Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34546803›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of psychology2022

Cognitive, Systems, and Computational Neurosciences of the Self in Motion.

Jean-Paul Noel, Dora E Angelaki

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Inside and outside the body space: a study on environmental knowledge, interoceptive and functional body representations in the prodromal stage of dementia.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Integration of learned artificial sensation with vision during freely moving navigation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Is It Me or the Train Moving? Humans Resolve Sensory Conflicts with a Nonlinear Feedback Mechanism in Balance Control.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Self-motion perception and sequential decision-making: where are we heading?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Walking humans and running mice: perception and neural encoding of optic flow during self-motion.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Visuo-tactile heading perception.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022
    Article
  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

2 authors.

Jean-Paul NoelCenter for Neural Science, New York University, New York, NY 10003, USA; email: da93@nyu.edu.
Dora E AngelakiCenter for Neural Science, New York University, New York, NY 10003, USA; email: da93@nyu.edu.

Funding

Project C: Neural basis of causal inference in continuous navigationU19NS118246 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI DRUGOWITSCH, JAN · 2020 to 2024
$12.0M
NINDS NIH HHS U19 NS118246
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Navigating by path integration requires continuously estimating one's self-motion. This estimate may be derived from visual velocity and/or vestibular acceleration signals. Importantly, these senses in isolation are ill-equipped to provide accurate estimates, and thus visuo-vestibular integration is an imperative. After a summary of the visual and vestibular pathways involved, the crux of this review focuses on the human and theoretical approaches that have outlined a normative account of cue combination in behavior and neurons, as well as on the systems neuroscience efforts that are searching for its neural implementation. We then highlight a contemporary frontier in our state of knowledge: understanding how velocity cues with time-varying reliabilities are integrated into an evolving position estimate over prolonged time periods. Further, we discuss how the brain builds internal models inferring when cues ought to be integrated versus segregated-a process of causal inference. Lastly, we suggest that the study of spatial navigation has not yet addressed its initial condition: self-location.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionNeurosciencesBrainCognitionCuesHumansBayesian inferencebodymultisensorynavigationperi-personal spacepopulation probabilistic coding

Identifiers

PMID34546803
PMCPMC8897977

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.