Supra-spinal circuits shape inhibitory postural adjustments anticipating voluntary index-finger flexion

We investigated the influence of gaze elevation on judging the possibility of passing under high obstacles during pitch body tilts, while stationary, in absence of allocentric cues. Specifically, we aimed at studying the influence of egocentric references upon geocentric judgements. Seated subjects, orientated at various body orientations, were asked to perceptually estimate the possibility of passing under a projected horizontal line while keeping their gaze on a fixation target and imagining a horizontal body displacement. The results showed a global overestimation of the possibility of passing under the line, and confirmed the influence of body orientation reported by Bringoux et al. (Exp Brain Res 185(4):673–680, 2008). More strikingly, a linear influence of gaze elevation was found on perceptual estimates. Precisely, downward eye elevation yielded increased overestimations, and conversely upward gaze elevation yielded decreased overestimations. Furthermore, body and gaze orientation effects were independent and combined additively to yield a global egocentric influence with a weight of 45 and 54%, respectively. Overall, our data suggest that multiple egocentric references can jointly affect the estimated possibility of passing under high obstacles. These results are discussed in terms of “interpenetrability” between geocentric and egocentric reference frames and clearly demonstrate that gaze elevation is involved, as body orientation, in geocentric spatial localization.     

Influence of whole-body pitch tilt and kinesthetic cues on the perceived gravity-referenced eye level

We investigated the effects of whole body tilt and lifting the arm against gravity on perceptual estimates of the Gravity-Referenced Eye Level (GREL), which corresponds to the subjective earth-referenced horizon. The results showed that the perceived GREL was influenced by body tilt, that is, lowered with forward tilt and elevated with backward tilt of the body. GREL estimates obtained by arm movements without vision were more biased by whole-body tilt than purely visual estimates. Strikingly, visual GREL estimates became more dependent on whole-body tilt when the indication of level was obtained by arm lifting. These findings indicate that active motor involvement and/or the addition of kinesthetic information increases the body tilt-induced bias when making GREL judgements. The introduction of motor/kinaesthetic cues may induce a switch from a semi-geocentric to a more egocentric frame of reference. This result challenges the assumption that combining non-conflicting multiple sensory inputs and/or using intermodal information provided during action should improve perceptual performance.     

Interpretation of a discontinuity in the sense of verticality at large body tilt

Results of earlier spatial-orientation studies focusing on the sense of verticality have emphasized an intriguing paradox. Despite evidence that nearly veridical signals for gravicentric head orientation and egocentric visual stimulus orientation are available, roll-tilted subjects err in the direction of the long body axis when adjusting a visual line to vertical in darkness (Aubert effect). This has led to the suggestion that a central egocentric bias signal with fixed strength and direction acts to pull the perceived vertical to the subjects' zenith (M-model). In the present study, the subjective visual vertical (SVV) was tested in six human subjects, across the entire 360 degrees range. For comparison, body-tilt estimates from four subjects where collected in a separate series of experiments. For absolute tilts up to approximately 135 degrees, SVV responses showed a gradually increasing Aubert effect that could not be attributed to errors in perceived body tilt but was nicely in line with the M-model. At larger absolute tilts, SVV errors abruptly reversed sign, now showing a pattern concordant with errors in body-tilt estimates but incompatible with the M-model. These results suggest that, in the normal working range, the perception of external space and the perception of body posture are based on different processing of body-tilt signals. Beyond this range, both spatial-orientation tasks seem to rely mainly on a common tilt signal.     

Otolith signals contribute to inter-individual differences in the perception of gravity-centered space

The aim of the present study was to investigate (1) the relative contribution of the egocentric reference as well as body orientation perception to visual horizon percept during tilt or during increased gravito-inertial acceleration (GiA, hypergravity environment) conditions and (2) the role of vestibular signals in the inter-individual differences observed in these perceptual modalities. Perceptual estimates analysis showed that backward tilt induced (1) an elevation of the visual horizon, (2) an elevation of the egocentric estimation (visual straight ahead) and (3) an overestimation of body tilt. The increase in the magnitude of GiA induced (1) a lowering of the apparent horizon, (2) a lowering of the straight ahead and (3) a perception of backward tilt. Overall, visual horizon percept can be expressed as the combination of body orientation perception and egocentric estimation. When assessing otolith reactivity using off-vertical axis rotation (OVAR), only visual egocentric estimation was significantly correlated with horizontal OVAR performance. On the one hand, we found a correlation between a low modulation amplitude of the otolith responses and straight ahead accuracy when the head axis was tilted relative to gravity. On the other hand, the bias of otolith responses was significantly correlated with straight ahead accuracy when subjects were submitted to an increase in the GiA. Thus, straight ahead sense would be dependent to some extent to otolith function. These results are discussed in terms of the contribution of otolith inputs in the overall multimodal integration subtending spatial constancy.     

