal in bilateral vestibulopathy, patients start compensating by relying more on the remaining cues. How these signals are reweighted in this integration process is difficult to establish, since they cannot be measured in isolation during natural tasks, are inherently noisy, and can be ambiguous or in conflict. Here, we review our recent work, combining experimental psychophysics with a reverse engineering approach, based on Bayesian inference principles, to quantify sensory noise levels and optimal (re)weighting at the individual subject level, in both patients with bilateral vestibular deficits and healthy controls. We show that these patients reweight the remaining sensory information, relying more on visual and other nonvestibular information than healthy controls in the perception of spatial orientation. This quantification approach could improve diagnostics and prognostics of multisensory integration deficits in vestibular patients, and contribute to an evaluation of rehabilitation therapies directed toward specific training programs.

Causal Inference in the Perception of Verticality

The perceptual upright is thought to be constructed by the central nervous system (CNS) as a vector sum; by combining estimates on the upright provided by the visual system and the body's inertial sensors with prior knowledge that upright is usually above the head. Recent findings furthermore show that the weighting of the respective sensory signals is proportional to their reliability, consistent with a Bayesian interpretation of a vector sum (Forced Fusion, FF). However, violations of FF have also been reported, suggesting that the CNS may rely on a single sensory system (Cue Capture, CC), or choose to process sensory signals based on inferred signal causality (Causal Inference, CI). We developed a novel alternative-reality system to manipulate visual and physical tilt independently. We tasked participants (n = 36) to indicate the perceived upright for various (in-)congruent combinations of visual-inertial stimuli, and compared models based on their agreement with the data. The results favor the CI model over FF, although this effect became unambiguous only for large discrepancies (±60°). We conclude that the notion of a vector sum does not provide a comprehensive explanation of the perception of the upright, and that CI offers a better alternative.

The Effect of Visual Experience on Perceived Haptic Verticality When Tilted in the Roll Plane

The orientation of the body in space can influence perception of verticality leading sometimes to biases consistent with priors peaked at the most common head and body orientation, that is upright. In this study, we investigate haptic perception of verticality in sighted individuals and early and late blind adults when tilted counterclockwise in the roll plane. Participants were asked to perform a stimulus orientation discrimination task with their body tilted to their left ear side 90° relative to gravity. Stimuli were presented by using a motorized haptic bar. In order to test whether different reference frames relative to the head influenced perception of verticality, we varied the position of the stimulus on the body longitudinal axis. Depending on the stimulus position sighted participants tended to have biases away or toward their body tilt. Visually impaired individuals instead show a different pattern of verticality estimations. A bias toward head and body tilt (i.e., Aubert effect) was observed in late blind individuals. Interestingly, no strong biases were observed in early blind individuals. Overall, these results posit visual sensory information to be fundamental in influencing the haptic readout of proprioceptive and vestibular information about body orientation relative to gravity. The acquisition of an idiotropic vector signaling the upright might take place through vision during development. Regarding early blind individuals, independent spatial navigation experience likely enhanced by echolocation behavior might have a role in such acquisition. In the case of participants with late onset blindness, early experience of vision might lead them to anchor their visually acquired priors to the haptic modality with no disambiguation between head and body references as observed in sighted individuals (Fraser et al., 2015). With our study, we aim to investigate haptic perception of gravity direction in unusual body tilts when vision is absent due to visual impairment. Insofar, our findings throw light on the influence of proprioceptive/vestibular sensory information on haptic perceived verticality in blind individuals showing how this phenomenon is affected by visual experience.

Perception of Upright: Multisensory Convergence and the Role of Temporo-Parietal Cortex

We inherently maintain a stable perception of the world despite frequent changes in the head, eye, and body positions. Such "orientation constancy" is a prerequisite for coherent spatial perception and sensorimotor planning. As a multimodal sensory reference, perception of upright represents neural processes that subserve orientation constancy through integration of sensory information encoding the eye, head, and body positions. Although perception of upright is distinct from perception of body orientation, they share similar neural substrates within the cerebral cortical networks involved in perception of spatial orientation. These cortical networks, mainly within the temporo-parietal junction, are crucial for multisensory processing and integration that generate sensory reference frames for coherent perception of self-position and extrapersonal space transformations. In this review, we focus on these neural mechanisms and discuss (i) neurobehavioral aspects of orientation constancy, (ii) sensory models that address the neurophysiology underlying perception of upright, and (iii) the current evidence for the role of cerebral cortex in perception of upright and orientation constancy, including findings from the neurological disorders that affect cortical function.

Flat shoes increase neurogenesis

The impairment of the horizontal is caused by elevation of the heel of the foot from the ground. Receptors in the soles of the feet provide a mapping of body orientation to the upright, and is identical to Mittelstaedt's idiotropic tendency. Initiation of gait wearing flat shoes without elevation of the heel is sufficient to change to a truthful horizontal. Using flat shoes increases neurogenesis and leads to a decreased frequency of diseases of the nervous system.

