↓ Skip to main content

Reaching During Virtual Rotation: Context Specific Compensations for Expected Coriolis Forces

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurophysiology, June 2000
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Reaching During Virtual Rotation: Context Specific Compensations for Expected Coriolis Forces
Published in
Journal of Neurophysiology, June 2000
DOI 10.1152/jn.2000.83.6.3230
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph V. Cohn, Paul DiZio, James R. Lackner

Abstract

Subjects who are in an enclosed chamber rotating at constant velocity feel physically stationary but make errors when pointing to targets. Reaching paths and endpoints are deviated in the direction of the transient inertial Coriolis forces generated by their arm movements. By contrast, reaching movements made during natural, voluntary torso rotation seem to be accurate, and subjects are unaware of the Coriolis forces generated by their movements. This pattern suggests that the motor plan for reaching movements uses a representation of body motion to prepare compensations for impending self-generated accelerative loads on the arm. If so, stationary subjects who are experiencing illusory self-rotation should make reaching errors when pointing to a target. These errors should be in the direction opposite the Coriolis accelerations their arm movements would generate if they were actually rotating. To determine whether such compensations exist, we had subjects in four experiments make visually open-loop reaches to targets while they were experiencing compelling illusory self-rotation and displacement induced by rotation of a complex, natural visual scene. The paths and endpoints of their initial reaching movements were significantly displaced leftward during counterclockwise illusory rotary displacement and rightward during clockwise illusory self-displacement. Subjects reached in a curvilinear path to the wrong place. These reaching errors were opposite in direction to the Coriolis forces that would have been generated by their arm movements during actual torso rotation. The magnitude of path curvature and endpoint errors increased as the speed of illusory self-rotation increased. In successive reaches, movement paths became straighter and endpoints more accurate despite the absence of visual error feedback or tactile feedback about target location. When subjects were again presented a stationary scene, their initial reaches were indistinguishable from pre-exposure baseline, indicating a total absence of aftereffects. These experiments demonstrate that the nervous system automatically compensates in a context-specific fashion for the Coriolis forces associated with reaching movements.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Belgium 2 2%
Austria 2 2%
New Zealand 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
France 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 81 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 23%
Researcher 20 22%
Professor 13 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 11%
Other 4 4%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 8 9%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 21%
Neuroscience 15 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 13%
Engineering 7 8%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 17 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2017.
All research outputs
#7,454,066
of 22,788,370 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurophysiology
#2,415
of 8,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,479
of 39,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurophysiology
#11
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,788,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 39,162 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.