Effects of external feedback about body tilt: Influence on the Subjective Proprioceptive Horizon

The present study investigated a cognitive aspect upon spatial perception, namely the impact of a true or false verbal feedback (FB) about the magnitude of body tilt on Subjective Proprioceptive Horizon (SPH) estimates. Subjects were asked to set their extended arm normal to gravity for different pitch body tilts up to 9 degrees . True FB were provided at all body tilt angles, whereas false FB were provided only at 6 degrees backward and 6 degrees forward body tilts for half of the trials. Our data confirmed previous results about the egocentric influence of body tilt itself upon SPH: estimates were linearly lowered with forward tilts and elevated with backward tilts. In addition, results showed a significant effect of the nature of the external FB provided to the subjects. When subjects received a false FB inducing a 3 degrees forward bias relative to physical body tilt, they set their SPH consequently higher than when they received a false FB inducing a 3 degrees backward bias. These findings clearly indicated that false cognitive information about body tilt might significantly modify the judgement of a geocentric direction of space, such as the SPH. This may have deleterious repercussions in aeronautics when pilots have to localize external objects relative to earth-based directions in darkened environments.     

Pitch body orientation influences the perception of self-motion direction induced by optic flow

We studied the effect of static pitch body tilts on the perception of self-motion direction induced by a visual stimulus. Subjects were seated in front of a screen on which was projected a 3D cluster of moving dots visually simulating a forward motion of the observer with upward or downward directional biases (relative to a true earth horizontal direction). The subjects were tilted at various angles relative to gravity and were asked to estimate the direction of the perceived motion (nose-up, as during take-off or nose-down, as during landing). The data showed that body orientation proportionally affected the amount of error in the reported perceived direction (by 40% of body tilt magnitude in a range of ±20°) and these errors were systematically recorded in the direction of body tilt. As a consequence, a same visual stimulus was differently interpreted depending on body orientation. While the subjects were required to perform the task in a geocentric reference frame (i.e., relative to a gravity-related direction), they were obviously influenced by egocentric references. These results suggest that the perception of self-motion is not elaborated within an exclusive reference frame (either egocentric or geocentric) but rather results from the combined influence of both.     

The elevator illusion results from the combination of body orientation and egocentric perception

Perception of body orientation and apparent location of objects are altered when humans are using assisted means of locomotion and the resultant of the imposed acceleration and gravity is no longer aligned with the gravitational vertical. As the otolithic system cannot discriminate the acceleration of gravity from sustained inertial accelerations, individuals would perceive the resultant acceleration vector (GiA) as the vertical. However, when subjects are aligned on the GiA, an increase in the magnitude of GiA induced a lowering of the apparent visual horizon (i.e. “elevator illusion”). The main aim of this study was to quantify the contribution of body and egocentric perception in the elevator illusion. While being exposed to 1 G and 1.3 G and aligned on the GiA acceleration, subjects (N = 20) were asked (1) to set a luminous target to the subjective horizon, (2) to set a luminous target on “straight ahead” position (egocentric task) and (3) to rotate a tilting tube to their subjective perception of body orientation. Results showed that increasing GiA lowered horizon and egocentric settings and induces a backward body tilt perception. Moreover, the elevator illusion can be expressed as the additive combination of two processes: one that is dependent on body tilt perception, and the other that is dependent on egocentric perception. Both misperceptions in hypergravity may be considered to be a consequence of excessive shearing of the otolith organs. However large inter-individual differences in body tilt perception were observed. This last result was discussed in terms of the contribution of extravestibular graviceptors.     

Influence of perceived egocentric coordinates on the subjective visual vertical

The majority of previous studies which have explored the mechanisms underlying perception of the direction of gravity in static roll tilt have proposed that the tendency to estimate the subjective visual vertical (SVV) as tilted towards body tilt (‘Aubert effect’) arises from an underestimation of perceived body tilt. The present study has evaluated an alternative assumption that erroneous estimates of verticality may be related to the ability to estimate the orientation of external objects with respect to the observer's perceived body Z-axis. Experiments showed that Aubert effects and the overestimations of 30–90° angles from the body Z-axis in the roll plane were both related to errors made in adjusting a visual rod parallel to the body Z-axis. The results suggest that errors in providing visual estimates of the observer's own body Z-axis reference are implicated in Aubert effect.     

