Search

Various studies have demonstrated a role for cognition on self-motion perception. Those studies all concerned modulations of the perception of a physical or visual motion stimulus. In our study, however, we investigated whether cognitive cues could elicit a percept of oscillatory self-motion in the absence of sensory motion. If so, we could use this percept to investigate if the resulting mismatch between estimated self-motion and a lack of corresponding sensory signals is motion sickening. To that end, we seated blindfolded participants on a swing that remained motionless during two conditions, apart from a deliberate perturbation at the start of each condition. The conditions only differed regarding instructions, a secondary task and a demonstration, which suggested either a quick halt (“Distraction”) or continuing oscillations of the swing (“Focus”). Participants reported that the swing oscillated with larger peak-to-peak displacements and for a longer period of time in the Focus condition. That increase was not reflected in the reported motion sickness scores, which did not differ between the two conditions. As the reported motion was rather small, the lack of an effect on the motion sickness response can be explained by assuming a subthreshold neural conflict. Our results support the existence of internal models relevant to sensorimotor processing and the potential of cognitive (behavioral) therapies to alleviate undesirable perceptual issues to some extent. We conclude that oscillatory self-motion can be perceived in the absence of related sensory stimulation, which advocates for the acknowledgement of cognitive cues in studies on self-motion perception.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether net metabolic cost of walking is affected by age per se. Methods We selected 10 healthy, active older adults (mean age 75 years) and 10 young adults (mean age 26 years), and determined their preferred overground walking speed. On the same day, in a morning and afternoon session, we had them walk at that speed overground and on a treadmill while we measured oxygen consumption rate. From the latter we subtracted the rate in sitting and calculated net metabolic cost. Results Anthropometrics were not different between the groups nor was preferred walking speed (1.27 m s−1 both groups). There was no difference in net metabolic cost of overground walking between older and young adults (e.g., in the morning 2.64 and 2.56 J kg−1 m−1, respectively, p > 0.05). In the morning session, net metabolic cost of walking was higher on the treadmill than overground in our older adults by 0.6 J kg−1 m−1 (p Conclusion First, there is no effect of age per se on metabolic cost of overground walking. Second, older adults tend to have higher metabolic cost of walking on a treadmill than walking overground at preferred speed, and adaptation may take a long time. The commonly reported age-related elevation of metabolic cost of walking may be due to confounding factors causing preferred walking speed to be lower in older adults, and/or due to older adults reacting differently to treadmill walking than young adults.

When tracking multiple moving targets among visually similar distractors, human observers are capable of distributing attention over several spatial locations. It is unclear, however, whether capacity limitations or perceptual–cognitive abilities are responsible for the development of expertise in multiple object tracking. Across two experiments, we examined the role of working memory and visual attention in tracking expertise. In Experiment 1, individuals who regularly engaged in object tracking sports (soccer and rugby) displayed improved tracking performance, relative to non-tracking sports (swimming, rowing, running) (p = 0.02, ηp2 = 0.163), but no differences in gaze strategy (ps > 0.31). In Experiment 2, participants trained on an adaptive object tracking task showed improved tracking performance (p = 0.005, d = 0.817), but no changes in gaze strategy (ps > 0.07). They did, however, show significant improvement in a working memory transfer task (p d = 0.970). These findings indicate that the development of tracking expertise is more closely linked to processing capacity limits than perceptual–cognitive strategies.

When asked to move their unseen hand-to-visual targets, people exhibit idiosyncratic but reliable visuo-proprioceptive matching errors. Unsurprisingly, vision and proprioception quickly align when these errors are made apparent by providing visual feedback of the position of the hand. However, retention of this learning is limited, such that the original matching errors soon reappear when visual feedback is removed. Several recent motor learning studies have shown that reward feedback can improve retention relative to error feedback. Here, using a visuo-proprioceptive position-matching task, we examined whether binary reward feedback can be effectively exploited to reduce matching errors and, if so, whether this learning leads to improved retention relative to learning based on error feedback. The results show that participants were able to adjust the visuo-proprioceptive mapping with reward feedback, but that the level of retention was similar to that observed when the adjustment was accomplished with error feedback. Therefore, similar to error feedback, reward feedback allows for temporary recalibration, but does not support long-lasting retention of this recalibration.

Visually induced motion sickness (VIMS) is a well-known sensation in virtual environments and simulators, typically characterized by a variety of symptoms such as pallor, sweating, dizziness, fatigue, and/or nausea. Numerous methods to reduce VIMS have been previously introduced; however, a reliable countermeasure is still missing. In the present study, the effect of airflow and seat vibration to alleviate VIMS was investigated. Eighty-two participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (airflow, vibration, combined airflow and vibration, and control) and then exposed to a 15 min long video of a bicycle ride shot from first-person view. VIMS was measured using the Fast Motion Sickness Scale (FMS) and the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ). Results showed that the exposure of airflow significantly reduced VIMS, whereas the presence of seat vibration, in contrast, did not have an impact on VIMS. Additionally, we found that females reported higher FMS scores than males, however, this sex difference was not found in the SSQ scores. Our findings demonstrate that airflow can be an effective and easy-to-apply technique to reduce VIMS in virtual environments and simulators, while vibration applied to the seat is not a successful method.

Two different ways to code a goal-directed movement have been proposed in the literature: vector coding and position coding. Assuming that the code is fine-tuned if a movement is immediately repeated, one can predict that repeating movements to the same endpoint will increase precision if movements are coded in terms of the position of the endpoint. Repeating the same movement vector at slightly different positions will increase precision if movements are coded in terms of vectors. Following this reasoning, Hudson and Landy (J Neurophys 108(10):2708–2716, 2012) found evidence for both types of coding when participants moved their hand over a table while the target and feedback were provided on a vertical screen. Do we also see evidence for both types of coding if participants repeat movements within a more natural visuo-motor mapping? To find out, we repeated the study of Hudson and Landy (J Neurophys 108(10):2708–2716, 2012), but our participants made movements directly to the targets. We compared the same movements embedded in blocks of repetitions of endpoints and blocks of repetitions of movement vectors. Within blocks, the movements were presented in a random order. We found no benefit of repeating either a position or a vector. We subsequently repeated the experiment with a similar mapping between movements and images to those used by Hudson and Landy and found that participants only clearly benefit from repeating a position. We conclude that repeating a position is particularly useful when dealing with unusual visuo-motor mappings.

If the surrounding of a visual target unexpectedly starts to move during a fast goal-directed hand movement, the hand reflexively moves along with it. This is known as the 'manual following response'. One explanation for this response is that it is a compensation for inferred self-motion in space. Previous studies have shown that background motion gives rise to both postural responses and deviations in goal-directed hand movements. To evaluate whether compensation for inferred self-motion is responsible for the manual responses we examined whether galvanic stimulation of the vestibular system would give rise to similar deviations in hand movements. Standing participants tried to quickly tap on targets that were presented on a horizontal screen. Participants could infer self-motion on some of the trials, either from galvanic vestibular stimulation or from background motion. Both perturbations took place during the hand movement. It took both the head and hand about 45 ms longer to respond to background motion than to respond to galvanic stimulation. The head responded in a similar manner to both types of perturbations. The hand responded about as expected to galvanic stimulation, but much more vigorously to background motion. Thus, the manual response to background motion is probably not a direct consequence of trying to compensate for inferred self-motion. Perhaps the manual following response is a consequence of an error in binding motion information to objects. ispartof: EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH vol:237 issue:10 pages:2549-2558 ispartof: location:Germany status: published

We studied the influence of haptics on visual perception of three-dimensional shape. Observers were shown pictures of an oblate spheroid in two different orientations. A gauge-figure task was used to measure their perception of the global shape. In the first two sessions only vision was used. The results showed that observers made large errors and interpreted the oblate spheroid as a sphere. They also misinterpreted the rotated oblate spheroid for a prolate spheroid. In two subsequent sessions observers were allowed to touch the stimulus while performing the task. The visual input remained unchanged: the observers were looking at the picture and could not see their hands. The results revealed that observers perceived a shape that was different from the vision-only sessions and closer to the veridical shape. Whereas, in general, vision is subject to ambiguities that arise from interpreting the retinal projection, our study shows that haptic input helps to disambiguate and reinterpret the visual input more veridically.

We studied active haptic discrimination of the geometrical features of an object. The geometrical parameters under investigation were the amplitude and width of a gaussian-shaped surface. Haptic discrimination thresholds were measured with regard to three values of these geometrical parameters. We found that humans discriminate up to about 300 shapes when both amplitude and width are extrapolated to the range between 1 μm and 1 m. Over this range, which covers the span of the arms, the number of discriminations is small compared to the number across the full range of chromaticities in vision. Roughly speaking, humans are far better at discriminating sharp (extensive amplitude and little width) gaussian surfaces from smooth (small amplitude and extensive width) ones than they are at discriminating small (small amplitude and width) surfaces from large (extensive amplitude and width) ones. Our main conclusion is that discrimination in the geometrical domain is poorest when the proportion between amplitude and width is roughly the same for both shapes. Our results are in close agreement with results of earlier experiments on detection thresholds. This indicates that similar, or even the same, neural mechanisms were used for detection and discrimination of the geometrical parameters under investigation.

We investigated what information subjects use when trying to hit moving targets. In particular, whether only visual information about the target's position is used to guide the hand to the place of interception or also information about its speed. Subjects hit targets that moved at different constant speeds and disappeared from view after varying amounts of time. This prevented the subjects from updating position information during the time that the target was invisible. Subjects hit further ahead of the disappearing point when the target moved faster, but not as much as they should have on the basis of the target's speed. This could be because more time is needed to perceive and use the correct speed than was available before the target disappeared. It could also be due to a speed-related misperception of the target's final position. The results of a second experiment were more consistent with the latter hypothesis. In a third experiment we moved the background to manipulate the perceived speed. This did not affect the hitting positions. We conclude that subjects respond only to the changing target position. Target speed influences the direction in which the hand moves indirectly, possibly via a speed-related misperception of position.