Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Holly, J. E.

Publications and source records attributed to Holly, J. E..

Translational Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex and Motion Perception During Interaural Linear Acceleration: Comparison of Different Motion Paradigms

The neural mechanisms to resolve ambiguous tilt-translation motion have been hypothesized to be different for motion perception and eye movements. Previous studies have demonstrated differences in ocular and perceptual responses using a variety of motion paradigms, including Off-Vertical Axis Rotation (OVAR), Variable Radius Centrifugation (VRC), translation along a linear track, and tilt about an Earth-horizontal axis. While the linear acceleration across these motion paradigms is presumably equivalent, there are important differences in semicircular canal cues. The purpose of this study was to compare translation motion perception and horizontal slow phase velocity to quantify consistencies, or lack thereof, across four different motion paradigms. Twelve healthy subjects were exposed to sinusoidal interaural linear acceleration between 0.01 and 0.6 Hz at 1.7 m/s/s (equivalent to 10 tilt) using OVAR, VRC, roll tilt, and lateral translation. During each trial, subjects verbally reported the amount of perceived peak-to-peak lateral translation and indicated the direction of motion with a joystick. Binocular eye movements were recorded using video-oculography. In general, the gain of translation perception (ratio of reported linear displacement to equivalent linear stimulus displacement) increased with stimulus frequency, while the phase did not significantly vary. However, translation perception was more pronounced during both VRC and lateral translation involving actual translation, whereas perceptions were less consistent and more variable during OVAR and roll tilt which did not involve actual translation. For each motion paradigm, horizontal eye movements were negligible at low frequencies and showed phase lead relative to the linear stimulus. At higher frequencies, the gain of the eye movements increased and became more inphase with the acceleration stimulus. While these results are consistent with the hypothesis that the neural computational strategies for motion perception and eye movements differ, they also indicate that the specific motion platform employed can have a significant effect on both the amplitude and phase of each.

Beaton, K. H.↗

Effects of Frequency and Motion Paradigm on Perception of Tilt and Translation During Periodic Linear Acceleration

Previous studies have demonstrated an effect of frequency on the gain of tilt and translation perception. Results from different motion paradigms are often combined to extend the stimulus frequency range. For example, Off-Vertical Axis Rotation (OVAR) and Variable Radius Centrifugation (VRC) are useful to test low frequencies of linear acceleration at amplitudes that would require impractical sled lengths. The purpose of this study was to compare roll-tilt and lateral translation motion perception in 12 healthy subjects across four paradigms: OVAR, VRC, sled translation and rotation about an earth-horizontal axis. Subjects were oscillated in darkness at six frequencies from 0.01875 to 0.6 Hz (peak acceleration equivalent to 10 deg, less for sled motion below 0.15 Hz). Subjects verbally described the amplitude of perceived tilt and translation, and used a joystick to indicate the direction of motion. Consistent with previous reports, tilt perception gain decreased as a function of stimulus frequency in the motion paradigms without concordant canal tilt cues (OVAR, VRC and Sled). Translation perception gain was negligible at low stimulus frequencies and increased at higher frequencies. There were no significant differences between the phase of tilt and translation, nor did the phase significantly vary across stimulus frequency. There were differences in perception gain across the different paradigms. Paradigms that included actual tilt stimuli had the larger tilt gains, and paradigms that included actual translation stimuli had larger translation gains. In addition, the frequency at which there was a crossover of tilt and translation gains appeared to vary across motion paradigm between 0.15 and 0.3 Hz. Since the linear acceleration in the head lateral plane was equivalent across paradigms, differences in gain may be attributable to the presence of linear accelerations in orthogonal directions and/or cognitive aspects based on the expected motion paths.

Beaton, K. H.↗