Perceptual disturbances predicted in zero-g through three-dimensional modeling

Journal of Vestibular Research: Equilibrium and Orientation

Volumn 13, Issue 4-6, 2003, Pages 173-186

  Holly, Jan E ^a  

^a Health Services and Department of Biology   (United States)

Author keywords

Model; Motion sickness; Perception; Self motion; Vestibular; Zero g

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE PAPER; CORIOLIS PHENOMENON; GRAVITY; MODEL; PERCEPTION; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PHYSICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ROTATION; SIMULATION; SUPINE POSITION;

CENTRIFUGATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CORIOLIS FORCE; GRAVITATION; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MOTION PERCEPTION; PERCEPTUAL DISORDERS; POSTURE; VESTIBULE;

EID: 2342448018     PISSN: 09574271     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. D.E. Angelaki, D.M. Merfeld and B.J.M. Hess, Low-frequency otolith and semicircular canal interactions after canal inactivation, Experimental Brain Research 132 (2000), 539-549.
2. D.E. Angelaki, M. Wei and D.M. Merfeld, Vestibular discrimination of gravity and translational acceleration, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 942 (2001), 114-127.
3. A.J. Benson, F.E. Guedry, D.E. Parker and M.F. Reschke, Microgravity vestibular investigations: perception of self-orientation and self-motion, Journal of Vestibular Research 7 (1997), 453-457.
4. W. Bles, Coriolis effects and motion sickness modelling, Brain Research Bulletin 47 (1998), 543-549.
5. J. Borah, L.R. Young and R.E. Curry, Optimal estimator model for human spatial orientation, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 545 (1988), 51-73.
6. J.E. Bos and W. Bles, Theoretical considerations on canal-otolith interaction and an observer model, Biological Cybernetics 86 (2002), 191-207.
7. G. Clément, S.T. Moore, T. Raphan and B. Cohen, Perception of tilt (somatogravic illusion) in response to sustained linear acceleration during space flight. Experimental Brain Research 138 (2001), 410-418.
8. J. Droulez and C. Darlot, The geometric and dynamic implications of the coherence constraints in three-dimensional sensorimotor interactions, in: Attention and Performance, M. Jeannerod, ed., Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989, pp. 495-526.
9. S. Glasauer and D.M. Merfeld, Modelling three-dimensional vestibular responses during complex motion stimulation, in: Three-Dimensional Kinematics of Eye, Head and Limb Movements, M. Fetter, T. Haslwanter, H. Misslich and D. Tweed, eds, Harwood, Reading, 1997, pp. 387-398.
10. A. Graybiel, E.F. Miller and J.L. Homick, Experiment M131. Human vestibular function, in: Biomedical Results from Skylab, (Section II), R.S. Johnston and L.F. Dietlein, eds, NASA SP-377, US Government Printing Office, 1977, pp. 74-103.
11. F.E. Guedry, Jr., Psychophysics of vestibular sensation, in: Handbook of Sensory Physiology, (Vol. VI), H.H. Kornhuber, ed., Springer, Berlin, 1974, pp. 3-154.
12. F.E. Guedry, Jr. and A.J. Benson, Coriolis cross-coupling effects: disorienting and nauseogenic or not? Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 49 (1978), 29-35.
13. Heiko Hecht, personal communication.
14. H. Hecht, J. Kavelaars, C.C. Cheung and L.R. Young, Orientation illusions and heart-rate changes during short-radius centrifugation, Journal of Vestibular Research 11 (2001), 115-127.
15. J.E. Holly, Subject-coincident coordinate systems and sustained motions. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 35 (1996), 445-473.
16. J.E. Holly, Three-dimensional baselines for perceived self-motion during acceleration and deceleration in a centrifuge, Journal of Vestibular Research 7 (1997), 45-61.
17. J.E. Holly, Baselines for three-dimensional perception of combined linear and angular self-motion with changing rotational axis, Journal of Vestibular Research 10 (2000), 163-178.
18. J.E. Holly, Three-dimensional differences between vestibular coriolis effects during acceleration, deceleration, and microgravity, Society for Neuroscience Abstracts 26 (2000), 1495.
19. J.E. Holly, Linear-angular interactions modeled in three dimensions to identify disorienting vestibular-proprioceptive mismatch, in: Abstracts of Multisensory Interactions Subserving Orienting Behavior (Satellite to Neural Control of Movement, 12th Annual Meeting), Naples, Florida, USA, April 14-16, 2002.
20. K. Kushiro, M. Dai, M. Kunin, S.B. Yakushin, B. Cohen and T. Raphan, Compensatory and orienting eye movements induced by off-vertical axis rotation (OVAR) in monkeys, Journal of Neurophysiology 88 (2002), 2445-2462.
21. J.R. Lackner and P. DiZio, Multisensory, cognitive, and motor influences on human spatial orientation in weightlessness, Journal of Vestibular Research 3 (1993), 361-372.
22. J.R. Lackner and A. Graybiel, The effective intensity of coriolis, cross-coupling stimulation is gravitoinertial force dependent: implications for space motion sickness. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 57 (1986), 229-235.
23. G. Melvill Jones, Origin significance and amelioration of coriolis illusions from the semicircular canals: a non-mathematical appraisal. Aerospace Medicine 41 (1970), 483-490.
24. D.M. Merfeld, Modeling human vestibular responses during eccentric rotation and off vertical axis rotation, Acta Oto-Laryngologica, Supplement 520 (1995), 354-359.
25. D.M. Merfeld, Modeling the vestibulo-ocular reflex of the squirrel monkey during eccentric rotation and roll tilt, Experimental Brain Research 106 (1995), 123-134.
26. D.M. Merfeld, L.R. Young, C.M. Oman and M.J. Shelhamer, A multidimensional model of the effect of gravity on the spatial orientation of the monkey, Journal of Vestibular Research 3 (1993), 141-161.
27. D.M. Merfeld and L.H. Zupan, Neural processing of gravitoinertial cues in humans. III. Modeling tilt and translation responses, Journal of Neurophysiology 87 (2002), 819-833.
28. D.M. Merfeld, L. Zupan and R.J. Peterka, Humans use internal models to estimate gravity and linear acceleration, Nature 398 (1999), 615-618.
29. T. Mergner and S. Glasauer, A simple model of vestibular canal-otolith signal fusion. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 871 (1999), 430-434.
30. H. Mittelstaedt, Somatic graviception. Biological Psychology 42 (1996), 53-74.
31. M.-L. Mittelstaedt and H. Mittelstaedt, The influence of otoliths and somatic graviceptors on angular velocity estimation, Journal of Vestibular Research 6 (1996), 355-366.
32. C.M. Oman, A heuristic mathematical model for the dynamics of sensory conflict and motion sickness, Acta Oto-Laryngologica, Supplement 392 (1982).
33. C.C. Ormsby and L.R. Young, Integration of semicircular canal and otolith information for multisensory orientation stimuli. Mathematical Biosciences 34 (1977), 1-21.
34. T. Raphan and B. Cohen, The vestibulo-ocular reflex in three dimensions. Experimental Brain Research 145 (2002), 1-27.
35. T. Raphan and D. Sturm, Modeling the spatiotemporal organization of velocity storage in the vestibuloocular reflex by optokinetic studies, Journal of Neurophysiology 66 (1991), 1410-1421.
36. G. Reymond, J. Droulez and A. Kemeny, Visuovestibular perception of self-motion modeled as a dynamic optimization process, Biological Cybernetics 87 (2002), 301-314.
37. S. Wearne, T. Raphan and B. Cohen, Effects of tilt of the gravito-inertial acceleration vector on the angular vestibuloocular reflex during centrifugation, Journal of Neurophysiology 81 (1999), 2175-2190.
38. P.D. Woodman and M.J. Griffin, Effect of direction of head movement on motion sickness caused by coriolis stimulation, Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 68 (1997), 93-98.
39. L.R. Young, Perception of the body in space: mechanisms, in: Handbook of Physiology, Volume III (Sensory Processes, Part 2), I. Darian-Smith, ed., American Physiological Society, Bethesda, Maryland, 1984, pp. 1023-1066.
40. L.H. Zupan, D.M. Merfeld and C. Darlot, Using sensory weighting to model the influence of canal, otolith and visual cues on spatial orientation and eye movements. Biological Cybernetics 96 (2002), 209-230.