Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Size of the Visual Feedback-Providing Object Affects the Vertical Posture Maintenance in Humans

  • Published:
Human Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Of all information that permits a person to elaborate an idea about the spatial position of their body, visual signals about the structures and sizes of visible objects in the surrounding play an important role. A study was made to find out how a change in the size of an object in the field of vision affects the stability of standing in healthy people. Subjects stood in stereo glasses and a mask that limited the field of vision in a darkened room in front of a screen (silver screen, 2 × 1.5 m), and a three-dimensional image of a dark gray sphere was projected on the screen. The subjects saw only the virtual three-dimensional image of the sphere in these conditions. Four sphere sizes with diameters of 8.75, 17.5, 35, and 70 cm were used. Spheres with these sizes covered visual fields of 4.5, 9, 18, and 36 degrees, respectively. The sphere was motionless in control conditions, while displacements of the sphere in the anteroposterior and lateral directions were in phase or out of phase with oscillations of the body’s center of gravity (CoG) in test conditions. The amplitude of sphere oscillations was twice as high as the amplitude of CoG oscillations. The subjects performed 36 tests of 40 s each; the instruction was to calmly stay on a stabilographic platform and to look at the sphere. The tests were grouped into four blocks, each including three control tests with the immobile sphere and six tests with the sphere moving in phase or out of phase with CoG oscillations. The interval between tests was 1 min. The sphere had the same size in all tests of a block. After each block, the subject rested in a sitting position for 4–5 min. Blocks with different sphere sizes were performed in a random order. The amplitude-frequency characteristics of two elementary variables were calculated from the trajectories that the center of pressure (CoP) of the feet showed in the anteroposterior and lateral directions. The variables were the trajectory of the CoG projection on the support (CoG variable) and the difference between the CoP and CoG trajectories. Sphere displacements destabilized the vertical posture in the test conditions. Destabilization increased with the increasing sphere size. Quality of standing worsened because of the changes in both amplitude and frequency characteristics of the CoG and CoP–CoG variables. An increase in sphere size exerted an opposite effect in control tests; i.e., body oscillations decreased. Changes in the stability of the vertical posture with increasing size of the sphere were presumably associated with the peculiarities of using visual information that comes from the central and peripheral fields of view.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Mittelstaedt, H., The role of the otoliths in the perception of the orientation of self and world to the vertical, Zool. Jahrb., Abt. Allg. Zool. Physiol. Tiere, 1991, vol. 95, nos. 3–4, p. 419.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dearing, R.R. and Harris, L.R., The contribution of different parts of the visual field to the perception of upright, Vision Res., 2011, vol. 51, no. 20, p. 2207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Karim, A.K. and Kojima, H., The what and why of perceptual asymmetries in the visual domain, Adv. Cognit. Psychol., 2010, vol. 6, no. 12, p. 103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Verleger, R. and Śmigasiewicz, K., Consciousness wanted, attention found: reasons for the advantage of the left visual field in identifying T2 among rapidly presented series, Conscious Cognit., 2015, vol. 35, no. 3, p. 260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Śmigasiewicz, K., Westphal, N., and Verleger, R., Leftward bias in orienting to and disengaging attention from salient task-irrelevant events in rapid serial visual presentation, Neuropsychologia, 2017, vol. 94, p. 96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Curcio, C.A., Sloan, K.R., Kalina, R.E., and Hendrickson, A.E., Human photoreceptor topography, J. Comp. Neurol., 1990, vol. 292, no. 4, p. 497.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Danckert, J. and Goodale, M., Ups and downs in the visual control of action, in Taking Action: Cognitive Neuroscience Perspectives on Intentional Acts, Johnson-Frey, S.H., Ed., Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003, p. 29.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sanda, N., Cerliani, L., Authié, C.N., et al., Visual brain plasticity induced by central and peripheral visual field loss, Brain Struct. Funct., 2018, vol. 223, no. 7, p. 3473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gattass, R., Nascimento-Silva, S., Soares, J.G.M., et al., Cortical visual areas in monkeys: location, topography, connections, columns, plasticity and cortical dynamics, Philos. Trans. R. Soc., B, 2005, vol. 360, no. 1456, p. 709.

