Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 176, Issue 3, pp 504–509 | Cite as

Role of gravity-based information on the orientation and localization of the perceived body midline

  • Hadrien Ceyte
  • Corinne Cian
  • Vincent Nougier
  • Isabelle Olivier
  • Marion Trousselard
Research Note

Abstract

The present study focused on the influence of gravity-based information on the orientation and localization of the perceived body midline. The orientation was investigated by the rolling adjustment of a rod on the subjects’ Z-axis and the localization by the horizontal adjustment of a visual dot as being straight ahead. Experiment 1 investigated the effect of the dissociation between the Z-axis and the direction of gravity by placing subjects in roll tilt and supine postures. In roll tilt, the perception of the body midline orientation was deviated in the direction of body tilt and the perception of its localization was deviated in the opposite direction. In the supine body orientation, estimates of the Z-axis and straight-ahead remained veridical as when the body was upright. Experiment 2 highlighted the relative importance of the otolithic and tactile information using diffuse pressure stimulation. The estimation of body midline orientation was modified contrarily to the estimation of its localization. Thus, subjects had no absolute representation of their egocentric space. The main hypothesis regarding the dissociation between the orientation and localization of the body midline may be related to a difference in the integration of sensory information. It can be suggested that the horizontal component of the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) contributed to the perceived localization of the body midline, whereas its orientation was mainly influenced by tactile information.

Keywords

Body midline Orientation Localization Tactile cues Otolithic cues 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the Instrumentation and Technological Research Laboratory of the Center of Research of the Military Health Service for the construction of the experimental device and the technical expertise and assistance.

References

  1. Bauermeister M (1964) Effect of body tilt on apparent verticality, apparent body position, and their relation. J Exp Psychol 67(2):142–147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bower D, Heilman K (1980) Pseudoneglect: effect of hemispace on a tactile line bisection task. Neuropsychologia 18:491–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bradshaw JL, Nettleton NC, Nathan G, Wilson L (1985) Bisecting rods and lines: effects of horizontal and vertical posture on left-side underestimation by normal subjects. Neuropsychologia 23(3):421–425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bronstein AM (1999) The interaction of otolith and proprioceptive information in the perception of verticality. The effects of labyrinthine and CNS disease. Ann N Y Acad Sci 871:324–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Critchley M (1953) The parietal lobes. Hafner, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Howard IP (1982) Human visual orientation. Willey, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Ito Y, Gresty MA (1997) Subjective postural orientation and visual vertical during slow pitch tilt for the seated human subject. Aviat Space Environ Med 6:3–12Google Scholar
  8. Jarchow T, Mast FW (1999) The effect of water immersion on postural and visual orientation. Aviat Space Environ Med 70:879–886PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Jeannerod M, Biguer B (1987) The directional coding of reaching movements. A visuomotor conception of spatial neglect. In: Jeannerod M (ed) Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspect of space neglect. Elsevier, North-Holland Amsterdam, pp 87–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lechner-Steinleitner S, Schöne H (1980) The subjective vertical under “dry” and “wet” conditions at clockwise and counterclockwise changed positions and the effect of a parallel background field. Psychol Res 41:305–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mast FW, Jarchow T (1996) Perceived body position and the visual horizontal. Brain Res Bull 40(5–6):393–397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nemire K, Cohen MM (1993) Visual and somesthetic influences on postural orientation in the median plane. Percept Psychophys 53(1):106–116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Nyborg H (1971) Tactile stimulation and perception of the vertical. I. Effect of diffuse versus Specific tactile stimulation. Scand J Psychol 12:1–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pansell T, Ygge J, Schworm HD (2003) Conjugacy of torsional eye movements in response to a head tilt paradigm. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44(6):2557–2564PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schöne H (1964) On the role of gravity in human spatial orientation. Aerosp Med 35:764–772Google Scholar
  16. Templeton WB (1973) The role of gravitational cues in the judgment of visual orientation. Percept Psychophys 14(3):451–457Google Scholar
  17. Trousselard M, Cian C, Nougier V, Pla S, Raphel C (2003) Contribution of somaesthetic cues to the perception of body orientation and subjective visual vertical. Percept Psychophys 65(8):1179–1187PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Wade NJ (1973) The effect of water immersion on the perception of the visual vertical. Br J Psychol 64:351–361PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hadrien Ceyte
    • 1
    • 2
  • Corinne Cian
    • 1
  • Vincent Nougier
    • 2
  • Isabelle Olivier
    • 2
  • Marion Trousselard
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre de Recherches du Service de Santé des ArméesLa Tronche cedexFrance
  2. 2.UPR-ES 597 ‘Sport et Performance Motrice’Université Joseph FourierGrenoble Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations