Visual-vestibular interactions: II. The directional component of visual background movement.

Guedry, Fred E.; Lentz, J. M.; Jell, Ralph M.; Norman, Joel

doi:10.1037/e436462004-001

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are reminiscent of earlier claims that human tracking responses evoked by the rotations of a small striped drum can be improved by contrary movements of the background (45, 87,88). Similar phenomena also seem to be operating in some recent experiments described by Guedry et al (32).…”

Section: Adequate Stimulus For Ocular Followingsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…The retinal events that gave rise to antiphase enhancement, and hence the most vigorous ocular following, resemble those during the tracking of a moving object: in the central retina, image slip in the direction of tracking, and in the peripheral retina, image slip in the contrary direction. It should be noted that in the present study and the earlier ones cited above (32,45,87,88) there was always a stationary boundary between the central and peripheral images. Nonetheless, the data suggest that the ocular following system is specialized for tracking objects rather than whole visual scenes though, of course, the system does respond to the latter.…”

Section: Adequate Stimulus For Ocular Followingsupporting

confidence: 76%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Short-latency ocular following responses of monkey. I. Dependence on temporospatial properties of visual input

Miles¹,

Kawano²,

Optican³

1986

Journal of Neurophysiology

272

256

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ocular following responses elicited by brief unexpected movements of the visual scene were studied in 10 rhesus monkeys. Test patterns were either random dots or sine-wave gratings [spatial frequency (Fs) 0.046-1.06 cycles per degree (c/degree)]. Test stimuli were velocity steps [speed (V) 5-400 degrees/s] of 100-ms duration, applied 50 ms after spontaneous saccades to avoid saccadic intrusions. Eye velocity response profiles were nonmonotonic and idiosyncratic, but consistent and closely time-locked to stimulus onset. Two measures of response amplitude were used: initial peak in eye velocity (ei), and average final eye velocity over the period of 110-140 ms measured from stimulus onset (ef). Using random dot patterns, response latencies were short, e.g., when the criterion for onset was an eye acceleration of 100 degrees/s2, mean latency (+/- SE) for eight monkeys with a 40 degrees/s test ramp was 51.5 +/- 0.6 ms. Using gratings of low spatial frequency (Fs less than 0.5 c/degree), latency was inversely related to, and solely a function of, contrast and temporal frequency, Ft (where Ft = V X Fs). We conclude from the latter that ocular following is triggered by local changes in luminance, and propose a model of the detection mechanism that reproduces all the essential features of these data. Moderate low-pass spatial filtering ("blurring") of the random dot pattern, by interposing a sheet of ground glass between the animal and the scene, progressively increased the response latency and decreased ef, but ei was either little affected or increased. When used with gratings, the ground glass simply reduced the contrast (range: 0.5-0.003), with very similar consequences for ocular following: latency increased and ef decreased, but ei changed little over the first decade of contrast reduction, increased over the second, and began to show attenuation (often pronounced) only at the lowest contrast. We suggest that these anomalous increases in ei with reductions in contrast are secondary to the delay in response onset and might be explained if the motion detectors responsible for triggering ocular following act as a gate for integrated retinal slip inputs to the tracking system proper: the delay in detection causes a buildup in the error signal driving the tracking response. En masse movement of the visual field was not the optimal stimulus for ocular following.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

show abstract

Section: Adequate Stimulus For Ocular Followingsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Adequate Stimulus For Ocular Followingsupporting

confidence: 76%

Short-latency ocular following responses of monkey. I. Dependence on temporospatial properties of visual input

