Physiological Mechanisms Underlying Motion Sickness

  • Thomas G. DobieEmail author
Part of the Springer Series on Naval Architecture, Marine Engineering, Shipbuilding and Shipping book series (NAMESS, volume 6)


In this chapter, I shall try to provide an overview of the changes that have taken place during the last fifty years in terms of identifying the physiological mechanisms underlying the motion sickness response. Despite the fact that much effort has gone into this search, we still do not have a definitive explanation for this syndrome. I suggest that we may well find that there is no single explanation and that perhaps a number of these current concepts are relevant. Fortunately, this lack of a clear model for the aetiology of motion sickness has not prevented us from making progress in terms of dealing with the condition.


  1. Bard P, Woolsey CW, Snider RS, Mountcastle VB, Bromley RB (1947) Delimitation of central nervous system mechanisms involved in motion sickness. Fed Proc 6:72Google Scholar
  2. Benson AJ (1984) Motion sickness. In: Dix MR, Hood JD (eds) Vertigo. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  3. Benson AJ (1988) Motion sickness. In: Ernsting J, King P (eds) Aviation medicine, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Bles W (1996) Mechanisms and theory of motion sickness. In: Presented at the AGARD/AMP short course on prevention and treatment of motion effects in aviation, Fürstenfeldbruck, Germany, and Lisbon, Portugal, September 1996Google Scholar
  5. Bles W, Bos JE, de Graaf B, Groen E, Wertheim AH (1998) Motion sickness: only one provocative conflict? Brain Res Bull 47(5):481–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brand JJ, Perry WLM (1966) Drugs used in motion sickness. A critical review of the methods available for the study of drugs of potential value in its treatment and of the information which has been derived by these methods. Pharmacol Rev 18(1):895–924Google Scholar
  7. Brizzee KR, Neal LM (1954) A reevaluation of the cellular morphology of the area postrema in view of recent evidence of a chemoreceptive function. J Comp Neurol 100:41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Claremont CA (1931) The psychology of seasickness. Psyche 11:86–90Google Scholar
  9. Coats AC, Norfleet WT (1998) Immersed false vertical room: a new motion sickness model. J Vestib Res 8(2):135–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dichgans J, Brandt T (1973) Optokinetic motion sickness as pseudo-Coriolis effects induced by moving visual stimuli. Acta Otolaryngologica 76:339–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ebenholtz SM (1988) Sources of asthenopia in navy flight simulators. Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Technical Information Center, Alexandria, VA, Accession Number AD-A212699Google Scholar
  12. Ebenholtz SM, Cohen MM, Linder BJ (1994) The possible role of nystagmus in motion sickness: a hypothesis. Aviat Space Environ Med 65:1032–1035Google Scholar
  13. Flanagan MB, May JG, Dobie TG (2002) Optokinetic nystagmus, vection and motion sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med 73:1067–1073Google Scholar
  14. Gay LN (1954) Labyrinthine factors in motion sickness. Int Rec Med General Pract Clin 176(12):628–630Google Scholar
  15. Graybiel A (1970) Susceptibility to acute motion sickness in blind persons. NAMI1100, Naval Aerospace Medical Center, Pensacola, FLGoogle Scholar
  16. Guedry FE (1970) Conflicting sensory orientation cues as a factor in motion sickness. In: 4th symposium on the role of the vestibular organs in space exploration, Naval Aerospace Medical Institute, Naval Aerospace Medical Center, September 24–26, 1968, Pensacola, FL. NASA SP-187, pp, 45–51, Office of Technology Utilization, NASA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. Guedry FE (1991) Motion sickness and its relation to some forms of spatial orientation: mechanisms and theory. In: Motion sickness: significance in aerospace operations and prophylaxis, AGARD lecture series 175 (AGARD-LS-175), North Atlantic Treaty Organization Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France, vol 2, p 1Google Scholar
  18. Held R (1961) Exposure history as a factor in maintaining stability of perception and coordination. J Nerv Mental Dis 132:26–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Held R, Mikaelian H (1964) Motor-sensory feedback versus need in adaptation to rearrangement. Perceptual Motor Skills 18:685–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hill J (1936) The care of the sea-sick. Br Med J 2:802–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Houchin KW, Dunbar JA, Lingua RW (1992) Reduction of postoperative emesis in medial rectus muscle surgery. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci 33:1336Google Scholar
  22. Irwin JA (1881) The pathology of sea-sickness. Lancet 1881(2):907–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Isaacs B (1957) The influence of head and body positions on the emetic action of apomorphine in man. Clin Sci 16:215–221Google Scholar
  24. James W (1882) The sense of dizziness in deaf-mutes. Am J Otolaryngol 4:239–254Google Scholar
  25. Johnson WH, Mayne JW (1953) Stimulus required to produce motion sickness: restriction of head movement as a preventative of airsickness—field studies on air borne troops. J Aviat Med 24(400–411):452Google Scholar
  26. Johnson WH, Stubbs RA, Kelk GF, Franks WR (1951) Stimulus required to produce motion sickness. 1. Preliminary report dealing with importance of head movements. J Aviat Med 22:365–374Google Scholar
  27. Katz RL, Bigger JT Jr (1970) Cardiac arrhythmias during anesthesia and operation. Anesthesiology 33:193–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kellogg RS, Kennedy RS, Graybiel A (1964) Motion sickness symptomatology of labyrinthine defective and normal subjects during zero gravity maneuvers. AMRL-TDR-64-47. Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright- Patterson Air Force BaseGoogle Scholar
  29. Kennedy RS, Graybiel A, McDonough RC, Beckwith D Jr (1968) Symptomatology under storm conditions in the North Atlantic in control subjects and in persons with bilateral labyrinthine defects. Acta Otolaryngologica 66:533–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lackner JR, DiZio P (1991) Decreased susceptibility to motion sickness during exposure to visual inversion in microgravity. Aviat Space Environ Med 62:206–211Google Scholar
  31. Lackner JL, Graybiel A (1981) Variations in gravitoinertial force level affect the gain of the vestibulo-ocular reflex: implications for the etiology of space motion sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med 52:154–158Google Scholar
  32. Laffan RJ, Borison HL (1957) Emetic action of nicotine and lobeline. J Pharmacol Exp Therap 121:468–476Google Scholar
  33. Lansberg MP (1960) A primer of space medicine. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  34. Leigh RJ, Daroff RB (1985) Space motion sickness: etiological hypotheses and a proposal for diagnostic clinical examination. Aviat Space Environ Med 56:469–473Google Scholar
  35. Matsuo V, Cohen B (1984) Vertical optokinetic nystagmus and vestibular nystagmus in the monkey: up-down asymmetry and effects of gravity. Exp Brain Res 53:197–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McNally WJ, Stuart EA (1942) Physiology of the labyrinth reviewed in relation to seasickness and other forms of motion sickness. War Med 2:683Google Scholar
  37. Milot JA, Jacob JL, Blanc VF, Hardy JF (1983) The oculocardiac reflex in strabismus surgery. Can J Ophthalmol 18:314–317Google Scholar
  38. Minor JL (1896) Seasickness: its cause and relief. N Y Med J 64:522–523Google Scholar
  39. Money KE (1970) Motion sickness. Physiol Rev 50:1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Money KE, Cheung BS (1983) Another function of the inner ear: facilitation of the emetic response to poisons. Aviat Space Environ Med 54(3):208–211Google Scholar
  41. Morales MF (1946) Asynchrony of labyrinthine receptors as a physical factor in motion sickness. Bull Math Biophys 8:147–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Norfleet WT, Coats AC, Powell MR (1995) Inverted immersion as a novel gravitoinertial environment. Aviat Space Environ Med 66:825–828Google Scholar
  43. Oman CM (1990) Motion sickness: a synthesis and evaluation of the sensory conflict theory. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 68:294–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Reason JT (1970) Motion sickness: a special case of sensory rearrangement. Adv Sci 26:386–393Google Scholar
  45. Reason JT (1978) Motion sickness adaptation: a neural mismatch model. J Roy Soc Med 71:819–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Reason JT, Brand JJ (1975) Motion sickness. Academic Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  47. Reynolds TT (1884) On the nature and treatment of seasickness. Lancet 123(3174):1161–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Riccio GE, Stoffregen TA (1991) An ecological theory of motion sickness and postural instability. Ecol Psychol 3(3):195–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sjöberg AA (1929) Experimental studies of the eliciting mechanism of seasickness. Acta Otolaryngol 13:343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Steele JE (1970) The symptomatology of motion sickness. In: Proceedings of the fourth symposium on the role of the vestibular organs in space exploration, NASA, SP-187, p 97Google Scholar
  51. 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 62:136–140Google Scholar
  52. Treisman M (1977) Motion sickness: an evolutionary hypothesis. Science 197:493–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. von Baumgarten RJ, Thumler R (1979) A model for vestibular function in altered gravitational states. Life Sci Space Res 7:161–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. von Gierke HE, von Parker DE (1994) Differences in otolith and abdominal viscera graviceptor dynamics: implications for motion sickness and perceived body position. Aviat Space Environ Med 65:747–751Google Scholar
  55. von Holst E (1954) Relations between the central nervous system and the peripheral organs. Br J Animal Behav 2:89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wang SC, Borison HL (1950) The vomiting center: a critical experimental analysis. Arch Neurol Psych 63:928–941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wang SC, Chinn HI (1954) Experimental motion sickness in dogs: functional importance of chemoreceptive emetic trigger zone. Am J Physiol 178:111–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wang SC, Chinn HI (1956) Experimental sickness in dogs: importance of labyrinth and vestibular cerebellum. Am J Physiol 185:617CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Biodynamics Laboratory, College of EngineeringUniversity of New OrleansNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations