Literature DB >> 16018346

Sex differences in tolerance to visually-induced motion sickness.

Moira B Flanagan1, James G May, Thomas G Dobie.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Women report a history of motion sickness (MS) about twice as frequently as men, but the results of experimental studies are equivocal. In the present investigation, we sought to replicate previous findings that women report a greater history of MS than men when interrogated with MS history questionnaires. We examined the hypothesis that those reporting that they are prone to MS are less likely to volunteer for MS provocative experiments than those who are MS resistant. Finally, using a subset of these participants, we exposed men and women, during two separate sessions, to visually elicited apparent motion, with and without voluntary head motion (pseudo-Coriolis stimulation), to examine any differences in MS elicited between these two groups on exposure to such motion stimulation.
METHOD: Experiment 1 used a MS History Questionnaire, which included an opportunity for male and female participants to volunteer for "psychology experiments" in the coming semester. This instrument was used to determine effects of sex and volunteer status on motion sickness susceptibility (MSS). Experiment 2 involved exposing a subset of these participants to rotation of a vertically striped rotating drum under static and head movement conditions. Measures of vection and MS were recorded.
RESULTS: We found higher MSS scores in women vs. men, particularly when looking at participants who elected to volunteer. Women in the second experiment reported significantly more MS, but they exhibited less tolerance with head movement. No significant differences in vection were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that laboratory manipulations that are more provocative of MS reveal reliable sex differences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16018346

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aviat Space Environ Med        ISSN: 0095-6562


  11 in total

1.  The efficacy of airflow and seat vibration on reducing visually induced motion sickness.

Authors:  Sarah D'Amour; Jelte E Bos; Behrang Keshavarz
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Sex differences in visual performance and postural sway precede sex differences in visually induced motion sickness.

Authors:  Frank Koslucher; Eric Haaland; Thomas A Stoffregen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-10-14       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Postural sway in men and women during nauseogenic motion of the illuminated environment.

Authors:  Frank Koslucher; Justin Munafo; Thomas A Stoffregen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-05-28       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Susceptibility to nausea and motion sickness as a function of the menstrual cycle.

Authors:  Robert L Matchock; Max E Levine; Peter J Gianaros; Robert M Stern
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2008-05-15

5.  Are there side effects to watching 3D movies? A prospective crossover observational study on visually induced motion sickness.

Authors:  Angelo G Solimini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-13       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Motion sickness diagnostic criteria: Consensus Document of the Classification Committee of the Bárány Society.

Authors:  Yoon-Hee Cha; John F Golding; Behrang Keshavarz; Joseph Furman; Ji-Soo Kim; Jose A Lopez-Escamez; Måns Magnusson; Bill J Yates; Ben D Lawson
Journal:  J Vestib Res       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 2.354

7.  Sex and Age Differences in Motion Sickness in Rats: The Correlation with Blood Hormone Responses and Neuronal Activation in the Vestibular and Autonomic Nuclei.

Authors:  Wei Zhou; Junqin Wang; Leilei Pan; Ruirui Qi; Peng Liu; Jiluo Liu; Yiling Cai
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 5.750

8.  Virtual Reality Is Sexist: But It Does Not Have to Be.

Authors:  Kay Stanney; Cali Fidopiastis; Linda Foster
Journal:  Front Robot AI       Date:  2020-01-31

9.  The role of cognitive factors and personality traits in the perception of illusory self-motion (vection).

Authors:  Sarah D'Amour; Laurence R Harris; Stefan Berti; Behrang Keshavarz
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Estimating the sensorimotor components of cybersickness.

Authors:  Séamas Weech; Jessy Parokaran Varghese; Michael Barnett-Cowan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 2.714

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.