Miles¹,

Kawano²,

Optican³

1986

Journal of Neurophysiology

272

256

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was pointed out that in order to scrutinize a nearby object off to one side a moving observer is obliged to track in and, in so doing, will sweep the images of any more distant background across the retina, thereby giving rise to anti-phase enhancement of ocular following. The above-mentioned studies were all carried out on monkeys, but there is some evidence that human ocular following elicited by the motion of large central images can also be improved by contrary motion of images in the surround (Guedry et al, 1981;Hood, 1975;Ter Braak, 1957;Ter Braak, 1962). It should be noted that ocular pursuit of small moving targets (1 deg or less) is generally worse against a stationary, featured background than against a dark or plain one in both monkeys (Keller & Khan, 1986) and humans (Barnes & Crombie, 1985;Collewijn & Tamminga, 1984;Yee et al, 1983).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short latency ocular-following responses in man

1990

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ocular-following responses elicited by brief unexpected movements of the visual scene were studied in human subjects. Response latencies varied with the type of stimulus and decreased systematically with increasing stimulus speed but, unlike those of monkeys, were not solely determined by the temporal frequency generated by sine-wave stimuli. Minimum latencies (70-75 ms) were considerably shorter than those reported for other visually driven eye movements. The magnitude of the responses to sine-wave stimuli changed markedly with stimulus speed and only slightly with spatial frequency over the ranges used. When normalized with respect to spatial frequency, all responses shared the same dependence on temporal frequency (band-pass characteristics with a peak at 16 Hz), indicating that temporal frequency, rather than speed per se, was the limiting factor over the entire range examined. This suggests that the underlying motion detectors respond to the local changes in luminance associated with the motion of the scene. Movements of the scene in the immediate wake of a saccadic eye movement were on average twice as effective as movements 600 ms later: post-saccadic enhancement. Less enhancement was seen in the wake of saccade-like shifts of the scene, which themselves elicited weak ocular following, something not seen in the wake of real saccades. We suggest that there are central mechanisms that, on the one hand, prevent the ocular-following system from tracking the visual disturbances created by saccades but, on the other, promote tracking of any subsequent disturbance and thereby help to suppress post-saccadic drift. Partitioning the visual scene into central and peripheral regions revealed that motion in the periphery can exert a weak modulatory influence on ocularfollowing responses resulting from motion at the center. We suggest that this may help the moving observer to stabilize his/her eyes on nearby stationary objects.

show abstract

“…Vestibular information is essential for our proper positioning in the tridimensional space. Spatial perception and that of the relationship of moving objects, visual and memory integration also depend on vestibular functions 2,3 . Vestibular afferent and efferent signals also act helping coordinate movements, internal orientation, muscle tone and body alignment 4 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vestibular rehabilitation with biofeedback in patients with central imbalance

Bittar¹,

Barros

2011

Braz. j. otorhinolaryngol. (Impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cent ral Nervous System disorders may cause important functional unbalance in the maintenance of balance and posture. There is no effective rehabilitation for these symptoms until now.Objective: The aim of this paper is to evaluate the use of tongue electrotactile stimulation on patients with central imbalance using BrainPort. Materials and Methods:This is a prospective case series study. We evaluated 8 patients with central imbalance, 6 men and 2 women, with mean age of 67.75 years. The patients were submitted to Computed Dynamic Posturography (CDP) and then received 18 sessions of electrotactile stimulation by BrainPort® device for 20 minutes, twice a day. Then they were submitted to a new CDP test and to a self-perception scale to assess symptom remission, partial improvement and no improvement at all.Results: 75% of the patients reported being more stable. There was no improvement in the balance control of the mass center in these patients. Conclusion:The patients were able to use the electrotactile stimulus to improve their balance control. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;77(3):356-61. ORIGINAL ARTICLE BJORL

show abstract

Visual-vestibular interactions: II. The directional component of visual background movement.

Abstract: 4 8 1 .44 1 40 4 m 14 .. 4 w-c4 w 50 4 m >" 'A a,0" w.C0 140i1 1 I3 04 2 9 ...-..

Cited by 4 publications

References 1 publication

Short-latency ocular following responses of monkey. I. Dependence on temporospatial properties of visual input

Short-latency ocular following responses of monkey. I. Dependence on temporospatial properties of visual input

Short latency ocular-following responses in man

Vestibular rehabilitation with biofeedback in patients with central imbalance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About