Dalmaijer Edwin S
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Vision (Basel). 2018 Jun;2(2). doi: 10.1101/260299. Epub 2018 Mar 21.
The current study presents a re-analysis of data from Zink et al. (1998, , ), who administered galvanic vestibular stimulation through unipolar direct current. They placed electrodes on each mastoid, and applied both right and left anodal stimulation. Ocular torsion and visual tilt were measured under different stimulation intensities. New modelling introduced here demonstrates that directly proportional linear models fit reasonably well to the relationship between vestibular input and visual tilt, but not to that between vestibular input and ocular torsion. Instead, an exponential model characterised by a decreasing slope and an asymptote fitted best. These results demonstrate that in the results presented by Zink et al., ocular torsion could not completely account for visual tilt. This suggests that vestibular input is processed centrally to stabilise vision when ocular torsion is insufficient. Potential mechanisms and seemingly conflicting literature are discussed.
当前的研究对津克等人（1998年）的数据进行了重新分析，他们通过单极直流电进行前庭电刺激。他们在每个乳突上放置电极，并施加左右阳极刺激。在不同刺激强度下测量眼扭转和视觉倾斜。这里引入的新模型表明，正比线性模型能较好地拟合前庭输入与视觉倾斜之间的关系，但不适用于前庭输入与眼扭转之间的关系。相反，一个具有递减斜率和渐近线的指数模型拟合效果最佳。这些结果表明，在津克等人给出的结果中，眼扭转不能完全解释视觉倾斜。这表明当前庭输入不足以稳定视觉时，前庭输入会在中枢进行处理。文中还讨论了潜在机制以及看似相互矛盾的文献。
