Whole-body motion discrimination in the visually impaired

Visually impaired people show superior abilities in various perception tasks such as auditory attention, auditory temporal resolution, auditory spatial tuning, and odor discrimination. However, with the use of psychophysical methods, auditory and olfactory detection thresholds typically do not differ between visually impaired and sighted participants. Using a motion platform we investigated thresholds of passive whole-body motion discrimination in nine visually impaired participants and nine age-matched sighted controls. Participants were rotated in yaw, tilted in roll, and translated along the y-axis at two different frequencies (0.3 Hz and 2 Hz). An adaptive 3-down 1-up staircase procedure was used along with a two-alternative direction (leftward vs. rightward) discrimination task. Superior performance of visually impaired participants was found in the 0.3 Hz roll tilt condition. No differences between the visually impaired and controls were observed in all other types of motion. The superior performance in the 0.3 Hz roll tilt condition could reflect differences in the integration of extra-vestibular cues and increased sensitivity towards changes in the direction of the gravito-inertial force. In the absence of visual information, roll tilts entail a more pronounced risk of falling, and this could eventually account for the group difference. It is argued that differences in experimental procedures (i.e. detection vs. discrimination of stimuli) explain the discrepant findings across perceptual tasks comparing blind and sighted participants.

Self-motion direction discrimination in the visually impaired

Despite the close interrelation between vestibular and visual processing (e.g., vestibulo-ocular reflex), surprisingly little is known about vestibular function in visually impaired people. In this study, we investigated thresholds of passive whole-body motion discrimination (leftward vs. rightward) in nine visually impaired participants and nine age-matched sighted controls. Participants were rotated in yaw, tilted in roll, and translated along the interaural axis at two different frequencies (0.33 and 2 Hz) by means of a motion platform. Superior performance of visually impaired participants was found in the 0.33 Hz roll tilt condition. No differences were observed in the other motion conditions. Roll tilts stimulate the semicircular canals and otoliths simultaneously. The results could thus reflect a specific improvement in canal–otolith integration in the visually impaired and are consistent with the compensatory hypothesis, which implies that the visually impaired are able to compensate the absence of visual input.