Shows body orientation influences vestibular-evoked potentials in humans, indicating dynamic processing mechanisms.
Otolithic vestibular receptors encode linear acceleration and head orientation relative to gravity, providing a fundamental reference signal for perception, action, and higher-order cognitive functions. However, the cerebral dynamics of otolithic information processing and their sensitivity to body orientation remain poorly characterized. Here, we used sound-induced vestibular stimulation combined with electroencephalography (EEG) in human participants to characterize vestibular-evoked potentials (vEPs) and to examine how body orientation relative to gravity modulates these responses. Otolithic activation was validated using cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials, confirming activation of otolithic pathways by 105 dB and 500 Hz tone pips. Acoustic stimuli included a novel masked stimulus that reduced auditory perception while preserving vestibular activation. Sound-induced vestibular stimulation elicited reliable short- and middle-latency vEP components. Importantly, middle-latency components Na/Pa (peak latency: 20–30 ms) and N*/P* (41–54 ms) were modulated by body orientation, showing reduced amplitudes in the supine compared with the upright position, but only for otolithic-activating sounds and not for matched auditory control stimuli. This orientation-dependent modulation was stronger for Na/Pa and was specific to otolithic-activating sounds, supporting a vestibular rather than auditory origin and highlighting early integration processes. This pattern suggests that modulation of vEPs primarily reflects context-dependent cerebral processing of otolithic signals rather than peripheral sensory mechanisms. Together, our results establish Na/Pa and N*/P* as reliable cerebral markers of otolithic processing and demonstrate that early cerebral vestibular responses are dynamically shaped by body orientation according to gravity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kobliska et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: