Time-interval for integration of stabilizing haptic and visual information in subjects balancing under static and dynamic conditions

Jean Louis Honeine, Marco Schieppati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Maintaining equilibrium is basically a sensorimotor integration task. The central nervous system (CNS) continually and selectively weights and rapidly integrates sensory inputs from multiple sources, and coordinates multiple outputs. The weighting process is based on the availability and accuracy of afferent signals at a given instant, on the time-period required to process each input, and possibly on the plasticity of the relevant pathways. The likelihood that sensory inflow changes while balancing under static or dynamic conditions is high, because subjects can pass from a dark to a well-lit environment or from a tactile-guided stabilization to loss of haptic inflow. This review article presents recent data on the temporal events accompanying sensory transition, on which basic information is fragmentary. The processing time from sensory shift to reaching a new steady state includes the time to (a) subtract or integrate sensory inputs; (b) move from allocentric to egocentric reference or vice versa; and (c) adjust the calibration of motor activity in time and amplitude to the new sensory set. We present examples of processes of integration of posture-stabilizing information, and of the respective sensorimotor time-intervals while allowing or occluding vision or adding or subtracting tactile information. These intervals are short, in the order of 1–2 s for different postural conditions, modalities and deliberate or passive shift. They are just longer for haptic than visual shift, just shorter on withdrawal than on addition of stabilizing input, and on deliberate than unexpected mode. The delays are the shortest (for haptic shift) in blind subjects. Since automatic balance stabilization may be vulnerable to sensory-integration delays and to interference from concurrent cognitive tasks in patients with sensorimotor problems, insight into the processing time for balance control represents a critical step in the design of new balance- and locomotion training devices.

Original languageEnglish
Article number190
JournalFrontiers in Systems Neuroscience
Volume8
Issue numberOCT
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 6 2014

Fingerprint

Touch
Locomotion
Posture
Calibration
Motor Activity
Central Nervous System
Weights and Measures
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Dynamic balance
  • Equilibrium
  • Haptic
  • Quiet stance
  • Sensory integration
  • Sensory reweighting
  • Vision

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuroscience (miscellaneous)
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Developmental Neuroscience

Cite this

Time-interval for integration of stabilizing haptic and visual information in subjects balancing under static and dynamic conditions. / Honeine, Jean Louis; Schieppati, Marco.

In: Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, Vol. 8, No. OCT, 190, 06.10.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f1a204e1a3484aa4bdc20432e3750e42,
title = "Time-interval for integration of stabilizing haptic and visual information in subjects balancing under static and dynamic conditions",
abstract = "Maintaining equilibrium is basically a sensorimotor integration task. The central nervous system (CNS) continually and selectively weights and rapidly integrates sensory inputs from multiple sources, and coordinates multiple outputs. The weighting process is based on the availability and accuracy of afferent signals at a given instant, on the time-period required to process each input, and possibly on the plasticity of the relevant pathways. The likelihood that sensory inflow changes while balancing under static or dynamic conditions is high, because subjects can pass from a dark to a well-lit environment or from a tactile-guided stabilization to loss of haptic inflow. This review article presents recent data on the temporal events accompanying sensory transition, on which basic information is fragmentary. The processing time from sensory shift to reaching a new steady state includes the time to (a) subtract or integrate sensory inputs; (b) move from allocentric to egocentric reference or vice versa; and (c) adjust the calibration of motor activity in time and amplitude to the new sensory set. We present examples of processes of integration of posture-stabilizing information, and of the respective sensorimotor time-intervals while allowing or occluding vision or adding or subtracting tactile information. These intervals are short, in the order of 1–2 s for different postural conditions, modalities and deliberate or passive shift. They are just longer for haptic than visual shift, just shorter on withdrawal than on addition of stabilizing input, and on deliberate than unexpected mode. The delays are the shortest (for haptic shift) in blind subjects. Since automatic balance stabilization may be vulnerable to sensory-integration delays and to interference from concurrent cognitive tasks in patients with sensorimotor problems, insight into the processing time for balance control represents a critical step in the design of new balance- and locomotion training devices.",
keywords = "Dynamic balance, Equilibrium, Haptic, Quiet stance, Sensory integration, Sensory reweighting, Vision",
author = "Honeine, {Jean Louis} and Marco Schieppati",
year = "2014",
month = "10",
day = "6",
doi = "10.3389/fnsys.2014.00190",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
journal = "Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience",
issn = "1662-5137",
publisher = "Frontiers Research Foundation",
number = "OCT",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Time-interval for integration of stabilizing haptic and visual information in subjects balancing under static and dynamic conditions

AU - Honeine, Jean Louis

AU - Schieppati, Marco

PY - 2014/10/6

Y1 - 2014/10/6

N2 - Maintaining equilibrium is basically a sensorimotor integration task. The central nervous system (CNS) continually and selectively weights and rapidly integrates sensory inputs from multiple sources, and coordinates multiple outputs. The weighting process is based on the availability and accuracy of afferent signals at a given instant, on the time-period required to process each input, and possibly on the plasticity of the relevant pathways. The likelihood that sensory inflow changes while balancing under static or dynamic conditions is high, because subjects can pass from a dark to a well-lit environment or from a tactile-guided stabilization to loss of haptic inflow. This review article presents recent data on the temporal events accompanying sensory transition, on which basic information is fragmentary. The processing time from sensory shift to reaching a new steady state includes the time to (a) subtract or integrate sensory inputs; (b) move from allocentric to egocentric reference or vice versa; and (c) adjust the calibration of motor activity in time and amplitude to the new sensory set. We present examples of processes of integration of posture-stabilizing information, and of the respective sensorimotor time-intervals while allowing or occluding vision or adding or subtracting tactile information. These intervals are short, in the order of 1–2 s for different postural conditions, modalities and deliberate or passive shift. They are just longer for haptic than visual shift, just shorter on withdrawal than on addition of stabilizing input, and on deliberate than unexpected mode. The delays are the shortest (for haptic shift) in blind subjects. Since automatic balance stabilization may be vulnerable to sensory-integration delays and to interference from concurrent cognitive tasks in patients with sensorimotor problems, insight into the processing time for balance control represents a critical step in the design of new balance- and locomotion training devices.

AB - Maintaining equilibrium is basically a sensorimotor integration task. The central nervous system (CNS) continually and selectively weights and rapidly integrates sensory inputs from multiple sources, and coordinates multiple outputs. The weighting process is based on the availability and accuracy of afferent signals at a given instant, on the time-period required to process each input, and possibly on the plasticity of the relevant pathways. The likelihood that sensory inflow changes while balancing under static or dynamic conditions is high, because subjects can pass from a dark to a well-lit environment or from a tactile-guided stabilization to loss of haptic inflow. This review article presents recent data on the temporal events accompanying sensory transition, on which basic information is fragmentary. The processing time from sensory shift to reaching a new steady state includes the time to (a) subtract or integrate sensory inputs; (b) move from allocentric to egocentric reference or vice versa; and (c) adjust the calibration of motor activity in time and amplitude to the new sensory set. We present examples of processes of integration of posture-stabilizing information, and of the respective sensorimotor time-intervals while allowing or occluding vision or adding or subtracting tactile information. These intervals are short, in the order of 1–2 s for different postural conditions, modalities and deliberate or passive shift. They are just longer for haptic than visual shift, just shorter on withdrawal than on addition of stabilizing input, and on deliberate than unexpected mode. The delays are the shortest (for haptic shift) in blind subjects. Since automatic balance stabilization may be vulnerable to sensory-integration delays and to interference from concurrent cognitive tasks in patients with sensorimotor problems, insight into the processing time for balance control represents a critical step in the design of new balance- and locomotion training devices.

KW - Dynamic balance

KW - Equilibrium

KW - Haptic

KW - Quiet stance

KW - Sensory integration

KW - Sensory reweighting

KW - Vision

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84907778358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84907778358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00190

DO - 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00190

M3 - Article

VL - 8

JO - Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience

JF - Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience

SN - 1662-5137

IS - OCT

M1 - 190

ER -