Perception of tilt and ocular torsion of vestibular patients during eccentric rotation

Four patients following unilateral vestibular loss and four patients complaining of otolith-dependent vertigo were tested during eccentric yaw rotation generating 1 × g centripetal acceleration directed along the interaural axis. Perception of body tilt in roll and in pitch was recorded in darkness using a somatosensory plate that the subjects maintained parallel to the perceived horizon. Ocular torsion was recorded by a video camera. Unilateral vestibular-defective patients underestimated the magnitude of the roll tilt and had a smaller torsion when the centrifugal force was towards the operated ear compared to the intact ear and healthy subjects. Patients with otolithic-dependent vertigo overestimated the magnitude of roll tilt in both directions of eccentric rotation relative to healthy subjects, and their ocular torsion was smaller than in healthy subjects. Eccentric rotation is a promising tool for the evaluation of vestibular dysfunction in patients. Eye torsion and perception of tilt during this stimulation are objective and subjective measurements, which could be used to determine alterations in spatial processing in the CNS.     

Role of gravity-based information on the orientation and localization of the perceived body midline

The present study focused on the influence of gravity-based information on the orientation and localization of the perceived body midline. The orientation was investigated by the rolling adjustment of a rod on the subjects’ Z-axis and the localization by the horizontal adjustment of a visual dot as being straight ahead. Experiment 1 investigated the effect of the dissociation between the Z-axis and the direction of gravity by placing subjects in roll tilt and supine postures. In roll tilt, the perception of the body midline orientation was deviated in the direction of body tilt and the perception of its localization was deviated in the opposite direction. In the supine body orientation, estimates of the Z-axis and straight-ahead remained veridical as when the body was upright. Experiment 2 highlighted the relative importance of the otolithic and tactile information using diffuse pressure stimulation. The estimation of body midline orientation was modified contrarily to the estimation of its localization. Thus, subjects had no absolute representation of their egocentric space. The main hypothesis regarding the dissociation between the orientation and localization of the body midline may be related to a difference in the integration of sensory information. It can be suggested that the horizontal component of the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) contributed to the perceived localization of the body midline, whereas its orientation was mainly influenced by tactile information.     

Dynamic effects on the subjective visual vertical after roll rotation

We investigated in normal human subjects how semicircular canal and otolith signals interact in the estimation of the subjective visual vertical after constant velocity or constant acceleration roll tilt. In the constant velocity paradigm, subjects were rotated in darkness at +/-60 degrees/s for five complete cycles before being stopped in one of seven orientations ranging from 0 to +/-90 degrees (right/left ear down). In the constant acceleration paradigm, subjects were rotated with an acceleration of +30 or -30 degrees/s2 to the same seven end positions between -90 and +90 degrees , by way of passing once through the upside-down position. The subjective visual vertical was assessed by measuring the setting of a luminous line that appeared at different test delays after stop rotation in otherwise complete darkness. The data suggest that gravitational jerk signals generated by otolith-semicircular canal interactions and/or carried by phasic otolith signals are responsible for the observed transient bias in the estimation of the subjective visual vertical. This transient bias depended on both rotation and tilt direction after constant velocity rotations, but was almost abolished following constant acceleration rotations.     

Visuospatial memory computations during whole-body rotations in roll

We used a memory-saccade task to test whether the location of a target, briefly presented before a whole-body rotation in roll, is stored in egocentric or in allocentric coordinates. To make this distinction, we exploited the fact that subjects, when tilted sideways in darkness, make systematic errors when indicating the direction of gravity (an allocentric task) even though they have a veridical percept of their self-orientation in space. We hypothesized that if spatial memory is coded allocentrically, these distortions affect the coding of remembered targets and their readout after a body rotation. Alternatively, if coding is egocentric, updating for body rotation becomes essential and errors in performance should be related to the amount of intervening rotation. Subjects (n = 6) were tested making saccades to remembered world-fixed targets after passive body tilts. Initial and final tilt angle ranged between -120 degrees CCW and 120 degrees CW. The results showed that subjects made large systematic directional errors in their saccades (up to 90 degrees ). These errors did not occur in the absence of intervening body rotation, ruling out a memory degradation effect. Regression analysis showed that the errors were closely related to the amount of subjective allocentric distortion at both the initial and final tilt angle, rather than to the amount of intervening rotation. We conclude that the brain uses an allocentric reference frame, possibly gravity-based, to code visuospatial memories during whole-body tilts. This supports the notion that the brain can define information in multiple frames of reference, depending on sensory inputs and task demands.     

Spatial coding of eye movements relative to perceived earth and head orientations during static roll tilt

This purpose of this study was to examine the spatial coding of eye movements during static roll tilt (up to ±45°) relative to perceived earth and head orientations. Binocular videographic recordings obtained in darkness from eight subjects allowed us to quantify the mean deviations in gaze trajectories along both horizontal and vertical coordinates relative to the true earth and head orientations. We found that both variability and curvature of gaze trajectories increased with roll tilt. The trajectories of eye movements made along the perceived earth-horizontal (PEH) were more accurate than movements along the perceived head-horizontal (PHH). The trajectories of both PEH and PHH saccades tended to deviate in the same direction as the head tilt. The deviations in gaze trajectories along the perceived earth-vertical (PEV) and perceived head-vertical (PHV) were both similar to the PHH orientation, except that saccades along the PEV deviated in the opposite direction relative to the head tilt. The magnitude of deviations along the PEV, PHH, and PHV corresponded to perceptual overestimations of roll tilt obtained from verbal reports. Both PEV gaze trajectories and perceptual estimates of tilt orientation were different following clockwise rather than counterclockwise tilt rotation; however, the PEH gaze trajectories were less affected by the direction of tilt rotation. Our results suggest that errors in gaze trajectories along PEV and perceived head orientations increase during roll tilt in a similar way to perceptual errors of tilt orientation. Although PEH and PEV gaze trajectories became nonorthogonal during roll tilt, we conclude that the spatial coding of eye movements during roll tilt is overall more accurate for the perceived earth reference frame than for the perceived head reference frame. Received: 22 April 1997 / Accepted: 18 December 1997     

Cognitive allocentric representations of visual space shape pointing errors

Subjects reached in three-dimensional space to a set of remembered targets whose position was varied randomly from trial to trial, but always fell along a "virtual" line (line condition). Targets were presented briefly, one-by-one and in an empty visual field. After a short delay, subjects were required to point to the remembered target location. Under these conditions, the target was presented in the complete absence of allocentric visual cues as to its position in space. However, because the subjects were informed prior to the experiment that all targets would fall on a straight line, they could conceivably imagine each point target as belonging to a single rigid object with a particular geometry and orientation in space, although this virtual object was never explicitly shown to the subjects. We compared the responses to repeated measurements of each target with those measured for targets presented in a directionally neutral configuration (sphere condition), and used the variable errors to infer the putative reference frames underlying the corresponding sensorimotor transformation. Performance in the different tasks was compared under two different lighting conditions (dim light or total darkness) and two memory delays (0.5 or 5 s). The pattern of variable errors differed significantly between the sphere condition and the line condition. In the former case, the errors were always accounted for by egocentric reference frames. By contrast the errors in the line condition revealed both egocentric and allocentric components, consistent with the hypothesis that target information can be defined concurrently in both egocentric and allocentric frames of reference, resulting in two independent coexisting representations. Electronic Publication     

Properties of the internal representation of gravity inferred from spatial-direction and body-tilt estimates

One of the key questions in spatial perception is whether the brain has a common representation of gravity that is generally accessible for various perceptual orientation tasks. To evaluate this idea, we compared the ability of six tilted subjects to indicate earth-centric directions in the dark with a visual and an oculomotor paradigm and to estimate their body tilt relative to gravity. Subjective earth-horizontal and -vertical data were collected, either by adjusting a visual line or by making saccades, at 37 roll-tilt angles across the entire range. These spatial perception responses and the associated body-tilt estimates were subjected to a principal-component analysis to describe their tilt dependence. This analysis allowed us to separate systematic and random errors in performance, to disentangle the effects of task (horizontal vs. vertical) and paradigm (visual vs. oculomotor) in the space-perception data, and to compare the veridicality of space perception and the sense of self-tilt. In all spatial-orientation tests, whether involving space-perception or body-tilt judgments, subjects made considerable systematic errors which mostly betrayed tilt underestimation [Aubert effect (A effect)] and peaked near 130 degrees tilt. However, the A effect was much smaller in body-tilt estimates than in spatial pointing, implying that the underlying signal processing must have been different. Pointing results obtained with the visual and the oculomotor paradigm were not identical either, but these differences, which were task-related (horizontal vs. vertical), were subtle in comparison. The tilt-dependent pattern of random errors (noisy scatter) was almost identical in visual and oculomotor pointing results, showing a steep monotonic increase with tilt angle, but was again clearly different in the body-tilt estimates. These findings are discussed in the context of a conceptual model in an attempt to explain how the different patterns of systematic and random errors in external-space and self-tilt perception may come about. The scheme proposes that basically similar computational mechanisms, working with different settings, may be responsible.     

Perceived versus actual head-on-trunk orientation during arm movement control

Static roll head tilt induces bias in the trajectory of upper limb voluntary movements. The aim of the experiment was to investigate whether this bias is dependant on the perception of body configuration rather than on its actual configuration. We used the ‘return’ phenomenon as a method to produce dissociation between perceived and actual head tilt. Static roll head tilt in supine subjects was sustained for 15 min during which subjects were periodically required to estimate verbally the tilt of their head respective to their trunk and draw, with their right index finger, straight lines aligned with their trunk. After 15 min, subjects’ head were realigned with the trunk, and subjects continued to give verbal estimate of head position and perform the motor task. Results showed that the initial angular deviation of the lines in the direction opposite to head tilt gradually diminished. The adaptation was noticeable within the first 3–5 min of tilt and subsequently diminished. Verbal estimates confirmed the return phenomenon, i.e. subjects perceived their head as slowly returning towards its neutral position after a few minutes of sustained tilt. When realigned with the trunk, subjects experienced the illusion that their head was tilted in the opposite direction to the initial head tilt and a line deviation in the opposite direction to those made on initial exposure was observed (after-effect). These results indicate that the angular deviation in motor production observed in condition of static head tilt were largely related to the perceived body configuration and therefore favour the hypothesis that the conscious perception of body configuration plays a key role in organising sensorimotor tasks.     

Perception of longitudinal body axis in microgravity during parabolic flight

It has been proposed that an internal representation of body vertical has a prominent role in spatial orientation. This investigation investigated the ability of human subjects to accurately locate their longitudinal body axis (an imaginary straight body midline running from head to toes) while free-floating in microgravity. Subjects were tested in-flight, as well as on ground in normal gravity in both the upright and supine orientations to provide baseline measurements. The subjects wore a goggle device and were in total darkness. They used knobs to rotate two luminous lines until they were parallel to the subjective direction of their longitudinal body axis, in the roll (right/left) and the pitch (forward/backward) planes. Results showed that the error between the perceived and the objective direction of the longitudinal body axis was significantly larger in microgravity than in normal gravity. This error in this egocentric frame of reference is presumably due to the absence of somatosensory cues when free-floating. Mechanical pressure on the chest using an airbag reduced the error in perception of the longitudinal body axis in microgravity, thus improving spatial orientation.     

Pronounced overestimation of support surface tilt during stance

A veridical internal notion of the kinematic state of the foot support is essential for postural control. The means by which this is obtained is still a matter of debate. We therefore measured the conscious perception of support tilt during transient anterior-posterior rotations of a motion platform in six healthy subjects, using a psychophysical matching procedure. Furthermore, we evaluated subjects' postural responses (in terms of displacement of subjects' center of mass, COM, and their ankle torque, as represented by the center of foot pressure, COP). The platform tilts were applied in absence of visual and auditory orientation cues. The platform rotations consisted of smoothed position ramps with different dominant frequencies (0.025, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.8 Hz) and different amplitudes (0.125 degrees, 0.25 degrees, 0.5 degrees, 1 degree, 2 degrees, 4 degrees, and 8 degrees) for the forward and backward directions, which yielded a 6x14 stimulus matrix. The stimuli were repeated five times in a random order. For the matching procedure, subjects tried to maintain an upright body orientation, while trying to orient a light-weight rod, which was attached to a belt around their waists, parallel to the perceived platform surface. We measured the stimulus-evoked angular excursions of the rod and of the subjects' COM as well as the COP shift. We found that the subjects' rod indications overestimated the platform tilts, particularly with small stimulus amplitudes. To characterize the overestimation, we compared the rod indications obtained while subjects stood on the tilting platform, to rod indications in a situation in which they stood next to the platform and tried to match the rod angle to the now visually perceived platform angle. From this comparison, we inferred that the subjects' kinesthetically derived notion of platform tilt overestimates the actual tilt by a factor of approximately 4. The estimates were linearly related to the angle between body (COM) and platform, i.e., to approximately the angle of the ankle joint, a finding which suggests a proprioceptive source of the overestimation. Further analyses supported this view; they showed that the onset latencies of the rod indications could be approximated by a theoretical indication mechanism with a reaction time of about 0.31 s, a velocity threshold of 0.099 degrees/s, and a displacement threshold of 0.12 degrees. These threshold values are well in line with previous work on the leg proprioceptive detection threshold of conscious perception of body sway. We therefore assume that the phenomenon of support tilt overestimation reflects a still unknown mechanism of leg proprioception in postural control.     

Egocentric and allocentric alignment tasks are affected by otolith input

Gravicentric visual alignments become less precise when the head is roll-tilted relative to gravity, which is most likely due to decreasing otolith sensitivity. To align a luminous line with the perceived gravity vector (gravicentric task) or the perceived body-longitudinal axis (egocentric task), the roll orientation of the line on the retina and the torsional position of the eyes relative to the head must be integrated to obtain the line orientation relative to the head. Whether otolith input contributes to egocentric tasks and whether the modulation of variability is restricted to vision-dependent paradigms is unknown. In nine subjects we compared precision and accuracy of gravicentric and egocentric alignments in various roll positions (upright, 45°, and 75° right-ear down) using a luminous line (visual paradigm) in darkness. Trial-to-trial variability doubled for both egocentric and gravicentric alignments when roll-tilted. Two mechanisms might explain the roll-angle-dependent modulation in egocentric tasks: 1) Modulating variability in estimated ocular torsion, which reflects the roll-dependent precision of otolith signals, affects the precision of estimating the line orientation relative to the head; this hypothesis predicts that variability modulation is restricted to vision-dependent alignments. 2) Estimated body-longitudinal reflects the roll-dependent variability of perceived earth-vertical. Gravicentric cues are thereby integrated regardless of the task's reference frame. To test the two hypotheses the visual paradigm was repeated using a rod instead (haptic paradigm). As with the visual paradigm, precision significantly decreased with increasing head roll for both tasks. These findings propose that the CNS integrates input coded in a gravicentric frame to solve egocentric tasks. In analogy to gravicentric tasks, where trial-to-trial variability is mainly influenced by the properties of the otolith afferents, egocentric tasks may also integrate otolith input. Such a shared mechanism for both paradigms and frames of reference is supported by the significantly correlated trial-to-trial variabilities.     

Tilt and translation motion perception during off-vertical axis rotation

The effect of stimulus frequency on tilt and translation motion perception was studied during constant velocity off-vertical axis rotation (OVAR), and compared to the effect of stimulus frequency on eye movements. Fourteen healthy subjects were rotated in darkness about their longitudinal axis 10° and 20° off-vertical at 45°/s (0.125 Hz) and 20° off-vertical at 180°/s (0.5 Hz). Perceived motion was evaluated using verbal reports and a joystick capable of recording tilt and translation in both sagittal and lateral planes. Eye movements were also recorded using videography. At the lower frequency, subjects reported the perception of progressing along the edge of a cone, whereas at the higher frequency they had the sensation of progressing along the edge of an upright cylinder. Tilt perception and ocular torsion significantly increased as the tilt angle increased from 10° to 20° at the lower frequency, and then decreased at the higher frequency. The phase lag of ocular torsion increased as a function of frequency, while the phase lag of tilt perception did not change. Horizontal eye movements were small at the lower frequency and showed a phase lead relative to the linear acceleration stimulus. While the phase lead of horizontal eye movements decreased at 0.5 Hz, the phase of translation perception did not vary with stimulus frequency and was similar to the phase of tilt perception during all conditions. A second data set was obtained in 12 subjects to compare motion perception phase when using a simple push-button to indicate nose-up orientation, continuous setting of pitch tilt alone, or continuous setting of tilt and translation in both pitch and roll planes as in the first data set. This set of measurements indicated that in the frequency range studied subjects tend to lead the stimulus when using a push-button task while lagging the stimulus when using a continuous setting of tilt with a joystick. Both amplitude and phase of tilt perception using the joystick were not different whether concentrating on pitch tilt alone or attempting a more complex reporting of tilt and translation in both sagittal and lateral planes. During dynamic linear stimuli in the absence of canal and visual input, a change in stimulus frequency alone elicits similar changes in the amplitude of both self-motion perception and eye movements. However, in contrast to the eye movements, the phase of both perceived tilt and translation motion is not altered by stimulus frequency over this limited range. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that neural processing to distinguish tilt and translation stimuli differs between eye movements and motion perception.