Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 218, Issue 4, pp 551–565 | Cite as

Multisensory integration in the estimation of walked distances

Research Article

Abstract

When walking through space, both dynamic visual information (optic flow) and body-based information (proprioceptive and vestibular) jointly specify the magnitude of distance travelled. While recent evidence has demonstrated the extent to which each of these cues can be used independently, less is known about how they are integrated when simultaneously present. Many studies have shown that sensory information is integrated using a weighted linear sum, yet little is known about whether this holds true for the integration of visual and body-based cues for travelled distance perception. In this study using Virtual Reality technologies, participants first travelled a predefined distance and subsequently matched this distance by adjusting an egocentric, in-depth target. The visual stimulus consisted of a long hallway and was presented in stereo via a head-mounted display. Body-based cues were provided either by walking in a fully tracked free-walking space (Exp. 1) or by being passively moved in a wheelchair (Exp. 2). Travelled distances were provided either through optic flow alone, body-based cues alone or through both cues combined. In the combined condition, visually specified distances were either congruent (1.0×) or incongruent (0.7× or 1.4×) with distances specified by body-based cues. Responses reflect a consistent combined effect of both visual and body-based information, with an overall higher influence of body-based cues when walking and a higher influence of visual cues during passive movement. When comparing the results of Experiments 1 and 2, it is clear that both proprioceptive and vestibular cues contribute to travelled distance estimates during walking. These observed results were effectively described using a basic linear weighting model.

Keywords

Optic flow Proprioception Vestibular Multisensory integration Distance estimation Self-motion 

