Previous studies have generally considered heading perception to be a visual task. However, since judgments of heading direction are required only during self-motion, there are several other relevant senses which could provide supplementary and, in some cases, necessary information to make accurate and precise judgments of the direction of self-motion. We assessed the contributions of several of these senses using tasks chosen to reflect the reference system used by each sensory modality. Head-pointing and rod-pointing tasks were performed in which subjects aligned either the head or an unseen pointer with the direction of motion during whole body linear motion. Passive visual and vestibular stimulation was generated by accelerating subjects at sub- or supravestibular thresholds down a linear track. The motor-kinesthetic system was stimulated by having subjects actively walk along the track. A helmet-mounted optical system, fixed either on the cart used to provide passive visual or vestibular information or on the walker used in the active walking conditions, provided a stereoscopic display of an optical flow field. Subjects could be positioned at any orientation relative to the heading, and heading judgments were obtained using unimodal visual, vestibular, or walking cues, or combined visual-vestibular and visual-walking cues. Vision alone resulted in reasonably precise and accurate head-pointing judgments (0.3 degrees constant errors, 2.9 degrees variable errors), but not rod-pointing judgments (3.5 degrees constant errors, 5.9 degrees variable errors). Concordant visual-walking stimulation slightly decreased the variable errors and reduced constant pointing errors to close to zero, while head-pointing errors were unaffected.

It has previously been reported that illusory self-rotation (circular vection) is most effectively induced by the more distant of two moving displays. Experiments are reported in which the relative effectiveness of two superimposed displays in generating circular vection as a function of (i) the separation in depth between them, (ii) their perceived relative distances, and (iii) which display was in the plane of focus was investigated. Circular vection was governed by the motion of the display that was perceived to be the more distant, even when it was actually nearer. However, actual or perceived distance was found to be not the crucial factor in circular vection because even when the distance between the two displays was virtually zero, vection was controlled by the display perceived to be in the background. When the displays were well separated in depth, vection was not affected by whether the near or the far display was in the plane of focus, nor by which display was fixed or pursued by the eyes.

No abstract

It has previously been shown that when a moving and a stationary display are superimposed, illusory self-rotation (circular vection) is induced only when the moving display appears as the background. Three experiments are reported on the extent to which illusory forward self-motion (forward vection) induced by a looming display is inhibited by a superimposed stationary display as a function of the size and location of the stationary display and of the depth between the stationary and looming displays. Results showed that forward vection was controlled by the display that was perceived as the background, and background stationary displays suppressed forward vection by about the same amount whatever their size and eccentricity. Also, the perception of foreground-background properties of competing displays determined which controlled forward vection, and this control was not tied to specific depth cues. The inhibitory effect of a stationary background on forward vection was, however, weaker than that found with circular vection. This difference makes sense because, for forward body motion, the image of a distant scene is virtually stationary whereas, when the body rotates, it is not.

No abstract