Visual feedback is not necessary for recalibrating the vestibular contribution to the dynamic phase of a perturbation recovery response

Abstract

Our recent work demonstrated that vision can recalibrate the vestibular signal used to re-establish equilibrium following a platform perturbation. Here, we investigate whether vision provided during a platform perturbation can recalibrate the use of vestibular reafference during the dynamic phase of the perturbation response. Dynamic postural responses were examined during a series of five forward perturbations to the body, while galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) selectively altered vestibular feedback and LCD occlusion spectacles controlled visual availability. Responses with and without vision were compared. The presence of GVS caused 1.78 ± 0.19 cm of medio-lateral (ML) body motion toward the anode during the initial 3 s of the dynamic postural response across perturbations. This dynamic ML response was attenuated across perturbations 1–3 independent of visual availability, resulting in a significant reduction of ML center of mass and pressure deviations (p < 0.01, ƞ² = 0.27). That is, the vestibular influence on the ML perturbation response could be altered but vision was not necessary for this adaptation. After removing GVS, the ML response component reversed in direction toward the cathode with a magnitude that was not significantly different to the amount of response attenuation seen when GVS was present (− 0.95 ± 0.19 cm; p = 0.99, ƞ² = 0.00). This suggested that the use of a GVS-altered vestibular signal during dynamic perturbation responses could be recalibrated, but that visual feedback was likely not responsible. Alternative mechanisms to explain the recalibration process are discussed.