  10. Sabbah, N., Sanda, N., Authié, C.N., et al., Reorganization of early visual cortex functional connectivity following selective peripheral and central visual loss, Sci. Rep., 2017, vol. 7, p. 43223.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Burdea, G. and Coiffet, P., Virtual Reality Technology, New York: Wiley, 2003, 2nd ed.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Caron, O., Faure, B., and Brenière, Y., Estimating the center of gravity of the body on the basis of the center of pressure in standing posture, J. Biomech., 1997, vol. 30, nos. 11–12, p. 1169.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rougier, P., Compatibility of postural behavior induced by two aspects of visual feedback: time delay and scale display, Exp. Brain Res., 2005, vol. 165, no. 2, p. 193.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nafati, G. and Vuillerme, N., Decreasing internal focus of attention improves postural control during quiet standing in young healthy adults, Res. Quart. Exercise Sport, 2011, vol. 82, no. 4, p. 634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Munoz, F. and Rougier, P.R., Estimation of centre of gravity movements in sitting posture: application to trunk backward tilt, J. Biomech., 2011, vol. 44, no. 9, p. 1771.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Winter, D.A., Patla, A.E., Prince, F.M., et al., Stiffness control of balance in quiet standing, J. Neurophysiol., 1998, vol. 80, no. 3, p. 1211.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kozhina, G.V., Levik, Y.S., Popov, A.K., and Smetanin, B.N., Visuomotor adaptation in healthy humans in standing position under the conditions of destabilization of virtual visual environment, Hum. Physiol., 2018, vol. 44, no. 5, p. 517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kozhina, G.V., Levik, Y.S., Popov, A.K., and Smetanin, B.N., Vertical posture maintenance with multiple repetitions under the conditions of destabilizing virtual visual environment, Hum. Physiol., 2019, vol. 45, no. 5, p. 515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Amblard, B. and Carblanc, A., Role of foveal and peripheral visual information in maintenance of postural equilibrium in man, Percept. Motor Skills, 1980, vol. 51, no. 3, p. 903.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kawakita, T., Kuno, S., Miyake, Y., and Watanabe, S., Body sway induced by depth linear vection in reference to central and peripheral visual field, Jpn. J. Physiol., 2000, vol. 50, no. 3, p. 315.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Park, D.J., Effect of visual stimulus using central and peripheral visual field on postural control of normal subjects, J. Phys. Ther. Sci., 2016, vol. 28, no. 6, p. 1769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Horiuchi, K., Ishihara, M., and Imanaka, K., The essential role of optical flow in the peripheral visual field for stable quiet standing: Evidence from the use of a head-mounted display, PLoS One, 2017, vol. 12, no. 10, p. 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kelly, J.W., Riecke, B., Loomis, J.M., and Beall, A.C., Visual control of posture in real and virtual environments, Percept. Psychophys., 2008, vol. 70, no. 1, p. 158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stoffregen, T.A., Brady, B.G., Merhi, O.A., and Oullier, O., Postural responses to two Technologies for generating optical flow, Presence, 2004, vol. 13, no. 5, p. 601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cunningham, D.W., Nusseck, H.G., Teufel, H., and Bulthoff, H.H., A psychophysical examination of movings, cylindrical virtual reality setups, and characteristic trajectories, Proc. IEEE Virtual Reality Conf. (VR’06), Alexandria, VA, 2006, p. 111.

  26. Osaka, N., Peripheral vision, in New Sensation-Perception Psychology Handbook, Oyama, T., Imai, S., and Wake, T., Eds., Tokyo: Seishin-Shobou, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Daniel, P.M. and Whitteridge D., The representation of the visual field on the cerebral cortex in monkeys, J. Physiol., 1961, vol. 159, p. 203.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Gurfinkel, V.S., Ivanenko, Y.P., Levik, Y.S., and Babakova, I.A., Kinesthetic reference for human orthograde posture, Neuroscience, 1995, vol. 68, no. 1, p. 229.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project no. 18-015-00222).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kharkevich Institute of Information Transmission Problems, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

    B. N. Smetanin, Yu. S. Levik, G. V. Kozhina & A. K. Popov

Authors
  1. B. N. Smetanin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yu. S. Levik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. V. Kozhina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. K. Popov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. N. Smetanin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests. The authors declare that they have no real or potential conflict of interest.

Statement of compliance with standards of research involving humans as subjects. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments and were approved by the Ethics Committee at the Kharkevich Institute of Information Transmission Problems (Moscow). All individual participants involved in the study voluntarily gave their written informed consent for participation after being informed about the potential risks and benefits and nature of the study.

Additional information

Translated by T. Tkacheva

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smetanin, B.N., Levik, Y.S., Kozhina, G.V. et al. The Size of the Visual Feedback-Providing Object Affects the Vertical Posture Maintenance in Humans. Hum Physiol 46, 677–688 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119720060109

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119720060109

Keywords:

Search

Navigation