References

  1. Alais D, Burr D (2004) The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Curr Biol 14:257–262PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Angelaki DE, Cullen KE (2008) Vestibular system: the many facets of a multimodal sense. Annu Rev Neurosci 31:125–150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angelaki DE, Gu Y, DeAngelis GC (2009) Multisensory integration: psychophysics, neurophysiology, and computation. Curr Opin Neurobiol 19:452–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakker NH, Werkoven PJ, Passenier PO (1999) The effects of proprioceptive and visual feedback on geographical orientation in virtual environments. Pres Teleop Virt Environ 8:36–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banton T, Stefanucci J, Durgin F, Fass A, Proffitt D (2005) The perception of walking speed in a virtual environment. Pres Teleop Virt Environ 14(4):394–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker W, Nasios G, Raab S, Jürgens R (2002) Fusion of vestibular and podokinesthetic information during self-turning towards instructed targets. Exp Brain Res 144:458–474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berthoz A, Israël I, Georges-François P, Grasso R, Tsuzuku T (1995) Spatial memory of body linear displacement: what is being stored? Science 269:95–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertin RJV, Berthoz A (2004) Visuo-vestibular interaction in the reconstruction of travelled trajectories. Exp Brain Res 154:11–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bremmer F, Lappe M (1999) The use of optical velocities for distance discrimination and reproduction during visually simulated self motion. Exp Brain Res 127:33–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruggeman H, Piuneu VS, Rieser JJ, Pick HL Jr (2009) Biomechanical versus inertial information: stable individual differences in perception of self-rotation. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 35:1472–1480PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bülthoff HH, Yuille A (1991) Bayesian models for seeing shapes and depth. Comment Theor Biol 2(4):283–314Google Scholar
  12. Butler JS, Smith S, Campos JL, Bülthoff HH (2010) Bayesian integration of visual and vestibular signals for heading. J Vis 10(12):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Butler JS, Campos JL, Bülthoff HH, Smith ST (2011) The role of stereo vision in visual-vestibular heading estimation. See Perceiv 24(5):453–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campos JL, Bülthoff HH (2011) Multisensory integration during self-motion in virtual reality. In: Wallace M, Murray M (eds) Frontiers in the neural bases of multisensory processes. Taylor and Francis Group, London, pp 603–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Campos JL, Siegle J, Mohler BJ, Loomis JM, Bülthoff HH (2009) Imagined self-motion differs from actual self-motion. PLoS ONE 4(11):e7793. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007793 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Campos JL, Byrne P, Sun HJ (2010) Body-based cues trump vision when estimating walked distance. Euro J Neurosci 31(10):1889–1898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chance SS, Gaunet F, Beall AC, Loomis JM (1998) Locomotion mode affects the updating of objects encountered during travel: the contribution of vestibular and proprioceptive inputs to path integration. Pres Teleop Virt Environ 7(2):168–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cheng K, Shettleworth S, Huttenlocher J, Rieser JJ (2007) Bayesian integrating of spatial information. Psychol Bull 133(4):625–637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Durgin FH, Pelah A, Fox LF, Lewis J, Kane R, Walley KA (2005) Self-motion perception during locomotor recalibration: more than meets the eye. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31:398–419PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Durgin FH, Akagi M, Gallistel CR, Haiken W (2009) The precision of locomotor odometry in humans. Exp Brain Res 193(3):429–436PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elliott D (1986) Continuous visual information may be important after all: a failure to replicate Thomson. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 12:388–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ernst MO, Bülthoff HH (2004) Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends Cogn Sci 8:162–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fetsch CR, Turner AH, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE (2009) Dynamic reweighting of visual and vestibular cues during self-motion perception. J Neurosci 29(49):15601–15612PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fetsch CR, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE (2010) Visual-vestibular cue integration for heading perception: applications of optimal cue integration theory. Euro J Neurosci 31:1721–1729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frenz H, Lappe M (2005) Absolute travel distance from optic flow. Vision Res 45(13):1679–1692PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Frenz H, Lappe M (2006) Visual distance estimation in static compared to moving virtual scenes. Span J Psych 9(2):321–331Google Scholar
  28. Frenz H, Bremmer F, Lappe M (2003) Discrimination of travel distances from “situated” optic flow. Vision Res 43(20):2173–2183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Frissen I, Campos JL, Souman JL, Ernst MO (2011) The relative contributions of proprioceptive and inertial information for self-motion perception. Exp Brain Res 212:163–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gepshtein S, Burge J, Ernst MO, Banks MS (2005) The combination of vision and touch depends on spatial proximity. J Vis 5(11): doi:10.1167/5.11.7
  31. Gibson JJ (1950) Perception of the visual world. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  32. Gu Y, Angelaki DE, DeAngelis GC (2008) Neural correlates of multisensory cue integration in macaque MSTd. Nat Neurosci 11(10):1201–1210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Guerin P, Bardy BG (2008) Optical modulation of locomotion and energy expenditure at preferred transition speed. Exp Brain Res 189:393–402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Harris LR, Jenkin M, Zikovitz DC (2000) Visual and non-visual cues in the perception of linear self-motion. Exp Brain Res 135:12–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Israël I, Berthoz A (1989) Contributions of the otoliths to the calculation of linear displacement. J Neurophysiol 62(1):247–263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Jürgens R, Becker W (2006) Perception of angular displacement without landmarks: evidence for Bayesian fusion of vestibular, optokinetic, podokinesthetic and cognitive information. Exp Brain Res 174:528–543PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kearns MJ (2003) The roles of vision and body senses in a homing task: the visual environment matters. Dissertation, Brown UniversityGoogle Scholar
  38. Kearns MJ, Warren WH, Duchon AP, Tarr MJ (2002) Path integration from optic flow and body senses in a homing task. Perception 31:349–374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Klatzky RL, Loomis JM, Beall AC, Chance SS, Golledge RG (1998) Spatial updating of self-position and orientation during real, imagined, and virtual locomotion. Psychol Sci 9(4):293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Knapp JM, Loomis JM (2004) Limited field of view of head-mounted displays is not the cause of distance underestimation in virtual environments. Pres Teleop Virt Environ 13(5):572–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Knill DC, Saunders JA (2003) Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant? Vis Res 43:2539–2558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Körding KP, Wolpert DM (2004) Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning. Nature 427(15):244–247PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Körding KP, Beierholm U, Ma WJ, Quartz S, Tenenbaum JB, Shams L (2007) Causal inference in multisensory perception. PLoS ONE 2(9):e943. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000943 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lappe M, Frenz H (2009) Visual estimation of travel distance during walking. Exp Brain Res 199:369–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lappe M, Jenkin M, Harris LR (2007) Travel distance estimation from visual motion by leaky path integration. Exp Brain Res 180(1):35–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Larish JF, Flach JM (1990) Sources of optical information useful for perception of speed of rectilinear self-motion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:295–302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lee DN (1976) Theory of visual control of braking based on information about time-to-collision. Perception 5(4):437–459PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lee DN, Lishman JR (1975) Visual proprioceptive control of stance. J Hum Mov Stud 1:89–95Google Scholar
