ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2021
Effect of timing delay between visual and vestibular stimuli on heading perception.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2021. 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.
- Cross-Modal Transfer as a Window Into the Investigation of Recent Stimulus and Response History in Perceptual Decision-Making.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Environmental motion presented ahead of self-motion modulates heading direction estimation.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Visuo-tactile heading perception.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Heading direction is perceived based on visual and inertial cues. The current study examined the effect of their relative timing on the ability of offset visual headings to influence inertial perception. Seven healthy human subjects experienced 2 s of translation along a heading of 0°, ±35°, ±70°, ±105°, or ±140°. These inertial headings were paired with 2-s duration visual headings that were presented at relative offsets of 0°, ±30°, ±60°, ±90°, or ±120°. The visual stimuli were also presented at 17 temporal delays ranging from -500 ms (visual lead) to 2,000 ms (visual delay) relative to the inertial stimulus. After each stimulus, subjects reported the direction of the inertial stimulus using a dial. The bias of the inertial heading toward the visual heading was robust at ±250 ms when examined across subjects during this period: 8.0° ± 0.5° with a 30° offset, 12.2° ± 0.5° with a 60° offset, 11.7° ± 0.6° with a 90° offset, and 9.8° ± 0.7° with a 120° offset (mean bias toward visual ± SE). The mean bias was much diminished with temporal misalignments of ±500 ms, and there was no longer any visual influence on the inertial heading when the visual stimulus was delayed by 1,000 ms or more. Although the amount of bias varied between subjects, the effect of delay was similar.
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.