Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:18:36.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prevalence and Correlates of Susceptibility to Motion Sickness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Krishan Sharma

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Data on susceptibility to motion sickness were collected on a sample of 535 individuals divided into eight groups. The prevalence of motion sickness among Tibetans and Northeast Indians (28%) was slightly higher than Northwest Indians (26%). Generally speaking, females (27.3%) were more susceptible than males (16.8%). Among different groups, the highest incidence of susceptibility to motion sickness (SMS) was recorded in schizophrenic patients (30%), while the lowest in rowers (zero percent). Ears and eyes are the most potent receptors of provocative motion that causes sickness. Individuals with greater spatial and motor control, reflected in sports like rowing, athletics and professions like armed and paramilitary forces, were less susceptible to motion sickness.

The SMS was significantly higher in individuals who suffered from spatial disorientation (35.05%), migraine (26.31%), gastrointestinal disorders (26.82%) and those who were more sensitive to unpleasant odours (24.64%) and preferred sweet flavours (24.48%) than their counterparts. These correlates have been utilized to explain the genesis of sickness using threshold model. Genetic and environmental pathways are strongly advocated. Past episodes of motion sickness acted as a strong psychological attribute in determining further episodes. The roadway buses and trucks proved more effective passive transportation types that caused sickness. The voluntary stabilization of the head and neck movements and gaze control proved very effective natural measures adopted by 38% subjects to avoid or limit motion sickness. About 50% of susceptible individuals became less susceptible or fully acclimatized to motion sickness due to habituation. The mean age at acclimatization was 21.98 ± 5.93 years.

Keywords

Motion sickness (MS)PrevalenceEthnic variationCorrelates
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , April 1997 , pp. 105 - 121
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1997

References

REFERENCES

1.Abe, K, Amatomi, M, Kajiyama, S (1970): Genetical and developmental aspects of susceptibility to motion sickness and frosbite. Hum Hered 20: 507–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Albert, A, Anderson, JA (1984): On the existence of maximum likelihood estimates in logistic regression models. Biometrika 71: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Anderson, JA (1974): Diagnosis of logistic discrimination functions: Further practical problems and results. Applied Statistics 23: 397–404.Google Scholar
4.Benson, AJ (1984): Motion sickness. In Dix, J R, Hood, J D (eds): Vertigo. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 391–425.Google Scholar
5.Bock, GR, Marsh, J (1991): Biological asymmetry and handedness. CIBA Foundation Symposium 162, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
6.Bradshaw, JL, Netleton, NC (1983): Human Cerebral Asymmetry. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
7.Chinn, HI, Smith, PK (1955): Motion sickness. Pharmacol Rev 7: 33–82.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Dillon, WR, Goldstein, M (1984): Multivariate Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
9.Dupont, P, Orban, GA, Vogels, R, Bormans, G, Nuyts, J, Schiepers, C, DeRoo, M, Mortelman, SL (1993): Different perceptual tasks performed with the same visual stimulus attribute activate different regions of the human brain; a prositron emission tomography study. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90: 10927–10931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Geschiwind, N, Galaburda, AM (1985): Cerebral lateralization, biological mechanisms, associations and pathology, I. A hypothesis and program for research. Arch Neurol 42: 428–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Irwin, JA (1881): The pathology of seasickness. Lancet II: 907–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.James, W (1882): The sense of dizziness in deaf-mutes. Am J Otol 4: 239–254.Google Scholar
13.Kennedy, RS, Fowlkes, JE, Berbaum, KS, Lilienthal, MG (1992): Use of motion sickness history questionnaire for prediction of simulator sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med 63: 588–593.Google Scholar
14.Lesaffre, E, Albert, A (1989): Partial separation in logistic discrimination. J Roy Stat Soc B, 51: 109–116.Google Scholar
15.Miller, EF, Graybiel, A (1970): A provocative test for grading susceptibility to motion sickness yielding a single numeral score. Acta Otolaryngol suppl 274.Google Scholar
16.Money, KE (1970): Motion sickness. Physiol Rev 50: 1–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Money, KE, Cheung, BS (1983): Another function of the inner ear: facilitation of the emetic response to poisons. Aviat Space Environ Med 62: 208–211.Google Scholar
18.Nicholson, AN, Pascoe, PA, Spencer, MB, Benson, AJ (1993): Jet lag and motion sickness. Brit Med Bull 49: 285–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Reason, JT (1970): Motion sickness: a special case of sensory rearrangement. Advancement of Science 26: 386–393.Google ScholarPubMed
20.Reason, JT (1978): Motion sickness adaptation: a neural mismatch model. J Roy Soc Med 71: 819–829.Google Scholar
21.Reason, JT, Brand, JJ (1975): Motion Sickness. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
22.Sharma, K (1980): Susceptibility to motion sickness. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 29: 157–162.Google ScholarPubMed
23.Sharma, K (1982): Susceptibility to motion sickness: some considerations. Everyday Science 27: 41–44.Google Scholar
24.Sivapulle, MJ (1981): On existence of maximum likelihood estimates for the binomial response models. J Roy Stat Soc B 43: 310–313.Google Scholar
25.Stephan, KM, Fink, GR, Passingham, RE, Silbersweig, D, Caballos-Baumann, AO, Frith, CD, Frackowiak, RSJ (1995): Functional anatomy of the mental respresentation of upper extremity movements in healthy subjects. J Neurophysiol 73: 373–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Stern, RM, HU, SQ, Leblane, R, Koch, KL (1993): Chinese hypersusceptibility to vection – induced motion sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med 64: 827–830.Google Scholar
27.Takahashi, M, Ogata, M, Miura, M (1995): Teleology of motion sickness. Acta Otolaryngol 115: 130–133.Google Scholar
28.Takahashi, M, Saito, A, Okada, Y, Takei, Y, Tomizawa, I, Uyama, K, Kanzaki, J (1991): Locomotion and motion sickness during horizontally and vertically reversed vision. Aviat Space Environ Med 62: 136–140.Google ScholarPubMed
29.Treisman, M (1977): Motion sickness: an evolutionary hypothesis. Science 197: 493–495.Google Scholar
30.Tyler, DB, Bard, P (1949): Motion sickness. Physiol Rev 29: 311–369.Google Scholar
31.Vandenberg, SG (1967): Hereditary factors in psychological variables in man, with a special emphasis on cognition. In Spuhler, JN (ed): Genetic Diversity and Human Behavior. New York: Wenner-Gren Foundation, pp. 99–133.Google Scholar
32.Watt, DGD, Bouyer, LJG, Nevo, IT, Smith, AV, Tiande, Y (1992): What is motion sickness? Ann NY Acad Sci 656: 660–667.Google Scholar
33.Zar, JH (1974): Biostatistical Analysis, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar