Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31239132›Full record

ArticleProgress in brain research2019

The influence of target distance on perceptual self-motion thresholds and the vestibulo-ocular reflex during interaural translation.

Susan King, Cyril Benoit, Nadeem Bandealy, Faisal Karmali

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Progress in brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Susan KingDepartment of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States; Jenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, MA, United States.
Cyril BenoitDepartment of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States; Jenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, MA, United States; Ecole Centrale Lyon, Lyon, France.
Nadeem BandealyDepartment of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States; Jenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, MA, United States.
Faisal KarmaliDepartment of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States; Jenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, MA, United States. Electronic address: faisal_karmali@meei.harvard.edu.
Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · USÉcole Centrale de Lyon · FRHarvard University · US

Funding

Measuring and Isolating Imprecision in Vestibular Perception and ActionR03DC013635 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY · PI KARMALI, FAISAL · 2015 to 2017
$492k
NIDCD NIH HHS R03 DC013635
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An elegant and influential mathematical model of eye movements is the geometric compensation required for visual fixation location in the translational vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR). Compensatory eye velocity scales with the inverse of fixation distance during head translation because larger angular eye movements are required to minimize retinal slip during head translation when targets are closer. This model has been extensively verified in experiments. Since the VOR and vestibular perception have shared anatomic pathways, we asked whether the same scaling may affect motion perception. Since perception does not require the linear-to-angular transformation required for the translational VOR, we hypothesized that perception would not scale with target distance. Subjects were tested with a motion direction-recognition threshold task in which they reported their perception of small translations of their body. Thresholds were measured in three conditions: (1) with a near target (0.20m) that extinguished just before each motion; (2) with a far target (0.47m); 3) with no target. The subject was always in darkness during motion. Thresholds were 0.59, 0.61 and 0.61cm/s, respectively. Translational VOR sensitivity (eye angular velocity divided by head translation velocity) was also measured and modulated with target distance. The scaling ratio of responses for the near vs. far target was 0.97 for perceptual thresholds, which was significantly different from the compensatory ratio (2.35; P<0.001) and the translational VOR scaling ratio (1.59; P=0.007) but not from no compensation (1.00; P=0.93). Thus, we conclude that despite shared anatomy for the VOR and perception, the brain processes signals according to the geometric functional constraints of each task.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAdultEye MovementsFemaleHumansMaleProprioceptionPsychomotor PerformanceReflex, Vestibulo-OcularSensory ThresholdsSpace PerceptionYoung AdultActionModelPerceptionVestibulo-ocular reflex

Identifiers

PMID31239132
PMCPMC9103442
OpenAlexW2953297326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.