Object motion perception during ego-motion: Patients with a complete loss of vestibular function vs. normals

• Published in: Brain research bulletin Vol. 40; no. 5; pp. 459 - 465
• Main Authors: Mesland, B.S., Finlay, A.L., Wertheim, A.H., Barnes, G.R., Morland, A.B., Bronstein, A.M., Gresty, M.A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 1996
• Subjects: Ego-motion; Filehne illusion; Humans; Motion; Motion perception; Object motion; Orientation - physiology; Perception - physiology; Photic Stimulation; Vestibular Diseases - physiopathology; Object motion; Filehne illusion; Ego-motion; Motion perception
• ISSN: 0361-9230; 1873-2747
• DOI: 10.1016/0361-9230(96)00142-6

Object motion perception was assessed in avestibular patients and normal controls. Two experiments were conducted, in which subjects were required to assess the motion of a visual stimulus with respect to earth. In the first experiment, we measured the velocity at which a briefly presented (200 ms) grating was perceived as earth fixed, while the subject maintained fixation on a visual target fixed relative to the body, during whole-body yaw rotation (VOR suppression). In this experimental setup, the influence of the semicircular canal signals on object motion perception was evaluated. The avestibular patients judged the grating to be stationary with respect to earth, when it was moving at the same velocity as their body, whereas for normal controls, the grating was perceived as stationary when it moved at a velocity slower than their body motion, but greater than zero. The difference between the two subject groups was significant, and showed the strong contribution of the vestibular system to object motion perception. Similarly, a measurement of the velocity at which a grating was perceived as stationary was obtained during smooth pursuit eye movements. In this experiment the contribution of the efference copy of the oculomotor signal and proprioceptive signals to object motion perception were assessed. As with the first experiment, the normal controls displayed a more veridical sense of object motion perception than the patients, although the difference was only just significant. We suggest that the difference could be an adaptive change in the patients perception of motion, which allows them to reduce the effects of oscillopsia.