Gravity in the Brain as a Reference for Space and Time Perception

Moving and interacting with the environment require a reference for orientation and a scale for calibration in space and time. There is a wide variety of environmental clues and calibrated frames at different locales, but the reference of gravity is ubiquitous on Earth. The pull of gravity on static objects provides a plummet which, together with the horizontal plane, defines a three-dimensional Cartesian frame for visual images. On the other hand, the gravitational acceleration of falling objects can provide a time-stamp on events, because the motion duration of an object accelerated by gravity over a given path is fixed. Indeed, since ancient times, man has been using plumb bobs for spatial surveying, and water clocks or pendulum clocks for time keeping. Here we review behavioral evidence in favor of the hypothesis that the brain is endowed with mechanisms that exploit the presence of gravity to estimate the spatial orientation and the passage of time. Several visual and non-visual (vestibular, haptic, visceral) cues are merged to estimate the orientation of the visual vertical. However, the relative weight of each cue is not fixed, but depends on the specific task. Next, we show that an internal model of the effects of gravity is combined with multisensory signals to time the interception of falling objects, to time the passage through spatial landmarks during virtual navigation, to assess the duration of a gravitational motion, and to judge the naturalness of periodic motion under gravity.

The Subjective Visual Vertical and the Subjective Haptic Vertical Access Different Gravity Estimates

The subjective visual vertical (SVV) and the subjective haptic vertical (SHV) both claim to probe the underlying perception of gravity. However, when the body is roll tilted these two measures evoke different patterns of errors with SVV generally becoming biased towards the body (A-effect, named for its discoverer, Hermann Rudolph Aubert) and SHV remaining accurate or becoming biased away from the body (E-effect, short for Entgegengesetzt-effect, meaning “opposite”, i.e., opposite to the A-effect). We compared the two methods in a series of five experiments and provide evidence that the two measures access two different but related estimates of gravitational vertical. Experiment 1 compared SVV and SHV across three levels of whole-body tilt and found that SVV showed an A-effect at larger tilts while SHV was accurate. Experiment 2 found that tilting either the head or the trunk independently produced an A-effect in SVV while SHV remained accurate when the head was tilted on an upright body but showed an A-effect when the body was tilted below an upright head. Experiment 3 repeated these head/body configurations in the presence of vestibular noise induced by using disruptive galvanic vestibular stimulation (dGVS). dGVS abolished both SVV and SHV A-effects while evoking a massive E-effect in the SHV head tilt condition. Experiments 4 and 5 show that SVV and SHV do not combine in an optimally statistical fashion, but when vibration is applied to the dorsal neck muscles, integration becomes optimal. Overall our results suggest that SVV and SHV access distinct underlying gravity percepts based primarily on head and body position information respectively, consistent with a model proposed by Clemens and colleagues.

Symmetries of a generic utricular projection: neural connectivity and the distribution of utricular information

Sensory contribution to perception and action depends on both sensory receptors and the organization of pathways (or projections) reaching the central nervous system. Unlike the semicircular canals that are divided into three discrete sensitivity directions, the utricle has a relatively complicated anatomical structure, including sensitivity directions over essentially 360° of a curved, two-dimensional disk. The utricle is not flat, and we do not assume it to be. Directional sensitivity of individual utricular afferents decreases in a cosine-like fashion from peak excitation for movement in one direction to a null or near null response for a movement in an orthogonal direction. Directional sensitivity varies slowly between neighboring cells except within the striolar region that separates the medial from the lateral zone, where the directional selectivity abruptly reverses along the reversal line. Utricular primary afferent pathways reach the vestibular nuclei and cerebellum and, in many cases, converge on target cells with semicircular canal primary afferents and afference from other sources. Mathematically, some canal pathways are known to be characterized by symmetry groups related to physical space. These groups structure rotational information and movement. They divide the target neural center into distinct populations according to the innervation patterns they receive. Like canal pathways, utricular pathways combine symmetries from the utricle with those from target neural centers. This study presents a generic set of transformations drawn from the known structure of the utricle and therefore likely to be found in utricular pathways, but not exhaustive of utricular pathway symmetries. This generic set of transformations forms a 32-element group that is a semi-direct product of two simple abelian groups. Subgroups of the group include order-four elements corresponding to discrete rotations. Evaluation of subgroups allows us to functionally identify the spatial implications of otolith and canal symmetries regarding action and perception. Our results are discussed in relation to observed utricular pathways, including those convergent with canal pathways. Oculomotor and other sensorimotor systems are organized according to canal planes. However, the utricle is evolutionarily prior to the canals and may provide a more fundamental spatial framework for canal pathways as well as for movement. The fullest purely otolithic pathway is likely that which reaches the lumbar spine via Deiters' cells in the lateral vestibular nucleus. It will be of great interest to see whether symmetries predicted from the utricle are identified within this pathway.

