ArticlePloS one2015
Human Vection Perception Using Inertial Nulling and Certainty Estimation: The Effect of Migraine History.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of timing delay between visual and vestibular stimuli on heading perception.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Article
- Roll vection in migraine and controls using inertial nulling and certainty estimate techniques.PloS one · 2017Article
- Article
- Physical therapy and migraine: musculoskeletal and balance dysfunctions and their relevance for clinical practice.Brazilian journal of physical therapyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Vection is an illusory perception of self-motion that can occur when visual motion fills the majority of the visual field. This study examines the effect of the duration of visual field movement (VFM) on the perceived strength of self-motion using an inertial nulling (IN) and a magnitude estimation technique based on the certainty that motion occurred (certainty estimation, CE). These techniques were then used to investigate the association between migraine diagnosis and the strength of perceived vection. Visual star-field stimuli consistent with either looming or receding motion were presented for 1, 4, 8 or 16s. Subjects reported the perceived direction of self-motion during the final 1s of the stimulus. For the IN method, an inertial nulling motion was delivered during this final 1s of the visual stimulus, and subjects reported the direction of perceived self-motion during this final second. The magnitude of inertial motion was varied adaptively to determine the point of subjective equality (PSE) at which forward or backward responses were equally likely. For the CE trials the same range of VFM was used but without inertial motion and subjects rated their certainty of motion on a scale of 0-100. PSE determined with the IN technique depended on direction and duration of visual motion and the CE technique showed greater certainty of perceived vection with longer VFM duration. A strong correlation between CE and IN techniques was present for the 8s stimulus. There was appreciable between-subject variation in both CE and IN techniques and migraine was associated with significantly increased perception of self-motion by CE and IN at 8 and 16s. Together, these results suggest that vection may be measured by both CE and IN techniques with good correlation. The results also suggest that susceptibility to vection may be higher in subjects with a history of migraine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.