Rod and Frame Alignment Times Increase When the Frame is Tilted
Psychology and Behavioral Sciences
Volume 2, Issue 2, April 2013, Pages: 66-72
Received: May 9, 2013; Published: May 30, 2013
Views 3207      Downloads 143
Jeff Bagust, School of Health and Social Care, Bournemouth University, UK
Sharon Docherty, AECC, 13-15 Parkwood Road, Bournemouth, UK
Rima Abdul Razzak, College of Medicine & Medical Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, PO Box 26671, Manama, Bahrain
Article Tools
Follow on us
The Rod and Frame test measures an individual’s subjective assessment of visual vertical and horizontal in the presence of a surrounding tilted frame. Attention has focused upon the effects of the surrounding frame upon spatial accuracy (Spatial Frame Effect). We have investigated if the tilted frame also affects the time that subjects take to make the alignment (Temporal Frame Effect). Results: 125 subjects performed a computerised Rod and Frame test to investigate the effects of a tilted frame on subjective visual vertical and horizontal. In addition the program recorded the time taken to make each alignment. For most subjects the mean Spatial Frame Effect was small (vertical 1.62, SD 0.93; horizontal 1.9, SD 1.43). The mean time taken to make alignments in the presence of a tilted frame was longer than when the frame was not tilted (vertical, +3.4s, SD 4.4; horizontal, +3.2s, SD 4.5). Differences in the times taken when the rod and frame were presented congruently and incongruently could be fully accounted for by the differences in steps needed to move the rod to its final alignment. No relationship was found between the spatial accuracy and the time to make the alignment and there was no relationship between the Spatial and Temporal Frame Effects. Conclusions: This study suggests that the Spatial, and Temporal, Frame Effects provide information about different aspects of the process of resolving conflicting visual information when making judgments on alignment. In everyday functions such as the maintenance of balance or susceptibility to motion sickness, the increased time taken may be as important as spatial accuracy
Subjective Visual Vertical, Subjective Visual Horizontal, Rod and Frame Test
To cite this article
Jeff Bagust, Sharon Docherty, Rima Abdul Razzak, Rod and Frame Alignment Times Increase When the Frame is Tilted, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 2, No. 2, 2013, pp. 66-72. doi: 10.11648/j.pbs.20130202.17
Witkin HA, Lewis HB, Hertzman M, Machover K, Meissener P, Wapner S. Personality through perception. New York: Harper; 1954.
Asch SE, Witkin HA. Studies in space orientation. II Perception of the upright with displaced visual fields and with body tilted. J Exp Psychol 1948, 38: 455–475.
Spinelli D, Antonucci G, Daini R. Zoccolotti P. Local and global visual mechanisms underlying individual differences in the rod-and-frame illusion. Percept & Psychophys 1995, 57:915-920.
Isableu B, OhlmannT, Crémieux J, Amblard B. How dynamic visual field dependence-independence interacts with the visual contribution to postural control. Hum Mov Sci 1998, 17:367-391.
Isableu B, Ohlmann T, Cremieux J, Vuillerme N, Amblard B, Gresty MA. Individual differences in the ability to identify, select and use appropriate frames of reference for perceptuo-motor control. Neuroscience 2010, 169:1199-1215.
Lord S, Webster, IW. Visual field dependence in elderly fallers and non-fallers. Int J Aging Hum Dev 1990, 31:267-277.
Lopez C, Lacour M, Magnan J, Borel L. Visual field dependence-independence before and after unilateral vestibular loss. Neuroreport 2006, 17:797-803.
Pagarkar W, Bamiou D-E, Ridout D, Luxon L M. Subjective Visual Vertical and Horizontal: Effect of the Preset Angle. Archives Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008, 134:394-401.
Grod JP, Diakow PR. Effect of neck pain on verticality perception: a cohort study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002, 83:412-415.
Bagust J, Rix GD, Hurst HC. Use of a computer rod and frame (CRAF) test to assess errors in the perception of visual vertical in a clinical setting – a pilot study. Clin Chiropractic 2005, 8:134-139.
Oltman PK. A portable rod-and frame apparatus. Perceptl Mot Skills 1968, 26:503-506.
Isableu B, Gueguen M, Fourré B, Giraudet G, Amorim M-A. Assessment of visual field dependence: Comparison between the mechanical 3D rod-and-frame test developed by Oltman in 1968 with a 2D computer-based version. Journal Vestib Res 2008, 18: 239-247.
Reger GM, McGee JS, van der Zaag, C, Thiebaux M, Buckwalter JG, Rizzo AA. A 3D virtual environment Rod and Frame Test: The reliability and validity of four traditional scoring methods for older adults. Journal Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2003, 25:1169-1177.
Bagust J. Assessment of verticality perception by a rod-and-frame test: preliminary observations on the use of a computer monitor and video eye glasses. Arch Phys Med & Rehabil 2005, 86:1062-1064.
Docherty S, Bagust J. From line to dots: An improved computerised Rod and Frame system for testing subjective visual vertical and horizontal. BMC ResNotes 2010, 3; 9.
Cohen MX. It’s about time. Front Hum Neurosci 2011, 5: 2.
Corbett JE, Handy TC, Enns JT. When do we know which way is up? The time course of orientation perception. Vision Res 2009, 49:28-39.
Kaleff CR, Aschidamini C, Baron J, de Leone CN, Canavarro S, Vargas CD. Semi-automatic measurement of visual verticality perception in humans reveals a new category of visual field dependency. Braz J Med Biol Res 2011, 44:754-761.
Lommertzen J, van Zuijlen AMJ, Meulenbroek RGJ, van Lier R. Differential effects of the rod and frame illusion on the timing of forearm rotations. Motor Control 2009, 13:54-68
Corbett JE, Enns J, Handy T. Electrophysiological evidence for post-perceptual influence of global visual context on perceived orientation. Brain Res 2009, 1292:82-92.
Bray A, Subanandan A, Isableu B, Ohlmann T, Golding JF, Gresty MA. We are most aware of our place in the world when about to fall. Curr Biol 2004, 14:R609-R610.
Agrawal Y, Carey JP, Della Santina CC, Schubert MC, Minor LB: Diabetes, vestibular dysfunction, and falls: Analyses from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Otol Neurotol 2010, 31.1445-1450
Bles W, Bos JE, de Graaf B, Groen E, Wertheim AH. Motion sickness: Only one provocative conflict? Brain Res Bull 1998, 47:481-487.
Bos JE, Bles W. Groen EL. A theory on visually induced motion sickness. Displays 2008, 29:45-57.
Bos JE. Nuancing the relationship between motion sickness and postural stability. Displays 2010, 32:189-193.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186