ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2017
Effect of eye position during human visual-vestibular integration of heading perception.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multisensory coding of self-motion and its contribution to navigation.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2025Review
- Article
- Psychometrics of inertial heading perception.Journal of vestibular research : equilibrium & orientation · 2024Article
- Cortical Mechanisms of Multisensory Linear Self-motion Perception.Neuroscience bulletin · 2023Review
- Visuo-tactile heading perception.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Vestibular Precision at the Level of Perception, Eye Movements, Posture, and Neurons.Neuroscience · 2021Review
- Effect of timing delay between visual and vestibular stimuli on heading perception.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Article
- Common causation and offset effects in human visual-inertial heading direction integration.Journal of neurophysiology · 2020Article
- Effect of range of heading differences on human visual-inertial heading estimation.Experimental brain research · 2019Article
- Vision Does Not Necessarily Stabilize the Head in Space During Continuous Postural Perturbations.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- Vestibular System and Self-Motion.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2018Review
- Effect of vibration during visual-inertial integration on human heading perception during eccentric gaze.PloS one · 2018Article
- Distinct spatial coordinate of visual and vestibular heading signals in macaque FEFsem and MSTd.eLife · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Visual and inertial stimuli provide heading discrimination cues. Integration of these multisensory stimuli has been demonstrated to depend on their relative reliability. However, the reference frame of visual stimuli is eye centered while inertia is head centered, and it remains unclear how these are reconciled with combined stimuli. Seven human subjects completed a heading discrimination task consisting of a 2-s translation with a peak velocity of 16 cm/s. Eye position was varied between 0° and ±25° left/right. Experiments were done with inertial motion, visual motion, or a combined visual-inertial motion. Visual motion coherence varied between 35% and 100%. Subjects reported whether their perceived heading was left or right of the midline in a forced-choice task. With the inertial stimulus the eye position had an effect such that the point of subjective equality (PSE) shifted 4.6 ± 2.4° in the gaze direction. With the visual stimulus the PSE shift was 10.2 ± 2.2° opposite the gaze direction, consistent with retinotopic coordinates. Thus with eccentric eye positions the perceived inertial and visual headings were offset ~15°. During the visual-inertial conditions the PSE varied consistently with the relative reliability of these stimuli such that at low visual coherence the PSE was similar to that of the inertial stimulus and at high coherence it was closer to the visual stimulus. On average, the inertial stimulus was weighted near Bayesian ideal predictions, but there was significant deviation from ideal in individual subjects. These findings support visual and inertial cue integration occurring in independent coordinate systems.
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.