Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 10 (6), 2041669519886903
eCollection

Larger Head Displacement to Optic Flow Presented in the Lower Visual Field

Affiliations

Larger Head Displacement to Optic Flow Presented in the Lower Visual Field

Kanon Fujimoto et al. Iperception.

Abstract

Optic flow that simulates self-motion often produces postural adjustment. Although literature has suggested that human postural control depends largely on visual inputs from the lower field in the environment, effects of the vertical location of optic flow on postural responses are not well investigated. Here, we examined whether optic flow presented in the lower visual field produces stronger responses than optic flow in the upper visual field. Either expanding or contracting optic flow was presented in upper, lower, or full visual fields through an Oculus Rift head-mounted display. Head displacement and vection strength were measured. Results showed larger head displacement under the optic flow presentation in the full visual field and the lower visual field than the upper visual field, during early period of presentation of the contracting optic flow. Vection was strongest in the full visual field and weakest in the upper visual field. Our findings of lower field superiority in head displacement and vection support the notion that ecologically relevant information has a particularly important role in human postural control and self-motion perception.

Keywords: optic flow; postural control; self-motion; vection; visual field.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Optic flows generated on the displays by the moving viewpoint. Spheres are distributed within (a) upper, (b) lower, or (c) full area of the VR scene. Note that the actual visual stimuli were viewed with binocular disparities.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Mean vection strength ratings for each location and direction of optic flow. Error bars represent standard error of the mean. Each line represents data from an individual participant.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Mean head displacement trajectories relative to the base position across all participants for each flow location and direction. Lines represent average head position across trials in each condition. Ribbons represent the 95% confidence intervals for each data point, obtained by the bootstrap method. Positive and negative values on the vertical axis represent anterior and posterior displacement, respectively.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Time series of sample-specific t values from the base position across participants for each flow location and direction. Positive and negative values on the vertical axis represent the head moving anteriorly or posteriorly relative to the base position, respectively.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Mean head displacement relative to the base position for each location and direction of optic flow. We separately calculated the mean head displacement for (a) first 5 s and (b) last 5 s from the stimulus onset. Each line represents data from an individual participant. Error bars represent standard error of the mean. *p < .05, **p < .01.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Average absolute head displacements relative to the base position for each location and direction of optic flow. As in Figure 3, we separately calculated the mean absolute head displacement of (a) first 5 s and (b) last 5 s from the stimulus onset. Each line represents data from an individual participant. Error bars represent standard error of the mean. *p < .05.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Agathos C. P., Bernardin D., Baranton K., Assaiante C., Isableu B. (2017). Drifting while stepping in place in old adults: Association of self-motion perception with reference frame reliance and ground optic flow sensitivity. Neuroscience, 347, 134–147. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.01.044 - PubMed
    1. Amenedo E., Pazo-Alvarez P., Cadaveira F. (2007). Vertical asymmetries in pre-attentive detection of changes in motion direction. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 64, 184–189. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.02.001 - PubMed
    1. Apthorp D., Nagle F., Palmisano S. (2014). Chaos in balance: Non-linear measures of postural control predict individual variations in visual illusions of motion. PLoS One, 9, 1–22. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0113897 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ball K., Sekuler R. (1980). Human vision favors centrifugal motion. Perception, 9, 317–325. doi:10.1068/p090317 - PubMed
    1. Barela J. A., Sanches M., Lopes A. G., Razuk M., Moraes R. (2011). Use of monocular and binocular visual cues for postural control in children. Journal of Vision, 11, pii:10. doi:10.1167/11.12.10 - PubMed

How to cite this article

    1. Fujimoto K., Ashida H. (2019). Larger head displacement to optic flow presented in the lower visual field. i-Perception, 10(6), 1–17. doi: 10.1177/2041669519886903

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback