Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 21, 2025

Assessment of Static Graviceptive Perception in the Roll-Plane using the Subjective Visual Vertical Paradigm
Published on: April 28, 2020
Perception of postural verticality in roll and pitch while sitting and standing in healthy subjects
Jeannine Bergmann1, Standislav Bardins2, Christian Prawitz2
1German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders (DSGZ), Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Marchioninistraße 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; Schoen Clinic Bad Aibling, Kolbermoorer Straße 72, 83043 Bad Aibling, Germany.
Abstract:
Assessment of verticality perception is increasingly used in patients with disorders of upright body orientation, e.g. in pusher behavior after hemispheric stroke or in retropulsion in neurovascular or degenerative diseases. The subjective postural vertical (SPV) assesses the individual's perceived upright body orientation in space and can be determined in a sitting or a standing position. As somatosensory input differs between sitting and standing, we suppose a different representation of verticality. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the SPV while sitting and while standing, and to determine the influence of proprioceptive and visual stimulations on the SPV in both positions. Twenty healthy subjects (18-40 years, 9 female) participated in two experiments. In experiment 1 the SPV was assessed in the pitch and roll planes while sitting and standing. In experiment 2 we additionally applied somatosensory Achilles tendon vibration and visual optokinetic stimulation. Results of experiment 1 revealed no difference of the SPV error between sitting and standing. Though, we found an increased SPV variability while sitting. Experiment 2 showed no effect of sensory manipulation in the pitch plane, but an effect of optokinetic stimulation in the roll plane. The tilt in direction of the visual stimuli was more pronounced while sitting. Optokinetic stimulation also resulted in a larger SPV variability in roll, indicating larger insecurity in verticality estimation during stimulation. In conclusion, even though the SPV assessment while sitting and standing resulted in similar mean values, the larger variability and the higher sensitivity to visual stimuli while sitting suggest different strategies for verticality estimation while sitting and while standing.
More Related Videos
14:52Computerized Dynamic Posturography for Postural Control Assessment in Patients with Intermittent Claudication
Published on: December 11, 2013
08:24Sit-to-stand-and-walk from 120% Knee Height: A Novel Approach to Assess Dynamic Postural Control Independent of Lead-limb
Published on: August 30, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Equilibrium and Balance
Anatomical Positions
The body is upright, facing forward, and standing erect.
The feet are parallel and flat on the floor.
The arms are hanging by the...
Normal and Tangetial Components: Problem Solving