The Mechanism of Physiological Height Vertigo: II. Posturography

Bles, W.; Kapteyn, T. S.; Brandt, Thomas; Arnold, Friedrich

doi:10.3109/00016488009127171

Cited by 135 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This specification is based on the evaluation of (1) images projected on each retina, and (2) information about the absolute distance between the observer and object; under the present experimental conditions, binocu- The results of Experiment 1 suggested that, during quiet standing in the Romberg posture, TPK (primarily from around the ankle joint) is a major source of information for the control of sway. This agrees with previous studies in which researchers have used nonrigid support surfaces (Bles, Kapteyn, Brandt, & Arnold, 1980;Nashner, 1970Nashner, , 1976Nashner, , 1977Nashner, Woollacott, & Tuma, 1979) and reversible ischemic blocks (Diener, Dichgans, Guschlbauer, & Mau, 1984;EIner, 1973EIner, , 1979EIner, Gurfinkel, Lipshits, Mamasakhlisov, & Popov, 1976;Mauritz & Dietz, 1980). In Experiment 2, we examined postural sway under the same visual conditions as those in Experi- lar convergence could provide such distance information.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

“…Work on height vertigo (Bles et al, 1980)demonstrates that the unstructured or "empty" visual field associated with conditions inducing physiological height vertigo also induces postural disequilibrium. 11 This effect is most likely due to a mechanism that modulates vestibular and/or vestibulospinal mechanisms relative to visual inputs.…”

Section: Conditions Versus Ecd the Comparison Of Individual Conditiomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Some visual influences on human postural equilibrium: Binocular versus monocular fixation

Fox

1990

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of vision for postural equilibrium has long been known; traditionally, this visual contribution to the control of posture has been analyzed primarily in terms of optical and retinal phenomena. Recently, however, there has been some suggestion that binocular and monocular fixation of identical stimuli have differential effects. Three experiments were conducted in order to measure self-generated movement (sway during quiet standing) of the body's center of gravity while field structure, ankle proprioception, and binocular/monocular fixation were varied. Field structure was varied from total darkness, to the presence of single and multiple LEDs in the dark, to full field structure (i.e., the richness of the feedback information was varied). Ankle proprioception was varied by changing foot position from side-by-side to heel-to-toe positions. Results indicate that (1) ankle-joint input is a significant factor in reducing sway, (2) binocular fixation attenuates sway relative to monocular fixation, under otherwise identical visual conditions, and (3) this difference persists in total darkness. Taken together, the data indicate that the visual influence on postural equilibrium results from a complex synergy that receives multimodal inputs. A simple optical/retinal explanation is not sufficient.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Conditions Versus Ecd the Comparison Of Individual Conditiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Some visual influences on human postural equilibrium: Binocular versus monocular fixation

Fox

1990

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These findings suggest that in order to induce consistent and directionally specific responses, the relative motion of objects within the foreground and the background must reflect what a moving observer would experience in a stable 3-D environment. Note that the retinal displacement of the moving background (21º) in Experiments 1-4 was larger than what a subject would experience during spontaneous sway (Bles et al, 1980). However, it has been reported that stimulus amplitude is not a relevant parameter for visuopostural responses (Lestienne et al, 1977;Masson et al, 1995;van Asten et al, 1988).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…They stood barefoot on a rigid foot support placed on top of a slab of foam rubber (height, 5 cm; specific weight, 30 g/dm 3 ) resting on the sway platform. The aim was to increase the instability of the subjects so that any effect of visual condition on the subjects' sway could be more easily observed (Bles et al, 1980;Bronstein, 1986;Lee & Lishman, 1975). Postural sway in the lateral direction was recorded using a force platform for center of pressure (COP) recordings.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of visual surrounding motion on body sway in a three-dimensional environment

Guerraz

Gianna

Burchill

et al. 2001

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Support for a separate cluster of fear of heights also comes from recent findings suggesting the presence of underlying physiological abnormalities (i.e., balance control) in individuals with fear of heights (Boffino et al, 2009). These problems particularly seem to involve the experience of 'height vertigo' and difficulties in using visual information to keep postural stability (Bles, Kapteyn, Brandt, & Arnold, 1980). Thus, it could be that at least a part of the individuals with height fears do not suffer from a psychological condition per se, but from an innate disturbance of a physiological mechanism by which a phobic behavioral response is triggered without ever having experienced an aversive learning experience in the past.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Structure of Common Fears: Comparing Three Different Models

Jongh

Oosterink

Kieffer

et al. 2011

The American Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: http://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. AbstractPrevious studies showed discrepant findings regarding the factor structure of common fears.The purpose of the present study was to expand on these findings and to contribute to the development of a descriptive framework for a fear classification. Using data from the Dutch general population (n=961; 50.9% women), an exploratory factor analysis was performed to delineate the multidimensional structure of 11 common fears previously used in a factoranalytic study by Fredrikson, Annas, Fischer, & Wik (1996). A second, independent sample (n=998; 48.3% women) was used to confirm the newly derived model by means of confirmatory factor analysis. In addition, the model was tested against the DSM-IV-TR model, and a model found earlier by Fredrikson et al. (1996). Although support was found for a 3-factor solution consisting of a blood-injection-injury factor, a situational-animal factor and a heights-related factor, confirmatory factor analysis showed that this 3-factor model and the DSM-IV-TR 4-factor model fitted the data equally well. The findings suggest that the structure of subclinical fears can be inferred from the DSM-classification of phobia subtypes, and that fears and phobias are two observable manifestations of a fear response along a continuum.

show abstract

The Mechanism of Physiological Height Vertigo: II. Posturography

Cited by 135 publications

References 3 publications

Some visual influences on human postural equilibrium: Binocular versus monocular fixation

Some visual influences on human postural equilibrium: Binocular versus monocular fixation

Effect of visual surrounding motion on body sway in a three-dimensional environment

The Structure of Common Fears: Comparing Three Different Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About