• Tatjana Seizova-Cajic and W L Ben Sachtler.
• School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Brennan Building A18, Sydney, 2006, NSW, Australia. tanjas@psych.usyd.edu.au
• Exp Brain Res. 2007 Jul 1; 181 (1): 117-29.

AbstractVibratory stimulation of the neck muscles can elicit illusory drift of a visual target; after vibration stops, motion in the opposite direction is perceived. This motion aftereffect (MAE) could be due to adaptation of proprioceptive mechanisms that encode head orientation, or at a stage where visual and proprioceptive information are combined. To distinguish between these two possibilities, we applied vibratory stimulation to dorsolateral neck muscles for 15-s periods alternating with 15-s periods without vibration. Twenty-six observers used a hand-held tracker to indicate perceived motion of a stationary light-emitting diode (LED) in an otherwise dark room. In the critical condition, observers were in complete darkness during vibration, and the LED was only turned on in post-vibration periods. If adaptation was purely proprioceptive, a visual MAE should have occurred in this condition, but it did not. In a follow-up experiment (N = 9), the LED was presented intermittently to determine if there was a position aftereffect that might have been inhibited by processes signalling an absence of motion. No aftereffect occurred under these conditions either. In both experiments, a visual stimulus had to be present during the adaptation period in order to elicit an aftereffect. Results from our previous study ruled out an explanation based on suppression of eye movements. Thus, the most likely site responsible for the visual aftereffect lies with bimodal mechanisms combining proprioceptive and visual information. We conclude that the bimodal mechanisms adapted more quickly than the proprioceptive mechanisms from which they received input.

24 keywords...

hide…