Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25462216›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Chaos in balance: non-linear measures of postural control predict individual variations in visual illusions of motion.

Deborah Apthorp, Fintan Nagle, Stephen Palmisano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Detection method for unrecognized spatial disorientation based on optical flow stimuli.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Detection of unrecognized spatial disorientation: A theoretical perspective.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2022
    Review
  8. The Impact of Optical Illusions on the Vestibular System.Journal of audiology & otology · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The Shepard-Risset glissando: music that moves you.Experimental brain research · 2017
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Deborah ApthorpResearch School of Psychology, College of Medicine, Biology & Environment, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; School of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Fintan NagleCentre for Mathematics, Physics and Engineering in the Life Sciences and Experimental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen PalmisanoSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visually-induced illusions of self-motion (vection) can be compelling for some people, but they are subject to large individual variations in strength. Do these variations depend, at least in part, on the extent to which people rely on vision to maintain their postural stability? We investigated by comparing physical posture measures to subjective vection ratings. Using a Bertec balance plate in a brightly-lit room, we measured 13 participants' excursions of the centre of foot pressure (CoP) over a 60-second period with eyes open and with eyes closed during quiet stance. Subsequently, we collected vection strength ratings for large optic flow displays while seated, using both verbal ratings and online throttle measures. We also collected measures of postural sway (changes in anterior-posterior CoP) in response to the same visual motion stimuli while standing on the plate. The magnitude of standing sway in response to expanding optic flow (in comparison to blank fixation periods) was predictive of both verbal and throttle measures for seated vection. In addition, the ratio between eyes-open and eyes-closed CoP excursions during quiet stance (using the area of postural sway) significantly predicted seated vection for both measures. Interestingly, these relationships were weaker for contracting optic flow displays, though these produced both stronger vection and more sway. Next we used a non-linear analysis (recurrence quantification analysis, RQA) of the fluctuations in anterior-posterior position during quiet stance (both with eyes closed and eyes open); this was a much stronger predictor of seated vection for both expanding and contracting stimuli. Given the complex multisensory integration involved in postural control, our study adds to the growing evidence that non-linear measures drawn from complexity theory may provide a more informative measure of postural sway than the conventional linear measures.

Indexed as

IllusionsMotionNonlinear DynamicsEvoked Potentials, VisualEyeFemaleFootHumansMaleMotion PerceptionPostural BalancePressureYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25462216
PMCPMC4252150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.