Human perceptual overestimation of whole body roll tilt in hypergravity

Hypergravity provides a unique environment to study human perception of orientation. We utilized a long-radius centrifuge to study perception of both static and dynamic whole body roll tilt in hypergravity, across a range of angles, frequencies, and net gravito-inertial levels (referred to as G levels). While studies of static tilt perception in hypergravity have been published, this is the first to measure dynamic tilt perception (i.e., with time-varying canal stimulation) in hypergravity using a continuous matching task. In complete darkness, subjects reported their orientation perception using a haptic task, whereby they attempted to align a hand-held bar with their perceived horizontal. Static roll tilt was overestimated in hypergravity, with more overestimation at larger angles and higher G levels, across the conditions tested (overestimated by ∼35% per additional G level, P < 0.001). As our primary contribution, we show that dynamic roll tilt was also consistently overestimated in hypergravity (P < 0.001) at all angles and frequencies tested, again with more overestimation at higher G levels. The overestimation was similar to that for static tilts at low angular velocities but decreased at higher angular velocities (P = 0.006), consistent with semicircular canal sensory integration. To match our findings, we propose a modification to a previous Observer-type canal-otolith interaction model. Specifically, our data were better modeled by including the hypothesis that the central nervous system treats otolith stimulation in the utricular plane differently than stimulation out of the utricular plane. This modified model was able to simulate quantitatively both the static and the dynamic roll tilt overestimation in hypergravity measured experimentally.

The effects of luminance, size, and duration of a visual line on apparent vertical while the head is being inclined in roll

We determined orientation of a line that is seen to be vertical (i.e., apparent vertical) while the head is inclined with the trunk upright. In this condition, it has been documented that apparent vertical is independent of head orientation (i.e., orientation constancy) or is in a direction opposite to the head inclination (i.e., the Müller effect). In this study, we have focused not only on the effect of head inclination but also on visual parameters of the line that was used to indicate apparent vertical. As the visual parameters, size (5.5° and 22° in visual angle), duration (0.1 s, 3 s, and no time limit), and luminance (0.026, 0.003, and 0.001 cd/m(2) against total darkness) were varied with the head being inclined within ±30°. The main findings were: 1) the Müller effect was at best 2°, but the head inclination was judged to be much larger than it was; 2) the correlation between apparent vertical and the judgmental error of head inclination was significant but was not very high (r = -0.20); 3) the line of short duration or of low luminance facilitated the Müller effect; and 4) the magnitude of the Müller effect was large when the head was inclined to the right rather than to the left. These findings were compared with the predictions from the theory of allowing for apparent head position, the theory of ocular countertorsion, and the sensory-tonic field theory. Many aspects of the results were consistent with the predictions from the sensory-tonic field theory.

To pass or not to pass: more a question of body orientation than visual cues

This study investigated the influence of pitch body tilt on judging the possibility of passing under high obstacles in the presence of an illusory horizontal self-motion. Seated subjects tilted at various body orientations were asked to estimate the possibility of passing under a projected bar (i.e., a parking barrier), while imagining a forward whole-body displacement normal to gravity. This task was performed under two visual conditions, providing either no visual surroundings or a translational horizontal optic flow that stopped just before the barrier appeared. The results showed a main overestimation of the possibility of passing under the bar in both cases and most importantly revealed a strong influence of body orientation despite the visual specification of horizontal self-motion by optic flow (i.e., both visual conditions yielded a comparable body tilt effect). Specifically, the subjective passability was proportionally deviated towards the body tilt by 46% of its magnitude when facing a horizontal optic flow and 43% without visual surroundings. This suggests that the egocentric attraction exerted by body tilt when referring the subjective passability to horizontal self-motion still persists even when anchoring horizontally related visual cues are displayed. These findings are discussed in terms of interaction between spatial references. The link between the reliability of available sensory inputs and the weight attributed to each reference is also addressed.

Disruption of spatial task performance in anorexia nervosa

In anorexia nervosa (AN), body distortions have been associated with parietal cortex (PC) dysfunction. The PC is the anatomical substrate for a supramodal reference framework involved in spatial orientation constancy. Here, we sought to evaluate spatial orientation constancy and the perception of body orientation in AN patients. In the present study, we investigated the effect of passive lateral body inclination on the visual and tactile subjective vertical (SV) and body Z-axis in 25 AN patients and 25 healthy controls. Subjects performed visual- and tactile-spatial judgments of axis orientations in an upright position and tilted 90° clockwise or counterclockwise. We observed a significant deviation of the tactile and visual SV towards the body (an A-effect) under tilted conditions, suggesting a multisensory impairment in spatial orientation. Deviation of the Z-axis in the direction of the tilt was also observed in the AN group. The greater A-effect in AN patients may reflect reduced interoceptive awareness and thus inadequate consideration of gravitational inflow. Furthermore, marked body weight loss could decrease the somatosensory inputs required for spatial orientation. Our study results suggest that spatial references are impaired in AN. This may be due to particular integration of visual, tactile and gravitational information (e.g. vestibular and proprioceptive cues) in the PC.

