Abstract
Both vestibular and visual cues are known to contribute to human ego-motion perception in space. While the vestibular system registers actual head motion in space, the visual system records in many situations only the relative head-vs-scene motion; then it signals head motion in space only if the scene is stationary. * The use of both cues is probably not merely a matter of redundancy for at least two reasons: (1) Imperfection of the vestibular system; for example, the horizontal canal system fails to register low frequency and constant-velocity head motion. (2) Ambiguity of visual cues; although the visual scene is stationary in most situations of every day life, there are situations in which the visual field, or large parts of it, are filled with moving objects which, when taken as a stationary reference, would create an illusory perception of ego-motion. Therefore, it would be desirable to dismiss visual ego-motion cues whenever the visual scene is moving, and to restrict the use of these cues to conditions where vestibular information deteriorates or is missing. The intriguing problem then is how to detect whether the visual scene is stationary or not. If detection of scene motion is based on vestibular cues, what happens if, for example, the vestibular system fails to distinguish between body stationarity and body motion of constant or low speed?
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Büttner, U., and Henn, V., 1981, Circular vection: Psychophysics and single-unit recordings in the monkey, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 374:274–283.
Dichgans, J., and Brandt, T., 1978, Visual-vestibular interaction: Effects on self-motion perception and postural control. In: Held, R., Leibowitz, H., and Teuber, H.L. (eds) Handbook of sensory physiology, Vol VIII. Springer New York, pp755–804.
Fischer, M.H., and Kommüller, A.E., 1930, Optokinetisch ausgelOste Bewegungswahrnehmung and optokinetischer Nystagmus, J Psychol Neurol, 41:273–308.
Henn, V., Cohen, B., and Young, L.R., 1980, Visual vestibular interaction in motion perception and the generation of nystagmus, Neurosci. Res. Program Bull., 18:459–651.
Leibowitz, H.W., Shupert, C., and Dichgans, J., 1979, The independence of dynamic spatial orientation from luminance and refraction error, Perception and Psychophysics, 25:75–79.
Mergner, T., and Becker, W., 1990, Perception of horizontal self-rotation: Multisensory and cognitive aspects. In: Warren, R., Wertheim, A.H. (eds) Perception and control of self-motion. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale London, pp219–263.
Mergner, T., Siebold, C., Schweigart, G., and Becker W., 1991, Human perception of horizontal head and trunk rotations in space during vestibular and neck stimulation, Exp Brain Res, 85:389–404.
Mergner, T., Rottler, G., Kimmig, H., and Becker, W., 1992, Role of vestibular and neck inputs for the perception of object motion in space, Exp Brain Res 89:655–668.
Zacharias, G.L., and Young, L.R., 1981, Influence of combined visual and vestibular cues on human perception and control of horizontal rotation, Exp. Brain Res., 41:159–171.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mergner, T., Schweigart, G., Kolev, O., Hlavačka, F., Becker, W. (1995). Visual-Vestibular Interaction for Human Ego-Motion Perception. In: Mergner, T., Hlavačka, F. (eds) Multisensory Control of Posture. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1931-7_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1931-7_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5791-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-1931-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive