Effect of range of heading differences on human visual-inertial heading estimation

Both visual and inertial cues are salient in heading determination. However, optic flow can ambiguously represent self-motion or environmental motion. It is unclear how visual and inertial heading cues are determined to have common cause and integrated vs perceived independently. In four experiments visual and inertial headings were presented simultaneously with ten subjects reporting visual or inertial headings in separate trial blocks. Experiment 1 examined inertial headings within 30° of straight-ahead and visual headings that were offset by up to 60°. Perception of the inertial heading was shifted in the direction of the visual stimulus by as much as 35° by the 60° offset, while perception of the visual stimulus remained largely uninfluenced. Experiment 2 used ± 140° range of inertial headings with up to 120° visual offset. This experiment found variable behavior between subjects with most perceiving the sensory stimuli to be shifted towards an intermediate heading but a few perceiving the headings independently. The visual and inertial headings influenced each other even at the largest offsets. Experiments 3 and 4 had similar inertial headings to experiments 1 and 2, respectively, except subjects reported environmental motion direction. Experiment 4 displayed similar perceptual influences as experiment 2, but in experiment 3 percepts were independent. Results suggested that perception of visual and inertial stimuli tend to be perceived as having common causation in most subjects with offsets up to 90° although with significant variation in perception between individuals. Limiting the range of inertial headings caused the visual heading to dominate the perception.