ArticleBrain and behavior2026
Expanded Spatiotemporal Concept of Cortical Visual-Vestibular Interaction in Humans: A fMRI Study on Visually Induced Motion Perception.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis high-resolution fast fMRI study explores visual-vestibular network interactions in expanded spatial and temporal detail. Under natural conditions coherent visual motion always occurs during self-motion. Technology applying coherent visual motion on stationary subjects creates visual-vestibular mismatch and allows investigation of system interplay in the MRI. In humans, the process minimizing the intersensory conflict was previously conceptualized as a categorical reciprocal upregulation of one (e.g., visual) and downregulation of the other system (e.g., vestibular), or vice versa.
methodsHealthy participants (n = 22) were tested with a two-phase paradigm using different coherent visual dot motion stimulation conditions (stimulation phase) and subsequent variable duration illusory self-motion perception while the visual pattern was stationary, called motion aftereffect (MAE, post-stimulation phase). A matched random dot stimulus, not inducing self-motion perception, served as the control. Signal modulations related to subjective illusory self-motion (MAE duration) were identified in a multivariate temporal model-free way. FINDING: Visual areas showed uniform positive signal curves with motion stimulation unrelated to self-motion perception (MAE duration), except for V5/MT. In contrast, vestibular areas exhibited fourfold signal patterns along the dimensions of transient versus sustained decreases and in relation to the stimulus phases and presence of correlation with MAE duration. Notably, beside V5/MT, further areas with intermediate signaling were identified.
conclusionAltogether, in contrast to the visual system, the vestibular network areas exhibited greatly differentiated processing instead of a categorical uniform system "on-off" mode. These novel findings expand our comprehension of the continuous interaction between the visual and vestibular systems, especially with respect to the various dynamical activity changes in vestibular areas, potentially indicating subspecialization of regions that might be essential even for humans moving in the real world.
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.