Visual Inertial Coherence Zone in the Perception of Heading

Abstract

Knowledge of human motion perception can be applied in the optimization of motion cueing algorithms. In the past it has been shown that some discrepancies between the amplitude or phase of a visual and inertial cue go unnoticed. These acceptable discrepancies are referred to as coherence zones. In the present experiment we investigate whether a coherence zone applies to the direction of visual and inertial motion cues. More specifically, we investigated how much heading of an inertial stimulus may deviate from a visual stimulus suggesting 'straight ahead' motion, before the 'straight ahead' percept falls apart. Subjects were presented with congruent visual-inertial linear horizontal motion stimuli with varying heading and incongruent visual-inertial linear horizontal motion stimuli, in which a visual cue suggesting straight ahead motion was coupled with an inertial heading cue with varying heading. Subjects judged I) whether or not they moved straight ahead, and II) whether or not the visual and inertial stimulus were congruent. We fitted psychometric curves to the combined judgments and calculated detection thresholds for a violation of either criterion. The results show that the 50% detection thresholds are larger in the incongruent than in the congruent condition. We interpret the threshold for the incongruent condition as the size of the coherence zone. In conclusion: we provide evidence of a coherence zone for heading, as wella as a measure of the size of the heading coherence zone. Nomenclature α = heading angle C = coherence variable µ = psychometric curve 50% detection threshold σ = psychometric curve slope 1 Ph.D. student,

Visual–vestibular integration during self-motion perception in younger and older adults.

“…Likewise, previous studies have demonstrated that younger adults weight visual and vestibular cues as a function of their relative reliabilities (e.g., Butler et al, 2010; Fetsch et al, 2009), but no previous studies have established whether the same is true for older adults. Finally, whereas a few previous studies have explored the types and magnitude of visual and vestibular spatial conflicts that younger adults will tolerate before they no longer integrate (de Winkel, Correia Gracio, Groen, & Werkhoven, 2010; de Winkel, Katliar, & Bülthoff, 2017; Kaliuzhna et al, 2015), the characteristics of the spatial window of integration are unknown for older adults. In fact, age-related changes to the spatial (rather than temporal) window of integration have generally not been well explored, even when considering other types of cue combinations (e.g., visual-auditory) or tasks (e.g., stimulus detection; de Dieuleveult et al, 2017).…”

An assessment of Causal Inference in visual-inertial traveled distance estimation

“…The concept was derived from the observation that physically moving observers are unable to detect concurrent visual motion when the amplitude of the visual motion is below a particular threshold [39,40]. CZ have been determined for the amplitude and phase of rotational as well as translation motion [41,42,43,44,45], and also for heading [46,30]. CI models can be said to be formed around an analogous concept, namely the probability that visual and inertial motion with any discrepancy will be attributed to a common cause Pr(C | e V , e I ).…”