Differential effects of visual feedback on subjective visual vertical accuracy and precision

The brain constructs an internal estimate of the gravitational vertical by integrating multiple sensory signals. In darkness, systematic head-roll dependent errors in verticality estimates, as measured by the subjective visual vertical (SVV), occur. We hypothesized that visual feedback after each trial results in increased accuracy, as physiological adjustment errors (A-/E-effect) are likely based on central computational mechanisms and investigated whether such improvements were related to adaptational shifts of perceived vertical or to a higher cognitive strategy. We asked 12 healthy human subjects to adjust a luminous arrow to vertical in various head-roll positions (0 to 120deg right-ear down, 15deg steps). After each adjustment visual feedback was provided (lights on, display of previous adjustment and of an earth-vertical cross). Control trials consisted of SVV adjustments without feedback. At head-roll angles with the largest A-effect (90, 105, and 120deg), errors were reduced significantly (p<0.001) by visual feedback, i.e. roll under-compensation decreased, while precision of SVV was not significantly (p>0.05) influenced. In seven subjects an additional session with two consecutive blocks (first with, then without visual feedback) was completed at 90, 105 and 120deg head-roll. In these positions the error-reduction by the previous visual feedback block remained significant over the consecutive 18-24 min (post-feedback block), i.e., was still significantly (p<0.002) different from the control trials. Eleven out of 12 subjects reported having consciously added a bias to their perceived vertical based on visual feedback in order to minimize errors. We conclude that improvements of SVV accuracy by visual feedback, which remained effective after removal of feedback for ≥18 min, rather resulted from a cognitive strategy than by adapting the internal estimate of the gravitational vertical. The mechanisms behind the SVV therefore, remained stable, which is also supported by the fact that SVV precision - depending mostly on otolith input - was not affected by visual feedback.

Hysteresis of haptic vertical and straight ahead in healthy human subjects

Background

The subjective haptic vertical (SHV) task requires subjects to adjust the roll orientation of an object, mostly in the roll plane, in such a way that it is parallel to perceived direction of gravity. Previously we found a tendency for clockwise rod rotations to deviate counter-clockwise and vice versa, indicating hysteresis. However, the contributing factors remained unclear. To clarify this we characterized the SHV in terms of handedness, hand used, direction of hand rotation, type of grasping (wrap vs. precision grip) and gender, and compared findings with perceived straight-ahead (PSA). Healthy subjects repetitively performed adjustments along SHV (n = 21) and PSA (n = 10) in complete darkness.

Results

For both SHV and PSA significant effects of the hand used and the direction of rod/plate rotation were found. The latter effect was similar for SHV and PSA, leading to significantly larger counter-clockwise shifts (relative to true earth-vertical and objective straight-ahead) for clockwise rotations compared to counter-clockwise rotations irrespective of the handedness and the type of grip. The effect of hand used, however, was opposite in the two tasks: while the SHV showed a counter-clockwise bias when the right hand was used and no bias for the left hand, in the PSA a counter-clockwise bias was obtained for the left hand without a bias for the right hand. No effects of grip and handedness (studied for SHV only) on accuracy were observed, however, SHV precision was significantly (p < 0.005) better in right-handed subjects compared to left-handed subjects and in male subjects.

Conclusions

Unimanual haptic tasks require control for the hand used and the type of grip as these factors significantly affect task performance. Furthermore, aligning objects with the SHV and PSA resulted in systematic direction-dependent deviations that could not be attributed to handedness, the hand used, or the type of grip. These deviations are consistent with hysteresis and are likely not related to gravitational pull, as they were observed in both planes tested, i.e. parallel and perpendicular to gravity. Short-term adaptation that shifts attention towards previous adjustment positions may provide an explanation for such biases of spatial orientation in both the horizontal and frontal plane.