  49. Loomis JM, Da Silva JA, Fujita N, Fukusima SS (1992) Visual space perception and visually directed action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18:906–921PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. MacNeilage PR, Banks MS, Berger DR, Bülthoff HH (2007) A Bayesian model of the disambiguation of gravitoinertial force by visual cues. Exp Brain Res 179:263–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marlinsky VV (1999) Vestibular and vestibule-proprioceptive perception of motion in the horizontal plane in blindfolded man: I. Estimations of linear displacement. Neuroscience 90:389–394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mittelstaedt ML, Mittelstaedt H (2001) Idiothetic navigation in humans: estimation of path length. Exp Brain Res 13:318–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mohler BJ, Thompson WB, Creem-Regehr SH, Pick HL, Warren WH (2007a) Visual flow influences gait transition speed and preferred walking speed. Exp Brain Res 181(2):221–228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mohler BJ, Thompson WB, Creem-Regehr SH, Willemsen P, Pick HL, Rieser JJ (2007b) Calibration of locomotion due to visual motion in a treadmill-based virtual environment. ACM Trans Appl Percept 4(1):20–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Proffitt DR, Stefanucci J, Banton T, Epstein W (2003) The role of effort in perceiving distance. Psychol Sci 14(2):106–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Prokop T, Schubert M, Berger W (1997) Visual influence on human locomotion. Exp Brain Res 114:63–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Redlick FP, Jenkin M, Harris LR (2001) Humans can use optic flow to estimate distance of travel. Vision Res 41:213–219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Riecke BE, van Veen HAHC, Bülthoff HH (2002) Visual homing is possible without landmarks—A path integration study in virtual reality. Pres Teleop Virt Environ 11(5):443–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Riecke BE, Cunningham DW, Bülthoff HH (2006) Spatial updating in virtual reality: the sufficiency of visual information. Psychol Res 71(3):298–313PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rieser JJ, Ashmead DH, Talor CR, Youngquist GA (1990) Visual perception and the guidance of locomotion without vision to previously seen targets. Perception 19(5):675–689PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rieser JJ, Pick HL, Ashmead DH, Garing AE (1995) Calibration of human locomotion and models of perceptual motor organization. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 21(3):480–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Seidman SH (2008) Translational motion perception and vestiboocular responses in the absence of non-inertial cues. Exp Brain Res 184:13–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Siegle J, Campos JL, Mohler BJ, Loomis JM, Bülthoff HH (2009) Measurement of instantaneous perceived self-motion using continuous pointing. Exp Brain Res 195(3):429–444PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Souman JL, Frissen I, Sreenivasa M, Ernst MO (2009) Walking straight into circles. Curr Biol 19(18):1538–1542PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Steck K, Wittlinger M, Wolf H (2009) Estimation of homing distance in desert ants, Cataglyphis fortis, remains unaffected by disturbances of walking behaviour. J Exp Biol 212(18):2893–2901PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Steinicke F, Bruder G, Jerald J, Frenz H, Lappe M (2010) Estimation of detection thresholds for redirected walking techniques. IEEE Trans Vis Comp Graph 16(1):17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sun HJ, Frost BJ (1998) Computation of different optical variables of looming objects in pigeon nucleus rotundus neurons. Nat Neurosci 1(4):296–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sun HJ, Lee AJ, Campos JL, Chan GSW, Zhang DH (2003) Multisensory integration in speed estimation during self-motion. Cyberpsychol Behav 6(5):509–518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sun HJ, Campos JL, Chan GSW (2004a) Multisensory integration in the estimation of relative path length. Exp Brain Res 154(2):246–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sun HJ, Campos JL, Chan GSW, Young M, Ellard C (2004b) The contributions of static visual cues, nonvisual cues, and optic flow in distance estimation. Perception 33:49–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Thompson WB, Willemsen P, Gooch AA, Creem-Regehr SH, Loomis JM, Beall AC (2004) Does the quality of the computer graphics matter when judging distances in visually immersive environments? Pres Teleop Virt Environ 13(5):560–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Thomson JA (1983) Is continuous visual monitoring necessary in visually guided locomotion? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 9:427–443PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wallace MT, Roberson GE, Hairston WD, Stein BE, Vaughan JW, Schirillo JA (2004) Unifying multisensory signals across time and space. Exp Brain Res 158:252–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Waller D, Greenauer N (2007) The role of body-based sensory information in the acquisition of enduring spatial representations. Psychol Res 71(3):322–332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Waller D, Richardson AR (2008) Correcting distance estimates by interacting with immersive virtual environments: effects of task and available sensory information. JEP Appl 14(1):61–72Google Scholar
  76. Warren WH, Hannon DJ (1998) Direction of self-motion is perceived from optical-flow. Nature 336:162–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Warren WH, Kay BA, Zosh WD, Duchon AP, Sahuc S (2001) Optic flow is used to control human walking. Nat Neurosci 4:213–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wilkie RM, Wann JP (2005) The role of visual and nonvisual information in the control of locomotion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31(5):901–911PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Witmer BG, Kline PB (1998) Judging perceived and traversed distance in virtual environments. Pres Teleop Virt Environ 7:144–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wittlinger M, Wehner R, Wolf H (2006) The ant odometer: stepping on stilts and stumps. Science 312:1965–1967PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wohlgemuth S, Ronacher B, Wehner R (2001) Ant odometry in the third dimension. Nature 411(6839):795–798PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Yong NA, Paige GD, Seidman SH (2007) Multiple sensory cues underlying the perception of translation and path. J Neurophysiol 97:1100–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Human Perception, Cognition and ActionMax Planck Institute for Biological CyberneticsTübingenGermany
  2. 2.Toronto Rehabilitation InstituteTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  4. 4.Cognitive Neurophysiology Laboratory, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Evaluation and Rehabilitation Center (CERC)Albert Einstein College of MedicineBronxUSA
  5. 5.Department of Brain and Cognitive EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations