Citation

Bowins B. Brain Res. Bull. 2010; 81(1): 7-11.

Affiliation

Private Practice, 2200 Yonge Street, Suite 1700, Toronto, Ontario, M4S 2C6.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.brainresbull.2009.09.017

PMID

19808080

Abstract

Theories pertaining to the "why" of motion sickness are in short supply relative to those detailing the "how." Considering the profoundly disturbing and dysfunctional symptoms of motion sickness, it is difficult to conceive of why this condition is so strongly biologically based in humans and most other mammalian and primate species. It is posited that motion sickness evolved as a potent negative reinforcement system designed to terminate motion involving sensory conflict or postural instability. During our evolution and that of many other species, motion of this type would have impaired evolutionary fitness via injury and/or signaling weakness and vulnerability to predators. The symptoms of motion sickness strongly motivate the individual to terminate the offending motion by early avoidance, cessation of movement, or removal of oneself from the source. The motion sickness negative reinforcement mechanism functions much like pain to strongly motivate evolutionary fitness preserving behavior. Alternative why theories focusing on the elimination of neurotoxins and the discouragement of motion programs yielding vestibular conflict suffer from several problems, foremost that neither can account for the rarity of motion sickness in infants and toddlers. The negative reinforcement model proposed here readily accounts for the absence of motion sickness in infants and toddlers, in that providing strong motivation to terminate aberrant motion does not make sense until a child is old enough to act on this motivation.

Language: en