Differences between right versus left lateral body tilt in its effect on the visual and tactual perception of verticality

Summary Ninety six Ss were subjected to lateral body tilt, ranging from 10° to 90° to the right and to the left, and indicated the visual vertical (by means of a luminescent rod) and the tactual vertical (by means of a metal bar) in a darkroom. There were significant differences for deviations of apparent from true vertical in both series between body tilt to the right versus to the left. With tilts to the right, apparent vertical deviated more opposite the direction of tilt, the E-phenomenon, or less in the direction of tilt, the A-phenomenon, as compared with tilts to the left.This study was supported, in part, by a Public Health Service Research Grant, MH 00348, from the National Institute of Mental Health, while the author was a NATO research fellow at Clark University, Worcester, MA; and in part by a Federal Grant, MR HD 06276, to the Children's Hospital Medical Center, while the author was a research fellow in child psychiatry at Harvard University, School of Medicine, Boston, MA.     

The perception of verticality and the frame of reference of the visual tilt aftereffect

Previous research has suggested that the visual tilt aftereffect operates according to a gravitational frame of reference. Three experiments were conducted to test this conclusion further. In each experiment, observers (with head upright) adjusted an illuminated bar to apparent vertical following various adaptation conditions. In Experiment 1, observers were given clear visual cues for objective vertical while adjusting the bar. In Experiment 2, they were not given visual cues for vertical. The adaptation conditions in Experiments 1 and 2 consisted of various combinations of head and stimulus tilt. Experiment 3 investigated the effects of head tilt alone. The results indicated that the tilt aftereffect follows a retinal frame of reference under some conditions (Experiment 1) and appears to follow a gravitational frame under others (Experiment 2). These results can be predicted by a simple model involving two factors, a purely visual aftereffect that follows a retinal frame and an extravisual aftereffect that appears to follow a gravitational frame.     

Contribution of somatosensory information to perception of the visual vertical with body tilt and rotating visual field

This study was designed to explore the role of somatosensory information from the trunk in the perception of the visual vertical. Twelve normal subjects and 1 subject with no somatosensory function below the neck attempted to set a line to the true vertical in the sitting and lying positions, first with a static visual background and then with rotation of the background about the line of sight. The absence of somatosensory information did not affect accuracy when the subjects were in the upright position. When lying horizontally, all control subjects experienced a substantial perceived tilt of the vertical in the direction of body tilt (the A effect), but, in contrast, the subject lacking somatosensory function exhibited a small but consistent apparent tilt of the vertical in the opposite direction (the E effect). This finding is discussed in relation to two competing hypotheses regarding the mechanisms subserving apparent displacement of the subjective vertical in tilted subjects.     

Application of the sensory-tonic theory of perception to figural after-effect

Current theoretical positions concerned with figural after-effects were criticized for their inadequacy in accounting for figural after-effects data and for their failure to link these phenomena with other perceptual phenomena in any systematic fashion. On the basis of the relative broadness of Gibson's early formulation, it was decided to adapt a similar adaptation theory, the sensory-tonic field theory of perception, to figural after-effect displacements. Appropriate hypotheses were stated and predictions made. These were tested and confirmed. It was concluded that although the success of the theory is limited, there appears to be hope for its extension.     

Effect of prolonged tilt on visual orientation

Visual orientation during lateral tilt is viewed in terms of orientation constancy. The postural systems involved in the maintenance of constancy are considered to be those of the otolith, neck and trunk. The relative contribution of these systems was investigated by obtaining visual verticality judgments immediately upon and several minutes after head, body, and trunk tilts. Due to the apparent non-adaptation of the otolith system any changes in visual orientation resulting from prolonged tilt would be attributed to adaptation of the proprioceptive system stimulated. For 30° head tilt visual orientation over-constancy was reduced by about 2°, reflecting the influence of the neck system. Prolonged body tilts of 30°, 60° and 90° reduced the constancy operating by approximately 1°, 3° and 8°, respectively. This was taken to indicate the contribution of the trunk system, which increased with increasing degrees of body tilt. The above interpretations received strong support from experiments involving trunk tilt, which stimulates only the neck and trunk systems.     

An experiment on the theory of visual motion perception

Two classes of theories of motion perception were studied: correlation and gradient models (in the sense of D. Marr). Random-dot kinematograms with a shifted square were presented to subjects, and the 80% threshold for detection of correct direction of movement was determined. Correlation models predict scale invariance, that is, a constant shift measured in units of texture elements of the translated pattern in spite of a geometric magnification. This was refuted for all subjects. The increase of the recognizable translation with the area of the translated form was verified except for the patterns with the largest texture elements (8 minutes of arc). This prediction, however, is not very specific for competing theories. Gradient models are not yet fully specified, and they contain some free parameters. They cannot be tested strictly, but there exist reasonable numerical parameter values by which our data can be satisfactorily explained.     

Imagined body orientation and perception of the visual vertical

The existence of body orientation mental imagery was tested by examining whether self roll tilt imagery affects the subjective visual vertical (SVV). Twenty healthy subjects judged the orientation of a dim luminous bar with respect to gravitational vertical, while normally seated in complete darkness with their head firmly restrained earth vertically. SVV was measured in three conditions: a reference condition with no imagery, and a left and a right imagery condition, during which the bar orientation was to be judged while the subjects imagine themselves roll-tilted towards left or right, respectively. The imagined roll tilts were of the same magnitude as roll tilts which generally induce an E- effect, i.e., an SVV lean toward the side opposite to those of body tilt. If imagery and perception of self roll tilt share common processes, self roll tilt imagery should induce an E-like effect. Results show an imagery- induced E-like effect, which strongly supports the idea that humans can perform mental imagery of body orientation about gravity. Received: 4 April 2000 / Accepted: 1 September 2000