Egocentric and allocentric alignment tasks are affected by otolith input

Gravicentric visual alignments become less precise when the head is roll-tilted relative to gravity, which is most likely due to decreasing otolith sensitivity. To align a luminous line with the perceived gravity vector (gravicentric task) or the perceived body-longitudinal axis (egocentric task), the roll orientation of the line on the retina and the torsional position of the eyes relative to the head must be integrated to obtain the line orientation relative to the head. Whether otolith input contributes to egocentric tasks and whether the modulation of variability is restricted to vision-dependent paradigms is unknown. In nine subjects we compared precision and accuracy of gravicentric and egocentric alignments in various roll positions (upright, 45°, and 75° right-ear down) using a luminous line (visual paradigm) in darkness. Trial-to-trial variability doubled for both egocentric and gravicentric alignments when roll-tilted. Two mechanisms might explain the roll-angle–dependent modulation in egocentric tasks: 1) Modulating variability in estimated ocular torsion, which reflects the roll-dependent precision of otolith signals, affects the precision of estimating the line orientation relative to the head; this hypothesis predicts that variability modulation is restricted to vision-dependent alignments. 2) Estimated body-longitudinal reflects the roll-dependent variability of perceived earth-vertical. Gravicentric cues are thereby integrated regardless of the task's reference frame. To test the two hypotheses the visual paradigm was repeated using a rod instead (haptic paradigm). As with the visual paradigm, precision significantly decreased with increasing head roll for both tasks. These findings propose that the CNS integrates input coded in a gravicentric frame to solve egocentric tasks. In analogy to gravicentric tasks, where trial-to-trial variability is mainly influenced by the properties of the otolith afferents, egocentric tasks may also integrate otolith input. Such a shared mechanism for both paradigms and frames of reference is supported by the significantly correlated trial-to-trial variabilities.

Spatial orientation constancy is impaired in anorexia nervosa

In anorexia nervosa (AN), body distortions have been associated with parietal cortex (PC) dysfunction. The PC is also the anatomical substrate of a supramodal reference framework involved in spatial orientation constancy. Given the impaired spatial orientation constancy found in hemineglect, we sought to determine whether similar disturbances could be observed in anorexic patients. We investigated the effect of passive lateral body inclination on the tactile subjective vertical (SV). Fifty participants (25 AN patients and 25 healthy controls) were asked to manually set a rod into the vertical position under three postural conditions. For tilted conditions, we observed a significant deviation of the tactile SV towards the body. This effect was abnormally accentuated in AN patients and might be caused by higher weighting with respect to the egocentric frame of reference. Our findings reinforce the role of the PC in AN and suggest that this dysfunction affects spatial orientation constancy as well as body boundaries.

Multisensory processing in spatial orientation: an inverse probabilistic approach

Most evidence that the brain uses Bayesian inference to integrate noisy sensory signals optimally has been obtained by showing that the noise levels in each modality separately can predict performance in combined conditions. Such a forward approach is difficult to implement when the various signals cannot be measured in isolation, as in spatial orientation, which involves the processing of visual, somatosensory, and vestibular cues. Instead, we applied an inverse probabilistic approach, based on optimal observer theory. Our goal was to investigate whether the perceptual differences found when probing two different states--body-in-space and head-in-space orientation--can be reconciled by a shared scheme using all available sensory signals. Using a psychometric approach, seven human subjects were tested on two orientation estimates at tilts < 120°: perception of body tilt [subjective body tilt (SBT)] and perception of visual vertical [subjective visual vertical (SVV)]. In all subjects, the SBT was more accurate than the SVV, which showed substantial systematic errors for tilt angles beyond 60°. Variability increased with tilt angle in both tasks, but was consistently lower in the SVV. The sensory integration model fitted both datasets very nicely. A further experiment, in which supine subjects judged their head orientation relative to the body, independently confirmed the predicted head-on-body noise by the model. Model predictions based on the derived noise properties from the various modalities were also consistent with previously published deficits in vestibular and somatosensory patients. We conclude that Bayesian computations can account for the typical differences in spatial orientation judgments associated with different task requirements.

Precision and accuracy of the subjective haptic vertical in the roll plane

BACKGROUND

When roll-tilted, the subjective visual vertical (SVV) deviates up to 40 degrees from earth-vertical and trial-to-trial variability increases with head roll. Imperfections in the central processing of visual information were postulated to explain these roll-angle dependent errors. For experimental conditions devoid of visual input, e.g. adjustments of body posture or of an object along vertical in darkness, significantly smaller errors were noted. Whereas the accuracy of verticality adjustments seems to depend strongly on the paradigm, we hypothesize that the precision, i.e. the inverse of trial-to-trial variability, is less influenced by the experimental setup and mainly reflects properties of the otoliths. Here we measured the subjective haptic vertical (SHV) and compared findings with previously reported SVV data. Twelve healthy right-handed human subjects (handedness assessed based on subjects' verbal report) adjusted a rod with the right hand along perceived earth-vertical during static head roll-tilts (0-360 degrees , steps of 20 degrees ).

RESULTS

SHV adjustments showed a tendency for clockwise rod rotations to deviate counter-clockwise and for counter-clockwise rod rotations to deviate clockwise, indicating hysteresis. Clockwise rod rotations resulted in counter-clockwise shifts of perceived earth-vertical up to -11.7 degrees and an average counter-clockwise SHV shift over all roll angles of -3.3 degrees (+/- 11.0 degrees ; +/- 1 StdDev). Counter-clockwise rod rotations yielded peak SHV deviations in clockwise direction of 8.9 degrees and an average clockwise SHV shift over all roll angles of 1.8 degrees (+/- 11.1 degrees ). Trial-to-trial variability was minimal in upright position, increased with increasing roll (peaking around 120-140 degrees ) and decreased to intermediate values in upside-down orientation. Compared to SVV, SHV variability near upright and upside-down was non-significantly (p > 0.05) larger; both showed an m-shaped pattern of variability as a function of roll position.

CONCLUSIONS

The reduction of adjustment errors by eliminating visual input supports the notion that deviations between perceived and actual earth-vertical in roll-tilted positions arise from central processing of visual information. The shared roll-tilt dependent modulation of trial-to-trial variability for both SVV and SHV, on the other hand, indicates that the perception of earth-verticality is dominated by the same sensory signal, i.e. the otolith signal, independent of whether the line/rod setting is under visual or tactile control.

Kinaesthetic and visual perceptions of orientations

In the present study we compare the kinaesthetic and visual perception of the vertical and horizontal orientations (subjective vertical and subjective horizontal) to determine whether the perception of cardinal orientations is amodal or modality-specific. The influence of methodological factors on the accuracy of perception is also investigated by varying the stimulus position as a function of its initial tilt (clockwise or counterclockwise) and its angle (22 degrees, 45 degrees, 67 degrees, and 90 degrees) in respect to its physical orientation. Ten participants estimated the vertical and horizontal orientations by repositioning a rod in the kinaesthetic condition or two luminous points, forming a 'virtual line' in the visual condition. Results within the visual modality replicated previous findings by showing that estimation of the physical orientations is very accurate regardless of the initial position of the virtual line. In contrast, the perception of orientation with the kinaesthetic modality was less accurate and systematically influenced by the angle between the initial position of the rod and the required orientation. The findings question the assumption that the subjective vertical is derived from an internal representation of gravity and highlight the necessity of taking into account methodological factors in studies on subjective orientations.

Interaction between reference frames during subjective vertical estimates in a tilted immersive virtual environment

Numerous studies highlighted the influence of a tilted visual frame on the perception of the visual vertical ('rod-and-frame effect' or RFE). Here, we investigated whether this influence can be modified in a virtual immersive environment (CAVE-like) by the structure of the visual scene and by the adjustment mode allowing visual or visuo-kinaesthetic control (V and VK mode, respectively). The way this influence might dynamically evolve throughout the adjustment was also investigated in two groups of subjects with the head unrestrained or restrained upright. RFE observed in the immersive environment was qualitatively comparable to that obtained in a real display (portable rod-and-frame test; Oltman 1968, Perceptual and Motor Skills 26 503-506). Moreover, RFE in the immersive environment appeared significantly influenced by the structure of the visual scene and by the adjustment mode: the more geometrical and meaningful 3-D features the visual scene contained, the greater the RFE. The RFE was also greater when the subjective vertical was assessed under visual control only, as compared to visuo-kinaesthetic control. Furthermore, the results showed a significant RFE increase throughout the adjustment, indicating that the influence of the visual scene upon subjective vertical might dynamically evolve over time. The latter effect was more pronounced for structured visual scenes and under visuo-kinaesthetic control. On the other hand, no difference was observed between the two groups of subjects having the head restrained or unrestrained. These results are discussed in terms of dynamic combination between coexisting reference frames for spatial orientation.

Angular displacement perception modulated by force background

We had recumbent subjects (n = 7) indicate the amplitude of imposed, passive yaw-axis body rotations in the 0, 1, and 1.8 g background force levels generated during parabolic flight maneuvers. The blindfolded subject, restrained in a cradle, aligned a gravity-neutral pointer with the subjective vertical while in an initial position and then tried to keep it aligned with the same external direction during a body rotation, lasting less than 1.5 s about the z-axis 30 degrees, 60 degrees, or 120 degrees in amplitude. All the rotations were above semicircular threshold levels for eliciting perception of angular displacement under terrestrial test conditions. In 1 and 1.8 g test conditions, subjects were able to indicate both the subjective vertical and the amplitude of the body rotation reasonably accurately. By contrast in 0 g, when indicating the subjective vertical, they aligned the pointer with the body midline and kept it nearly aligned with their midline during the subsequent body tilts. They also reported feeling supine throughout the 0 g test periods. The attenuation of apparent self-displacement in 0 g is discussed in terms of (1) a possible failure of integration of semicircular canal velocity signals, (2) a contribution of somatosensory pressure and contact cues, and (3) gravicentric versus body-centric reference frames. The significance of the findings for predicting and preventing motion sickness and disorientation in orbital space flight and in rotating artificial gravity environments is discussed.

Perceived self-orientation in allocentric and egocentric space: effects of visual and physical tilt on saccadic and tactile measures

Do physical tilt and tilt of the visual environment affect perception of allocentric and egocentric space? We addressed this question using two perceptual-motor tasks: alignment of a tactile rod (ROD) and saccadic eye movements (EM). Nine participants indicated the vertical axis of their heads (egocentric task), as well as the direction of gravity (allocentric task). Head orientation (+/-60 degrees and 0 degrees) and visual environment orientation (+/-120 degrees, +/-60 degrees and 0 degrees) were independently manipulated in the fronto-planar roll plane. ROD and EM estimates of both allocentric and egocentric reference directions varied with head and room orientation. Physical tilt dominated allocentric estimates in the dark where overestimates of physical tilt were noted up to 11 degrees using both measures. Allocentric ROD and EM estimates were significantly correlated across all head orientations (r=.70, p<.01) but only when upright for egocentric estimates (r=.38, p<.01). The relative contributions of the visual environment, gravity's direction and long-body axis to the estimation of allocentric and egocentric directions were determined by vector modeling. This modeling found that vision determined about 14% of the allocentric ROD and EM estimates, that the long-axis body reference played no discernible role, and that the largest factor was gravity, the effective direction of which was non-veridical. For egocentric estimates, vision contributed about 3% with the largest factor being the body reference. We conclude that perception of allocentric and egocentric space is likely influenced by multiple senses that define common egocentric and allocentric frames of reference accessible for saccadic and tactile estimates of perceived self-orientation.

Roll tilt psychophysics in rhesus monkeys during vestibular and visual stimulation

How does the brain calculate the spatial orientation of the head relative to gravity? Psychophysical measurements are critical to investigate this question, but such measurements have been limited to humans. In non-human primates, behavioral measures have focused on vestibular-mediated eye movements, which do not reflect percepts of head orientation. We have therefore developed a method to measure tilt perception in monkeys, derived from the subjective visual vertical (SVV) task. Two rhesus monkeys were trained to align a light bar parallel to gravity and performed this task during roll tilts, centrifugation, and roll optokinetic stimulation. The monkeys accurately aligned the light bar with gravity during static roll tilts but also demonstrated small orientation-dependent misperceptions of the tilt angle analogous to those measured in humans. When the gravito-inertial force (GIF) rotated dynamically in the roll plane, SVV responses remained closely aligned with the GIF during roll tilt of the head (coplanar canal rotational cues present), lagged slightly behind the GIF during variable-radius centrifugation (no canal cues present), and shifted gradually during fixed-radius centrifugation (orthogonal yaw canal cues present). SVV responses also deviated away from the earth-vertical during roll optokinetic stimulation. These results demonstrate that rotational cues derived from the semicircular canals and visual system have prominent effects on psychophysical measurements of roll tilt in rhesus monkeys and therefore suggest that a central synthesis of graviceptive and rotational cues contributes to percepts of head orientation relative to gravity in non-human primates.

Body-tilt and visual verticality perception during multiple cycles of roll rotation

To assess the effects of degrading canal cues for dynamic spatial orientation in human observers, we tested how judgments about visual-line orientation in space (subjective visual vertical task, SVV) and estimates of instantaneous body tilt (subjective body-tilt task, SBT) develop in the course of three cycles of constant-velocity roll rotation. These abilities were tested across the entire tilt range in separate experiments. For comparison, we also obtained SVV data during static roll tilt. We found that as tilt increased, dynamic SVV responses became strongly biased toward the head pole of the body axis (A-effect), as if body tilt was underestimated. However, on entering the range of near-inverse tilts, SVV responses adopted a bimodal pattern, alternating between A-effects (biased toward head-pole) and E-effects (biased toward feet-pole). Apart from an onset effect, this tilt-dependent pattern of systematic SVV errors repeated itself in subsequent rotation cycles with little sign of worsening performance. Static SVV responses were qualitatively similar and consistent with previous reports but showed smaller A-effects. By contrast, dynamic SBT errors were small and unimodal, indicating that errors in visual-verticality estimates were not caused by errors in body-tilt estimation. We discuss these results in terms of predictions from a canal-otolith interaction model extended with a leaky integrator and an egocentric bias mechanism. We conclude that the egocentric-bias mechanism becomes more manifest during constant velocity roll-rotation and that perceptual errors due to incorrect disambiguation of the otolith signal are small despite the decay of canal signals.

Shared computational mechanism for tilt compensation accounts for biased verticality percepts in motion and pattern vision

To determine the direction of object motion in external space, the brain must combine retinal motion signals and information about the orientation of the eyes in space. We assessed the accuracy of this process in eight laterally tilted subjects who aligned the motion direction of a random-dot pattern (30% coherence, moving at 6 degrees /s) with their perceived direction of gravity (motion vertical) in otherwise complete darkness. For comparison, we also tested the ability to align an adjustable visual line (12 degrees diameter) to the direction of gravity (line vertical). For small head tilts (<40 degrees ), systematic errors in either task were almost negligible. In contrast, tilts >60 degrees revealed a pattern of large systematic errors (often >30 degrees ) that was virtually identical in both tasks. Regression analysis confirmed that mean errors in the two tasks were closely related, with slopes close to 1.0 and correlations >0.89. Control experiments ruled out that motion settings were based on processing of individual single-dot paths. We conclude that the conversion of both motion direction and line orientation on the retina into a spatial frame of reference involves a shared computational strategy. Simulations with two spatial-orientation models suggest that the pattern of systematic errors may be the downside of an optimal strategy for dealing with imperfections in the tilt signal that is implemented before the reference-frame transformation.

Influence of gravitoinertial force level on the subjective vertical during recumbent yaw axis body tilt

We tilted recumbent subjects at various angles about their yaw (foot to head) axis and had them indicate the direction of their subjective vertical and apparent head midline about the same axis. One set of tests was conducted during parabolic flight maneuvers where the background gravitoinertial acceleration varied from 0 to 1.8g. The blindfolded subjects (n = 6) were tested supine and at tilts of 60 degrees and 30 degrees left and right about their horizontal long body axis. They used a gravity neutral joystick to indicate their subjective vertical or their head midline continuously from the high force through the 0g portions of parabolas. In 0g, all subjects felt supine and oriented the joystick perpendicular to their body when indicating the subjective vertical. This points to strong influences of the symmetric somatic touch and pressure cues from the apparatus on orientation when the otolith organs are unloaded. In contrast to the settings in 0g, settings of the subjective vertical in 1g and 1.8g varied as a function of body orientation. However, the settings did not differ between 1g and 1.8g test conditions. Subjective vertical judgments were also made by subjects (n = 11) in the Brandeis slow rotation room, with the room stationary and rotating at a speed that produced a 2g resultant of gravitational and centrifugal acceleration. There were no differences between settings of the subjective vertical made in 1g and 2g. The similarity of 1g and hyper-g settings during recumbent yaw tilts, both in parabolic flight and in the rotating room, contrasts with the previously observed, strong influence which force levels above 1g have on settings of the subjective vertical during tilt of the body in pitch or roll. The findings for all three axes are consistent with a recently developed model of static spatial orientation.

Perception of longitudinal body axis in microgravity during parabolic flight

It has been proposed that an internal representation of body vertical has a prominent role in spatial orientation. This investigation investigated the ability of human subjects to accurately locate their longitudinal body axis (an imaginary straight body midline running from head to toes) while free-floating in microgravity. Subjects were tested in-flight, as well as on ground in normal gravity in both the upright and supine orientations to provide baseline measurements. The subjects wore a goggle device and were in total darkness. They used knobs to rotate two luminous lines until they were parallel to the subjective direction of their longitudinal body axis, in the roll (right/left) and the pitch (forward/backward) planes. Results showed that the error between the perceived and the objective direction of the longitudinal body axis was significantly larger in microgravity than in normal gravity. This error in this egocentric frame of reference is presumably due to the absence of somatosensory cues when free-floating. Mechanical pressure on the chest using an airbag reduced the error in perception of the longitudinal body axis in microgravity, thus improving spatial orientation.

Mechanisms of human static spatial orientation

We have developed a tri-axial model of spatial orientation applicable to static 1g and non-1g environments. The model attempts to capture the mechanics of otolith organ transduction of static linear forces and the perceptual computations performed on these sensor signals to yield subjective orientation of the vertical direction relative to the head. Our model differs from other treatments that involve computing the gravitoinertial force (GIF) vector in three independent dimensions. The perceptual component of our model embodies the idea that the central nervous system processes utricular and saccular stimuli as if they were produced by a GIF vector equal to 1g, even when it differs in magnitude, because in the course of evolution living creatures have always experienced gravity as a constant. We determine just two independent angles of head orientation relative to the vertical that are GIF dependent, the third angle being derived from the first two and being GIF independent. Somatosensory stimulation is used to resolve our vestibular model's ambiguity of the up-down directions. Our otolith mechanical model takes into account recently established non-linear behavior of the force-displacement relationship of the otoconia, and possible otoconial deflections that are not co-linear with the direction of the input force (cross-talk). The free parameters of our model relate entirely to the mechanical otolith model. They were determined by fitting the integrated mechanical/perceptual model to subjective indications of the vertical obtained during pitch and roll body tilts in 1g and 2g force backgrounds and during recumbent yaw tilts in 1g. The complete data set was fit with very little residual error. A novel prediction of the model is that background force magnitude either lower or higher than 1g will not affect subjective vertical judgments during recumbent yaw tilt. These predictions have been confirmed in recent parabolic flight experiments.