Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Integration of vestibular and proprioceptive signals for spatial updating

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Spatial updating during self-motion typically involves the appropriate integration of both visual and non-visual cues, including vestibular and proprioceptive information. Here, we investigated how human observers combine these two non-visual cues during full-stride curvilinear walking. To obtain a continuous, real-time estimate of perceived position, observers were asked to continuously point toward a previously viewed target in the absence of vision. They did so while moving on a large circular treadmill under various movement conditions. Two conditions were designed to evaluate spatial updating when information was largely limited to either proprioceptive information (walking in place) or vestibular information (passive movement). A third condition evaluated updating when both sources of information were available (walking through space) and were either congruent or in conflict. During both the passive movement condition and while walking through space, the pattern of pointing behavior demonstrated evidence of accurate egocentric updating. In contrast, when walking in place, perceived self-motion was underestimated and participants always adjusted the pointer at a constant rate, irrespective of changes in the rate at which the participant moved relative to the target. The results are discussed in relation to the maximum likelihood estimation model of sensory integration. They show that when the two cues were congruent, estimates were combined, such that the variance of the adjustments was generally reduced. Results also suggest that when conflicts were introduced between the vestibular and proprioceptive cues, spatial updating was based on a weighted average of the two inputs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Here we assume that most of the inputs provided during passive self-motion in the current context are largely attributable to the vestibular system. However, this is not to say that other somatosensory information from the skin during accelerations, vibrations, and wind could not play a role in self-motion perception (although several of these cues were intentionally limited in the current study).

  2. Note that despite the fact that the term “unisensory” may not be completely appropriate in this context, we will nonetheless use this terminology throughout the paper for simplicity.

References

  • Alais D, Burr D (2004) The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Curr Biol 14:257–262

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Alton F, Baldey L, Caplan S, Morrisey MC (1998) A kinematic comparison between overground and treadmill walking. Clin Biomech 13:434–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andre J, Rogers S (2006) Using verbal and blind-walking distance estimates to investigate the two visual systems hypothesis. Percept Psychophys 68:353–361

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Angelaki DE, Cullen KE (2008) Vestibular system: the many facets of a multimodal sense. Annu Rev Neurosci 31:125–150

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Angelaki DE, Gu Y, DeAngelis GC (2009) Multisensory integration: psychophysics, neurophysiology, and computation. Curr Opin Neurobiol 19:452–458

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker NH, Werkoven PJ, Passenier PO (1999) The effects of proprioceptive and visual feedback on geographical orientation in virtual environments. Presence-Teleop Virt 8:36–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker W, Nasios G, Raab S, Jürgens R (2002) Fusion of vestibular and podokinesthetic information during self-turning towards instructed targets. Exp Brain Res 144:458–474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentvelzen A, Leung J, Alais D (2009) Discriminating audiovisual speed: optimal integration of speed defaults to probability summation when component reliabilities diverge. Perception 38:966–987

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berthoz A, Israël I, Georges-François P, Grasso R, Tsuzuku T (1995) Spatial memory of body linear displacement: what is being stored? Science 269:95–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bles W (1981) Stepping around: circular vection and Coriolis effects. In: Long J, Baddeley A (eds) Attention and performance IX. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Bles W, de Wit G (1978) La sensation de rotation et la march circulaire [sensation of rotation and circular walking]. Aggressologie 19(A):29–30

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bruggeman H, Piuneu VS, Rieser JJ, Pick HL Jr (2009) Biomechanical versus inertial information: stable individual differences in perception of self-rotation. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 35:1472–1480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bülthoff HH, Yuille AL (1996) A Bayesian framework for the integration of visual modules. In: McClelland J, Inui T (eds) Attention and performance XVI: information integration in perception and communication. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler JS, Smith ST, Campos JL, Bülthoff HH (2010) Bayesian integration of visual and vestibular signals for heading. J Vis 10(11): Article 23. doi:10.1167/10.11.23

  • Campos JL, Bülthoff HH (in press) Multisensory integration during self-motion in virtual reality. In: Wallace M, Murray M (eds) Frontiers in the neural bases of multisensory processes, Taylor and Francis

  • Campos JL, Siegle JH, Mohler BJ, Bülthoff HH, Loomis JM (2009) Imagined self-motion differs from perceived self-motion: evidence from a novel continuous pointing method. PLoS ONE 4:e7793. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Campos JL, Byrne P, Sun H-J (2010) Body-based cues trump vision when estimating walked distance. Eur J Neurosci 31:1889–1898

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng K, Shettleworth SJ, Huttenlocher J, Rieser JJ (2007) Bayesian integration of spatial information. Psychol Bull 133:625–637

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Durgin FH, Mikio A, Gallistel CR, Haiken W (2009) The precision of locomotor odometry in humans. Exp Brain Res 193:429–436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ellard CG, Shaughnessy SC (2003) A comparison of visual and non-visual sensory inputs to walked distance in a blind-walking task. Perception 32:567–578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott D (1986) Continuous visual information may be important after all: a failure to replicate Thomson. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 12:388–391

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429–433

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst MO, Bülthoff HH (2004) Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends Cogn Sci 8:162–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faisal AA, Wolpert DM (2009) Near optimal combination of sensory and motor uncertainty in time during a naturalistic perception-action task. J Neurophysiol 101:1901–1912

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fetsch CR, Turner AH, DeAngelis GC, Angelaki DE (2009) Dynamic reweighting of visual and vestibular cues during self-motion perception. J Neurosci 29:15601–15612

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fukusima SS, Loomis JM, Da Silva JA (1997) Visual perception of egocentric distance as assessed by triangulation. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23:86–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gepshtein S, Burge J, Ernst MO, Banks MS (2005) The combination of vision and touch depends on spatial proximity. J Vis 5(11): Article 7. doi:10.1167/5.11.7

  • Glasauer S, Amorim MA, Vitte E, Berthoz A (1994) Goal-directed linear locomotion in normal and labyrinthine-defective subjects. Exp Brain Res 98:323–335

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Glasauer S, Amorim MA, Viaud-Delmon I, Berthoz A (2002) Differential effects of labyrinthine dysfunction on distance and direction during blindfolded walking of a triangular path. Exp Brain Res 145:489–497

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harris LR, Jenkin M, Zikovitz DC (2000) Visual and non-visual cues in the perception of linear self-motion. Exp Brain Res 135:12–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Israël I, Berthoz A (1989) Contribution of the otoliths to the calculation of linear displacement. J Neurophysiol 62:247–263

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Israël I, Grasso R, Georges-Francois P, Tsuzuku T, Berthoz A (1997) Spatial memory and path integration studied by self-driven passive linear displacement. I. Basic properties. J Neurophysiol 77:3180–3192

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs RA (1999) Optimal integration of texture and motion cues to depth. Vis Res 39:3621–3629

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jürgens R, Becker W (2006) Perception of angular displacement without landmarks: evidence for Bayesian fusion of vestibular, optokinetic, podokinesthetic and cognitive information. Exp Brain Res 174:528–543

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Knill DC, Saunders JA (2003) Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant? Vis Res 43:2539–2558

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Körding KP, Wolpert DM (2004) Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning. Nature 427:244–247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kunz BR, Creem-Regehr SH, Thompson WB (2009) Evidence for motor simulation in imagined locomotion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 35:1458–1471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lackner JR, DiZio P (2005) Vestibular, proprioceptive, and haptic contributions to spatial orientation. Annu Rev Psychol 56:115–147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loomis JM, Philbeck JW (2008) Measuring perception with spatial updating and action. In: Klatzky RL, Behrmann M, MacWhinney B (eds) Embodiment, egospace and action. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis JM, DaSilva JA, Fujita N, Fukusima SS (1992) Visual space-perception and visually-directed action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18:906–921

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • MacNeilage PR, Banks MS, Berger DR, Bülthoff HH (2007) A Bayesian model of the disambiguation of gravitoinertial force by visual cues. Exp Brain Res 179:263–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marlinsky VV (1999) Vestibular and vestibule-proprioceptive perception of motion in the horizontal plane in blindfolded man: I. Estimations of linear displacement. Neuroscience 90:389–394

