Assessment of visual field dependence: Comparison between the mechanical 3D rod-and-frame test developed by Oltman in 1968 with a 2D computer-based version

Journal of Vestibular Research: Equilibrium and Orientation

Volumn 18, Issue 5-6, 2008, Pages 239-247

  Isableu, Brice ^a,b   Gueguen, Marc ^b   Fourré, Benoît ^b,c   Giraudet, Guillaume ^c   Amorim, Michel Ange ^b,d  

^a Lab des Techniques de l'Ingenierie Med et de la Complexite Info Mathematiques et Applic   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

^c Essilor International   (France)

^d INSTITUT UNIVERSITAIRE DE FRANCE   (France)

Author keywords

Computers; Frames of reference; Rod and frame test; Spatial perception; Verticality; Visual field dependence independence

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BINOCULAR VISION; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REHABILITATION MEDICINE; ROD AND FRAME TEST; SENSORIMOTOR FUNCTION; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TILTING; VISION TEST; VISUAL FIELD; ADULT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; ORIENTATION; PHYSIOLOGY; VISION;

COMPUTERS; HUMANS; MALE; ORIENTATION; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISION TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 67651049326     PISSN: 09574271     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. S.E. Asch and H.A. Witkin, Studies in space orientation. II. Perception of the upright with displaced visual fields and with body tilted, J Exp Psychol 38 (1948), 455-475.
2. J. Bagust, Assessment of verticality perception by a rod-andframe test: preliminary observations on the use of a computer monitor and video eye glasses, Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86 (2005), 1062-1064.
3. D. Bernardin, B. Isableu, P. Fourcade and B.G. Bardy, Differential exploitation of the inertia tensor in multi-joint arm reaching, Exp Brain Res 167 (2005), 487-495.
4. I.V. Bonan, A.P. Yelnik, F.M. Colle, C. Michaud, E. Normand, B. Panigot, P. Roth, J.P. Guichard and E. Vicaut, Reliance on visual information after stroke. Part II: Effectiveness of a balance rehabilitation program with visual cue deprivation after stroke: a randomized controlled trial, Arch Phys Med Rehabil 85 (2004), 274-278.
5. T. Brandt, P. Bartenstein, A. Janek and M. Dieterich, Reciprocal inhibitory visual-vestibular interaction. Visual motion stimulation deactivates the parieto-insular vestibular cortex, Brain 121 (1998), 1749-1758.
6. T. Brandt, S. Glasauer, T. Stephan, S. Bense, T.A. Yousry, A. Deutschlander and M. Dieterich, Visual-Vestibular and Visuovisual Cortical Interaction: New Insights from fMRI and PET, Ann N Y Acad Sci 956 (2002), 230-241.
7. A. Bray, A. Subanandan, B. Isableu, T. Ohlmann, J.F. Golding and M.A. Gresty, We are most aware of our place in the world when about to fall, Curr Biol 14 (2004), R609-R610.
8. F. Brenet and M. Luyat, Frame Anisotropy: a Problem of Individual Validity, 1995.
9. C. Cian, D. Esquivie, P.A. Barraud and C. Raphel, Respective contribution of orientation contrast and illusion of self- tilt to the rod-and-frame effect, Perception 24 (1995), 623-630.
10. J.O. Coq and C. Xerri, Sensorimotor experience modulates age-dependent alterations of the forepaw representation in the rat primary somatosensory cortex, Neuroscience 104 (2001), 705-715.
11. A. Deutschlander, S. Bense, T. Stephan, M. Schwaiger, T. Brandt and M. Dieterich, Sensory system interactions during simultaneous vestibular and visual stimulation in PET, Hum Brain Mapp 16 (2002), 92-103. (Pubitemid 34587378)
12. M. Dieterich and T. Brandt, Brain activation studies on visualvestibular and ocular motor interaction, Curr Opin Neurol 13 (2000), 13-18. (Pubitemid 30130794)
13. J.R. DiLorenzo and I. Rock, The rod-and-frame effect as a function of the righting of the frame, J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 8 (1982), 536-546.
14. S.M. Ebenholtz, Determinants of the rod and frame effect: The role of retinal size, Percept Psychophys 22 (1977), 531-538.
15. S.M. Ebenholtz and J.W. Callan, Modulation of the rod and frame effect: Retinal angle vs apparent size, Psychological Research 42 (1980), 327-334.
16. S.M. Ebenholtz and J.W. Callan, Modulation of the rod and frame effect: Retinal angle vs apparent size, Psychological Research 42 (1980), 327-334.
17. T. Elbert, V. Candia, E. Altenmuller, H. Rau, A. Sterr, B. Rockstroh, C. Pantev and E. Taub, Alteration of digital representations in somatosensory cortex in focal hand dystonia, Neuroreport 9 (1998), 3571-3575.
18. M.O. Ernst and H.H. Bulthoff, Merging the senses into a robust percept, Trends Cogn Sci 8 (2004), 162-169.
19. E. Golomer, J. Cremieux, P. Dupui, B. Isableu andT. Ohlmann, Visual contribution to self-induced body sway frequencies and visual perception of male professional dancers, Neurosci Lett 267 (1999), 189-192.
20. D.R. Goodenough, P.K. Oltman, E. Sigman and P.W. Cox, The rod-and-frame illusion in erect and supine observers, Percept Psychophys 29 (1981), 365-370.
21. J.P. Grod and P.R. Diakow, Effect of neck pain on verticality perception: a cohort study, Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83 (2002), 412-415.
22. M. Guerraz, D. Poquin and T. Ohlmann, The role of headcentric spatial reference with a static and kinetic visual disturbance, Percept Psychophys 60 (1998), 287-295.
23. M. Guerraz, L. Yardley, P. Bertholon, L. Pollak, P. Rudge, M.A. Gresty and A.M. Bronstein, Visual vertigo: symptom assessment, spatial orientation and postural control, Brain 124 (2001), 1646-1656.
24. A. Hafstrom, P.A. Fransson, M. Karlberg and M. Magnusson, Ipsilesional visual field dependency for patients with vestibular schwannoma, Neuroreport 15 (2004), 2201-2204.
25. A. Hafstrom, F. Modig, M. Karlberg and P.A. Fransson, Increased visual dependence and otolith dysfunction with alcohol intoxication, Neuroreport 18 (2007), 391-394.
26. B. Isableu, T. Ohlmann, B. Amblard and J. Cremieux, Liens entre la perception de la verticalité et le contôle postural, Numéro thématique "Sport, posture et équilibration", S. T. A. P. S. 46-47 (1998), 125-144.
27. B. Isableu, T. Ohlmann, J. Cremieux and B. Amblard, Selection of spatial frame of reference and postural control variability, Exp Brain Res 114 (1997), 584-589. (Pubitemid 27214262)
28. B. Isableu, T. Ohlmann, J. Cremieux and B. Amblard, How dynamic visual field dependence-independence interacts with the visual contribution to postural control, Human Movement Science 17 (1998), 367-391.
29. B. Isableu, T. Ohlmann, J. Cremieux and B. Amblard, Differential approach to strategies of segmental stabilisation in postural control, Exp Brain Res 150 (2003), 208-221.
30. C. Lopez, M. Lacour, J. Magnan and L. Borel, Visual field dependence-independence before and after unilateral vestibular loss, Neuroreport 17 (2006), 797-803. (Pubitemid 43804757)
31. S.R. Lord, Visual risk factors for falls in older people, Age Ageing 35(Suppl 2) (2006), ii42-ii45.
32. C. Marendaz, Selection of reference frames and the 'vicariance' of perceptual systems, Perception 18 (1989), 739-751.
33. L.B. Marincola and G.M. Long, Perceptual style and dual-task performance as a function of task difficulty and task emphasis, Percept Mot Skills 61 (1985), 1091-1105.
34. H. Nyborg and B. Isaksen, A method for analysing performances in the rod-and-frame test, II, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 15 (1974), 124-126.
35. T. Ohlmann and C. Marendaz, Vicarious processes involved in selection/control of frames of reference and spatial aspects of field dependence-independence, in Field dependenceindependence: Cognitive style across the life Span, S. Wapner and J. Demick, eds, L.E.A., Publisher Hillsdale New Jersey, 1991, pp. 105-129.
36. P.K. Oltman, Aportable rod-and-frame apparatus, Percept Mot Skills 26 (1968), 503-506.
37. C. Pantev, A. Engelien, V. Candia and T. Elbert, Representational cortex in musicians. Plastic alterations in response to musical practice, Ann N Y Acad Sci 930(300-14) (2001), 300-314.
38. C. Rousseu and J. Crémieux, Perception de l'orientation visuelle chez des experts en taekwondo, STAPS 65 (2004), 79-96.
39. M.J. Sholl, The relation between horizontality and rod-andframe and vestibular navigational performance, J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 15 (1989), 110-125.
40. D. Spinelli, G. Antonucci, R. Daini and P. Zoccolotti, Local and global visual mechanisms underlying individual differences in the rod-and-frame illusion, Percept Psychophys 57 (1995), 915-920.
41. M.J. Streibel and S.M. Ebenholtz, Construct validity of perceptual style: role of stimulus size in the embedded-figures test and the rod-and-frame test, Percept Psychophys 31 (1982), 128-138.
42. N. Vibert, T. Hoang, D.P. Gilchrist, H.G. MacDougall, A.M. Burgess, R.D. Roberts, P.P. Vidal and I.S. Curthoys, Psychophysiological correlates of the inter-individual variability of head movement control in seated humans, Gait Posture 23 (2006), 355-363.
43. N. Vuillerme, O. Chenu, N. Pinsault, M. Boisgontier, J. Demongeot and Y. Payan, Inter-individual variability in sensory weighting of a plantar pressure-based, tongue-placed tactile biofeedback for controlling posture, Neurosci Lett 421 (2007), 173-177.
44. P. Wenderoth and H. Beh, Component analysis of orientation illusions, Perception 6 (1977), 57-75.
45. H.A.Witkin and D.R. Goodenough, Cognitive styles: essence and origins. Field dependence and field independence, Psychol. Issues (1981), 1-141.
46. H.A. Witkin, Perception of Body Position and of the Position of the Visual Field, American Psychological Association, Washington, 1950.
47. A.P.Yelnik, A. Kassouha, I.V. Bonan, M.C. Leman, C. Jacq, E. Vicaut and F.M. Colle, Postural visual dependence after recent stroke: assessment by optokinetic stimulation, Gait Posture 24 (2006), 262-269.
48. P. Zoccolotti, G. Antonucci, R. Daini, M.L. Martelli and D. Spinelli, Frame-of-reference and hierarchical-organisation effects in the rod-and-frame illusion, Perception 26 (1997), 1485-1494.
49. P. Zoccolotti, G. Antonucci, D.R. Goodenough, L. Pizzamiglio and D. Spinelli, The role of frame size on vertical and horizontal observers in the rod- and-frame illusion, Acta Psychol (Amst) 79 (1992), 171-187.
50. P. Zoccolotti, G. Antonucci and D. Spinelli, The gap between rod and frame influences the rod-and-frame effect with small and large inducing displays, Percept Psychophys 54 (1993), 14-19.