The DOI matches its Crossref record.
VISUAL STABILIZATION OF POSTURE: PHYSIOLOGICAL STIMULUS CHARACTERISTICS AND CLINICAL ASPECTS
Abstract
Visual stabilization of posture is critically dependent on stimulus characteristics as well as on the performance of the visual system. The purpose of the present investigation was to obtain quantitative data in man by means of posturography of fore-aft and lateral body sway in relation to different visual stimulus characteristics. Visual acuity, when decreased logarithmically, causes a linearly increasing postural instability, twice as prominent for fore-aft than for lateral sway. Any measurable visual contribution for fore-aft sway ceases with an acuity lower than 0.03 and for lateral sway with an acuity lower than 0.01. The central area of the visual field as compared with the peripheral retina dominates postural control. The foveal region exhibits a powerful contribution, in particular for lateral sway. A partial but significant visual stabilization is preserved with a visual input rate between 1 to 4 Hz flicker frequency. As soon as continuous motion perception becomes involved with frequencies higher than 4 Hz, visual stabilization gradually improves with a saturation at frequencies higher than 16 Hz. Lateral body sway activity and eye-object distance are linearly related: body sway decreases with increasing distance corresponding to the linear decrease of net retinal displacement with increasing eye-object distance. Aspects of 'afferent' and 'efferent' visual motion perception, which involve fore-aft and lateral body sway differently, are evaluated. The clinical relevance is demonstrated in patients with oculomotor disturbances. The results are discussed with respect to the variety of related clinical disorders, which involve reduction in visual acuity, field defects, accommodation disturbances and ocular oscillations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Direction-dependent control of balance during walking and standing
O'Connor, S. M., & Kuo, A. D. (2009) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.00131.2009 · Cited by 393
Billot, M., Calvani, R., Urtamo, A., Sánchez-Sánchez, J. L., Ciccolari-Micaldi, C., Chang, M., Roller-Wirnsberger, R., Wirnsberger, G., Sinclair, A., Vaquero-Pinto, M. N., et al. (2020) · Clinical Interventions in Aging · doi:10.2147/cia.s253535 · Cited by 242
Mergner, T., Schweigart, G., Maurer, C., & Blümle, A. (2005) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-005-0065-3 · Cited by 144
Optic-flow and egocentric-direction strategies in walking: central vs peripheral visual field
Turano, K. A., Yu, D., Hao, L., & Hicks, J. C. (2005) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/j.visres.2005.06.017 · Cited by 129
Jacob, R. G., Woody, S. R., Clark, D. B., Lilienfeld, S. O., Hirsch, B. E., Kucera, G. D., Furman, J. M., & Durrant, J. D. (1993) · Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment · doi:10.1007/bf00965035 · Cited by 127
Metadata
- Authors
- PAULUS, W. M., STRAUBE, A., & BRANDT, T.
- Venue
- Brain
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1984
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1143-1163
- ISSN
- 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2156
- OpenAlex
- W2027791179
- Cited by
- 769
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: VISUAL STABILIZATION OF POSTURE: PHYSIOLOGICAL STIMULUS CHARACTERISTICS AND CLINICAL ASPECTS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/107.4.1143
- The paper
- PAULUS, W. M., STRAUBE, A., & BRANDT, T. (1984). VISUAL STABILIZATION OF POSTURE: PHYSIOLOGICAL STIMULUS CHARACTERISTICS AND CLINICAL ASPECTS. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/107.4.1143
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.