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mittelstaedt ML, Mittelstaedt H (2001) Idiothetic navigation in humans: estimation of path length. Exp Brain Res 139:318–332

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nardini M, Jones P, Bedford R, Braddick O (2008) Development of cue integration in human navigation. Curr Biol 18:689–693

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rieser JJ, Ashmead DH, Talor CR, Youngquist GA (1990) Visual perception and the guidance of locomotion without vision to previously seen targets. Perception 19:675–689

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rieser JJ, Pick HL Jr, Ashmead DH, Garing AE (1995) Calibration of human locomotion and models of perceptual-motor organization. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 21:480–497

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Riley PO, Paolini G, Della Croce U, Paylo KW, Kerrigan DC (2007) A kinematic and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill walking in healthy subjects. Gait Posture 26:17–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Siegle JH, Campos JL, Mohler BJ, Loomis JM, Bülthoff HH (2009) Measurement of instantaneous perceived self-motion using continuous pointing. Exp Brain Res 195:429–444

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Souman JL, Frissen I, Sreenivasa MN, Ernst MO (2009) Walking straight into circles. Curr Biol 19:1538–1542

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sperry RW (1950) Neural basis of the spontaneous optokinetic response produced by visual inversion. J Comp Physiol Psychol 43:482–489

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Steenhuis RE, Goodale MA (1988) The effects of time and distance on accuracy of target-directed locomotion: does an accurate short-term memory for spatial location exist? J Mot Behav 20:399–415

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sun H-J, Lee AJ, Campos JL, Chan GSW, Zhang DH (2003) Multisensory integration in speed estimation during self-motion. Cyberpsychol Behav 6:509–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sun H-J, Campos JL, Chan GSW (2004a) Multisensory integration in the estimation of relative path length. Exp Brain Res 154:246–254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sun H-J, Campos JL, Chan GSW, Young M, Ellard C (2004b) The contributions of static visual cues, nonvisual cues, and optic flow in distance estimation. Perception 33:49–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson JA (1983) Is continuous visual monitoring necessary in visually guided locomotion? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 9:427–443

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Von Holst E, Mittelstaedt H (1950) Das Reafferenzprinzip (Wechselwirkungen zwischen Zentralnervensystem und Peripherie). Naturwissenschaften 37:464–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner S, Noppeney U (2010) Superadditive responses in superior temporal sulcus predict audiovisual benefits in object categorization. Cereb Cortex 20:1829–1842

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first two authors contributed equally to this work. We thank Michael Weyel for technical assistance and Dr John Butler for valuable advice on the data analysis. We also thank Dr Jack Loomis for earlier valuable discussions and insights. We gratefully acknowledge the work done by the mechanical and electrical workshops of the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics in adapting the CTM and making it operational. This work was funded by the European 6th Framework Programme CyberWalk (FP6-511092). The writing of this paper by the first author was partially supported by a NSERC grant attributed to Catherine Guastavino (McGill University).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut de Recherche en Communication et Cybernétique de Nantes (IRCCyN), UMR CNRS 6597, 1, rue de la Noë, B. P. 92101, 44321, Nantes Cedex 03, France

    Ilja Frissen

  2. Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Multisensory Perception and Action Group, Tübingen, Germany

    Ilja Frissen, Jan L. Souman & Marc O. Ernst

  3. Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Human Perception, Cognition, and Action Group, Tübingen, Germany

    Jennifer L. Campos

  4. Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Jennifer L. Campos

  5. Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, 550 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 2A2, Canada

    Jennifer L. Campos

  6. Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany

    Marc O. Ernst

Authors
  1. Ilja Frissen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer L. Campos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan L. Souman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marc O. Ernst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ilja Frissen or Jennifer L. Campos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Frissen, I., Campos, J.L., Souman, J.L. et al. Integration of vestibular and proprioceptive signals for spatial updating. Exp Brain Res 212, 163–176 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2717-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2717-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation