Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Howard, Ian P.

Publications and source records attributed to Howard, Ian P..

The Role of Visual Cues in Microgravity Spatial Orientation

In weightlessness, astronauts must rely on vision to remain spatially oriented. Although gravitational down cues are missing, most astronauts maintain a subjective vertical -a subjective sense of which way is up. This is evidenced by anecdotal reports of crewmembers feeling upside down (inversion illusions) or feeling that a floor has become a ceiling and vice versa (visual reorientation illusions). Instability in the subjective vertical direction can trigger disorientation and space motion sickness. On Neurolab, a virtual environment display system was used to conduct five interrelated experiments, which quantified: (a) how the direction of each person's subjective vertical depends on the orientation of the surrounding visual environment, (b) whether rolling the virtual visual environment produces stronger illusions of circular self-motion (circular vection) and more visual reorientation illusions than on Earth, (c) whether a virtual scene moving past the subject produces a stronger linear self-motion illusion (linear vection), and (d) whether deliberate manipulation of the subjective vertical changes a crewmember's interpretation of shading or the ability to recognize objects. None of the crew's subjective vertical indications became more independent of environmental cues in weightlessness. Three who were either strongly dependent on or independent of stationary visual cues in preflight tests remained so inflight. One other became more visually dependent inflight, but recovered postflight. Susceptibility to illusions of circular self-motion increased in flight. The time to the onset of linear self-motion illusions decreased and the illusion magnitude significantly increased for most subjects while free floating in weightlessness. These decreased toward one-G levels when the subject 'stood up' in weightlessness by wearing constant force springs. For several subjects, changing the relative direction of the subjective vertical in weightlessness-either by body rotation or by simply cognitively initiating a visual reorientation-altered the illusion of convexity produced when viewing a flat, shaded disc. It changed at least one person's ability to recognize previously presented two-dimensional shapes. Overall, results show that most astronauts become more dependent on dynamic visual motion cues and some become responsive to stationary orientation cues. The direction of the subjective vertical is labile in the absence of gravity. This can interfere with the ability to properly interpret shading, or to recognize complex objects in different orientations.

Oman, Charles M.↗

Perception of self-tilt in a true and illusory vertical plane

A tilted furnished room can induce strong visual reorientation illusions in stationary subjects. Supine subjects may perceive themselves upright when the room is tilted 90 degrees so that the visual polarity axis is kept aligned with the subject. This 'upright illusion' was used to induce roll tilt in a truly horizontal, but perceptually vertical, plane. A semistatic tilt profile was applied, in which the tilt angle gradually changed from 0 degrees to 90 degrees, and vice versa. This method produced larger illusory self-tilt than usually found with static tilt of a visual scene. Ten subjects indicated self-tilt by setting a tactile rod to perceived vertical. Six of them experienced the upright illusion and indicated illusory self-tilt with an average gain of about 0.5. This value is smaller than with true self-tilt (0.8), but comparable to the gain of visually induced self-tilt in erect subjects. Apparently, the contribution of nonvisual cues to gravity was independent of the subject's orientation to gravity itself. It therefore seems that the gain of visually induced self-tilt is smaller because of lacking, rather than conflicting, nonvisual cues. A vector analysis is used to discuss the results in terms of relative sensory weightings.

Non-NASA Center↗

Spatial vision within egocentric and exocentric frames of reference

It is remarkable that we are able to perceive a stable visual world and judge the directions, orientations, and movements of visual objects given that images move on the retina, the eyes move in the head, the head moves on the body, and the body moves in space. An understanding of the mechanisms underlying perceptual stability and spatial judgements requires precise definitions of relevant coordinate systems. An egocentric frame of reference is defined with respect to some part of the observer. There are four principal egocentric frames of reference, a station-point frame associated with the nodal point of the eye, an retinocentric frame associated with the retina, a headcentric frame associated with the head, and a bodycentric frame (torsocentric) associated with the torso. Additional egocentric frames can be identified with respect to any segment of the body. An egocentric task is one in which the position, orientation, or motion of an object is judged with respect to an egocentric frame of reference. A proprioceptive is a special kind of egocentric task in which the object being judged is also part of the body. An example of a proprioceptive task is that of directing the gaze toward the seen or unseen toe. An exocentric frame of reference is external to the observer. Geographical coordinates and the direction of gravity are examples of exocentric frames of reference. These various frames are listed in tabular form, together with examples of judgements of each type.

Howard, Ian P.↗

Spatial vision within egocentric and exocentric frames of reference

The extent to which perceptual judgements within egocentric and exocentric frames of reference are subject to illusory disturbances and long term modifications is discussed. It is argued that well known spatial illusions, such as the oculogyral illusion and induced visual motion have usually been discussed without proper attention being paid to the frame of reference within which they occur, and that this has led to the construction of inadequate theories and inappropriate procedures for testing them.

Howard, Ian P.↗