Thursday, 4 October 2012

Why do humans walk in circles?

It's a trusted plot device of many a thriller. The lost protagonists stagger for hours through creepy forest only to end up back where they started. In fact the idea that humans walk in circles is no urban myth. This was confirmed by Jan Souman and colleagues in a 2009 study, in which participants walked for hours at night in a German forest and the Tunisian Sahara. But the question remains - why?

Souman's team rejected past theories, including the idea that people have one leg that's stronger or longer than the other. If that were true you'd expect people to systematically veer off in the same direction, but their participants varied in their circling direction.

Now a team in France has made a bold attempt to get to the bottom of the mystery. Emma Bestaven and her colleagues hired out a huge indoor exhibition space in Bordeaux (90m x 150m) and blindfolded their participants, thus ensuring that there was no way any environmental sounds or bumps on the ground could interfere with the results.

Another innovation was that the researchers used EMG to monitor the participants' muscle activity in their legs whilst they walked; they had them stand on a force plate to check how their balance was distributed; and they assessed their subjective sense of the vertical, via their placement of a vertical bar.

Given six attempts to walk in a straight line, the fifteen blindfolded participants (7 women) in fact frequently veered off in one direction or the other, just as expected based on past research. Half the time they deviated off to the left, 39 per cent of the time to the right, and the remainder of the walks they managed to go straight. Six of the participants always veered in the same direction, the others mixed it up. There was no evidence of participants getting straighter with each attempt, but a faster walking speed was associated with a straighter trajectory.

Many past theories for why humans walk in circles were ruled out - walking deviation was unrelated to hand, eye or leg dominance. The recordings of muscle activity drew a blank. But there was one clue. The participants' "centre of pressure" score obtained when they stood on the force plate, which reflects their postural balance, was correlated with how much they deviated from a straight line when they walked. In turn, this "centre of pressure" score was correlated with participants' subjective sense of a straight vertical line.



Emma Bestaven, Etienne Guillaud, and Jean-René Cazalets (2012). Is “Circling” Behavior in Humans Related to Postural Asymmetry? PLoS ONE DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043861

Post written by Christian Jarrett for the BPS Research Digest.


  1. for the walking-in-circle hypothesis to work, they have to veer off in one direction consistently ie
    left, left ... left or
    right, right ... right.

    fluctuating between left and right might cancel off the effect.

    did the researcher show that the degree of consistency is sufficiently large such that the walking-in-circle phenomenon would occur?

    1. Anonymous5:15 pm

      not necessarily. while fluctuation cancellations could occur at higher frequencies, a disproportionate imbalance would affect the overall path in the long run. Think about the outline of a gear or cog.

  2. It would be very surprising if we could walk for long distances in a nice straight line when blindfolded, as it would imply we have some kind of calibrated biological gps-like system. And it would be pretty extraordinary if our onboard inertial navigation equipment (vestibular system) was accurate enough to work over much more than a few metres. Sooner or later, we’re bound to deviate off in one direction or the other.

    By the way, did the researchers test with-chewing gum and without-chewing gum?

    1. Anonymous8:43 am

      not quite. if it were 'random' as you imply they would veer left then right then left and overall would go in a straight line. what we don't know is why people veered consistently in one direction, thus making a loop.

    2. If the 'randomness' was truly random then errors would, given time, perfectly cancel out - to result in a straight line path. In the much more likely event that the vestibular system was not perfectly 'balanced' (ahem, sorry!) then the errors would bias it in one direction or the other - resulting in a circular (though wobbly) path. No?

  3. For once, a 'circular analysis' that makes for good science.

  4. Anonymous6:24 pm

    Check this out:

  5. Cameron M10:18 pm

    A link between walking in a straight line and balance certainly seems logically justified... It would explain at least two scenarios that spring to mind, namely an attempt to walk straight whilst on a rolling boat, or whilst excessively drunk.

    Now all that's left to do is attempt to canvas a large enough area with level flooring that these effects can be tested on a larger scale. Australia would make a good site?

