The remembered vanishing location of a moving target has been found to be displaced downward in the direction of gravity (representational gravity) and more so with increasing retention intervals, suggesting that the visual spatial updating recruits an internal model of gravity. Despite being consistently linked with gravity, few inquiries have been made about the role of vestibular information in these trends. Previous experiments with static tilting of observers’ bodies suggest that under conflicting cues between the idiotropic vector and vestibular signals, the dynamic drift in memory is reduced to a constant displacement along the body's main axis. The present experiment aims to replicate and extend these outcomes while keeping the observers’ bodies unchanged in relation to physical gravity by varying the gravito-inertial acceleration using a short-radius centrifuge. Observers were shown, while accelerated to varying degrees, targets moving along several directions and were required to indicate the perceived vanishing location after a variable interval. Increases of the gravito-inertial force (up to 1.4G), orthogonal to the idiotropic vector, did not affect the direction of representational gravity, but significantly disrupted its time course. The role and functioning of an internal model of gravity for spatial perception and orientation are discussed in light of the results.
AngelakiD. E., & CullenK. E. (2008). Vestibular system: The many facets of a multimodal sense. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 31, 125–150.
2.
AngelakiD. E., KlierE. M., & SnyderL. H. (2009). A vestibular sensation: probabilistic approaches to spatial perception. Neuron, 64, 448–461.
3.
AngelakiD. E., ShaikhA. G., GreenA. M., & DickmanJ. D. (2004). Neurons compute internal models of the physical laws of motion. Nature, 430, 560–564.
4.
BakerJ. T., HarperT. M., & SnyderL. H. (2003). Spatial memory following shifts of gaze: I. Saccades to memorized world-fixed and gaze-fixed targets. Journal of Neurophysiology, 89, 2564-2576.
5.
BertaminiM. (1993). Memory for position and dynamic representation. Memory & Cognition, 21, 449–457.
6.
BerthozA. (2000). The brain's sense of movement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
BoscoG., MonacheS., GravanoS., IndovinaI., La ScaleiaB., MaffeiV., … LacquanitiF. (2015). Filling gaps in visual motion for target capture. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 9. doi:10.3389/fnint.2015.00013
8.
ButlerJ. S., SmithS. T., CamposJ. L., & BülthoffH. H. (2010). Bayesian integration of visual and vestibular signals for heading. Journal of Vision, 10. doi:10.1167/10.11.23
9.
ClémentG. (2011). Fundamentals of space medicine. New York: Springer.
10.
ClémentG., MooreS. T., RaphanT., & CohenB. (2001). Perception of tilt (somatogravic illusion) in response to sustained linear acceleration during space flight. Experimental Brain Research, 138, 410–418.
11.
ClémentG., & ReschkeM. F. (2008). Neuroscience in space. New York, USA: Springer.
12.
De Sá TeixeiraN. (2014). Fourier decomposition of spatial localization errors reveals an idiotropic dominance of an internal model of gravity. Vision Research, 105, 177–188.
13.
De Sá TeixeiraN. A. (2016a). How fast do objects fall in visual memory? uncovering the temporal and spatial features of representational gravity. Plos One, 11(2), e0148953. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148953
14.
De Sá TeixeiraN. A. (2016b). The visual representations of motion and of gravity are functionally independent: evidence of a differential effect of smooth pursuit eye movements. Experimental Brain Research, 234, 2491–2504.
15.
De Sá TeixeiraN. A., & HechtH. (2014). The dynamic representation of gravity is suspended when the idiotropic vector is misaligned with gravity. Journal of Vestibular Research, 24, 267–279.
16.
De Sá TeixeiraN. A., HechtH., & OliveiraA. M. (2013). The representational dynamics of remembered projectile locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 1690–1699.
17.
De Sá TeixeiraN. A., & OliveiraA. M. (2014). Spatial and foveal biases, not perceived mass or heaviness, explain the effect of target size on representational momentum and representational gravity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1664–1679.
18.
De VrijerM., MedendorpW. P., & Van GisbergenJ. A. M. (2008). Shared computational mechanisms for tilt compensation accounts for biased verticality percepts in motion and pattern vision. Journal of Neurophysiology, 99, 915–930.
19.
DiZioP., & LacknerJ. R. (2002). Sensorimotor aspects of high-speed artificial gravity: III. Sensorimotor Adaptation. Journal of Vestibular Research, 12, 291–299.
20.
FreydJ. J. (1983). The mental representation of movement when static stimuli are viewed. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 575–581.
21.
FreydJ. J. (1987). Dynamic mental representations. Psychological Review, 94, 427–438.
22.
FreydJ. J., & FinkeR. A. (1984). Representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 126–132.
23.
FreydJ. J., & FinkeR. A. (1985). A velocity effect for representational momentum. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 23, 443–446.
24.
FreydJ. J., & JohnsonJ. Q. (1987). Probing the time course of representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 259–268.
25.
FreydJ. J., PantzerT. M., & ChengJ. L. (1988). Representing statics as forces in equilibrium. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 395–407.
GiannaC., HeimbrandS., & GrestyM. (1996). Thresholds for detection of motion direction during passive lateral whole-body acceleration in normal subjects and patients with bilateral loss of labyrinthine function. Brain Research Bulletin, 40, 443–447.
28.
GibsonJ. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
29.
GrushR. (2005). Internal models and the construction of time: generalizing from state estimation to trajectory estimation to address temporal features of perception, including temporal illusions. Journal of Neural Engineering, 2, S209–S218.
30.
HarrisL. R., HerpersR., HofhammerT., & JenkinM. (2014) How much gravity is needed to establish the perceptual upright?PLoS ONE, 9, e106207. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0106207
31.
HarrisL. R., JenkinM. R., DydeR. T., & JenkinH. L. (2011). Enhancing visual cues to orientation: suggestions for space travellers and the elderly. Progress in Brain Research, 191, 133–142.
32.
von HelmholtzH. (1867). Handbuch der physiologischen optik. Leipzig: Leopold Voss.
33.
HowardI. P., & TempletonW. B. (1966). Human spatial orientation. New York, USA: Wiley.
34.
HubbardT. L. (1990). Cognitive representation of linear motion: possible direction and gravity effects in judged displacement. Memory & Cognition, 18, 299–309.
35.
HubbardT. L. (1995). Cognitive representation of motion: evidence for friction and gravity analogues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 241–254.
36.
HubbardT. L. (1997). Target size and displacement along the axis of implied gravitational attraction: effects of implied weight and evidence of representational gravity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1484–1493.
37.
HubbardT. L. (2005). Representational momentum and related displacements in spatial memory: A review of the findings. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 822–851.
38.
HubbardT. L. (2006). Computational theory and cognition in representational momentum and related types of displacement: A reply to kerzel. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 174–177.
39.
HubbardT. L., & BharuchaJ. J. (1988). Judged displacement in apparent vertical and horizontal motion. Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 211–221.
40.
JampelR. S., & ShiD. X. (2002). The absence of so-called compensatory ocular countertorsion: the response of the eyes to head tilt. Archives of Ophthalmology, 120, 1331–1340.
41.
JenkinH. L., DydeR. T., JenkinM. R., HarrisL. R., & HowardI. P. (2003). Relative role of visual and non-visual cues in judging the direction of ‘up': experiments in the york tilted room facility. Journal of Vestibular Research, 13, 287–293.
42.
JenkinH. L., JenkinM. R., DydeR. T., & HarrisL. R. (2004). Shape-from-shading depends on visual, gravitational, and body-orientation cues. Perception, 33, 1453–1461.
43.
KerzelD. (2000). Eye movements and visible persistence explain the mislocalization of the final position of a moving target. Vision Research, 40, 3703–3715.
44.
KerzelD. (2002). The locus of “memory displacement” is at least partially perceptual: effects of velocity, expectation, friction, memory averaging, and weight. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 680–692.
45.
KerzelD. (2003). Centripetal force draws the eyes, not memory of the target, toward the center. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 458–466.
46.
KerzelD. (2006). Why eye movements and perceptual factors have to be controlled in studies on “representational momentum”. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 166–173.
47.
KerzelD., JordanJ. S., & MüsselerJ. (2001). The role of perception in the mislocalization of the final position of a moving target. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 829–840.
48.
LacknerJ. R., & DiZioP. (2005). Vestibular, proprioceptive, and haptic contributions to spatial orientation. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 115–147.
49.
LacquanitiF., BoscoG., GravanoS., IndovinaI., La ScaleiaB., MaffeiV., & ZagoM. (2014). Multisensory integration and internal models for sensing gravity effects in primates. BioMed Research International. Article no. 615854. doi:10.1155/2014/615854
50.
LacquanitiF., BoscoG., GravanoS., IndovinaI., La ScaleiaB., MAffeiV., & ZagoM. (2015). Gravity in the brain as a reference for space and time perception. Multisensory Research, 28, 397–426.
51.
LacquanitiF., BoscoG., IndovinaI., La ScaleiaB., MaffeiV., MoscatelliA., & ZagoM. (2013). Visual gravitational motion and the vestibular system in humans. Frontiers of Integrative Neuroscience, 7. doi:10.3389/fnint.2013.00101
52.
La ScaleiaB., LacquanitiF., & ZagoM. (2014). Neural extrapolation of motion for a ball rolling down an inclined plane. PloS One, 9, e99837. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099837
53.
La ScaleiaB., ZagoM., & LacquanitiF. (2015). Hand interception of occluded motion in humans: A test of model-based vs. on-line Control. Journal of Neurophysiology, 114, 1577–1592.
54.
LobmaierJ. S., & MastF. W. (2007). The thatcher illusion: rotating the viewer instead of the picture. Perception, 36, 537–546.
55.
LopezC., BachofnerC., MercierM., & BlankeO. (2009). Gravity and observer's body orientation influence the visual perception of human body postures. Journal or Vision, 9, 1–14.
56.
MacNeilageR. R., BanksM. S., BergerD. R., & BülthoffH. H. (2007). A bayesian model of the disambiguation of gravitoinertial force by visual cues. Experimental Brain Research, 179, 263–290.
57.
MarrD. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freema.
58.
MittelstaedtH. (1983). A new solution to the problem of the subjective vertical. Naturwissenschaften, 70, 272–281.
59.
MittelstaedtH. (1986). The subjective vertical as a function of visual and extraretinal cues. Acta Psychologica, 63, 63–85.
60.
MotesM. A., HubbardT. L., CourtneyJ. R., & RypmaB. (2008). A principal components analysis of dynamic spatial memory biases. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1076–1083.
61.
MowrerO. H. (1937). The influence of vision during bodily rotation upon the duration of post-rotational nystagmus. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 25, 351–364.
62.
NagaiM., KazaiK., & YagiA. (2002). Larger forward memory displacement in the direction of gravity. Visual Cognition, 9, 28–40.
63.
NijhawanR. (1994). Motion extrapolation in catching. Nature, 370, 256–257.
64.
NijhawanR. (2008). Visual prediction: psychophysics and neurophysiology of compensation for time delays. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31, 179–198.
65.
NijhawanR., & KirschfeldK. (2003). Analogous mechanisms compensate for neural delays in the sensory and the motor pathways: evidence from motor flash-lag. Current Biology, 13, 749–753.
66.
OmanC. M. (2003). Human visual orientation in weightlessness. In HarrisL. & JenkinM. (Eds.), Levels of perception (pp. 375–398). New York: Springer.
67.
PeirceJ. W. (2007). Psychopy – psychophysics software in python. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 162, 8–13.
68.
PeirceJ. W. (2009). Generating stimuli for neuroscience using psychoPy. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 2. doi:10.3389/neuro.11.010.2008
69.
PoonC.-S., & MerfeldD. M. (2005). Internal models: The state of the art. Journal of Neural Engineering, 2, editorial, i–v.
70.
PrsaM., Jimenez-RezendeD., & BlankeO. (2015). Inference of perceptual priors from path dynamics of passive self-motion. Journal of Neurophysiology, 113, 1400–1413.
71.
ReedC. L., & VinsonN. G. (1996). Conceptual effects on representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 839–850.
72.
SchöneH. (1962). Über den einfluss der schwerkraft auf die augenrollung und auf die wahrnehmung der lage im raum. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Physiologie, 46, 57–87.
73.
SekulerR., & ArmstrongR. (1978). Fourier analysis of polar coordinate data in visual physiology and psychophysics. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 10, 8–14.
74.
ShepardR. N. (1984). Ecological constraints on internal representation: resonant kinematics of perceiving, imagining, thinking, and dreaming. Psychological Review, 91, 417–447.
75.
SnyderL. (1999). This way up: illusions and the internal models in the vestibular system. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 396–398.
76.
TinC., & PoonC.-S. (2005). Internal models in sensorimotor integration: perspectives from adaptive control theory. Journal of Neural Engineering, 2, S147–S163.
77.
Van BarneveldD. C. P. B. M., KiemeneijA. C. M., & Van OpstalA. J. (2011). Absence of spatial updating when the visuomotor system is unsure about stimulus motion. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(29), 10558–10568.
78.
WadeS. W., & CurthoysI. S. (1997). The effect of ocular torsional position on perception of the roll-tilt of visual stimuli. Vision Research, 37, 1071–1078.
79.
WoellnerR. C., & GraybielA. (1959). Counterrrolling ofthe eyes and its dependance on the magnitude of gravitational or inertial force acting laterally on the body. Journal of Applied Physiology, 14, 632–634.
80.
YoungL. R. (1983). Perception of the body in space: mechanisms. In BrookhartJ. M., MountcastleV. B. and MagounH. W. (Eds.), Handbook of physiology: The nervous system III (pp. 1023–1066). Bethesda, MD: American Physiological Society.
81.
YoungL. R. (1999). Artificial gravtiy considerations for a Mars exploration mission. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 871, 367–378.
82.
YoungL. R., HechtH., LyneL. E., SienkoK. H., CheungC. C., & KavelaarsJ. (2001). Artificial gravity: head movements during short-radius centrifugation. Acta Astronautica, 49, 215–226.
83.
YoungL. R., SienkoK. H., LyneL. E., HechtH., & NatapoffA. (2003). Adaptation of the vestibulo-ocular reflex, subjective tilt, and motion sickness to head movements during short-radius centrifugation. Journal of Vestibular Research, 13, 65–77.
84.
ZagoM., McIntyreJ., SenotP., & LacquanitiF. (2008). Internal models and prediction of visual gravitational motion. Vision Research, 48, 1532–1538.
