Effects of Orbital Space Flight on Vestibular Reflexes and Perception

  • Laurence R. Young


We have considered the complex adaptive process of human spatial orientation in terms of a time varying optimal estimator (Borah et al., 1978,1988, Merfeld et al., 1993). According to this view, the brain is constantly attempting to make the best possible guess about where we are in the presence of parallel, at times conflicting, cues from the various sensory organs and from efferent copy of our own motor commands. Central to the optimal estimator is the Kalman filter, which is capable of determining mathematically the gains to be applied to each measurement signal in order to produce a “state estimate” which is optimal in the least squares error sense, for some given error cost function. At the heart of the optimal estimator is the “internal model”, which includes knowledge of the dynamic characteristics of the body, of the sense organs and of the random motions to which the body is subjected. This internal model appears, in part, under many different names in the evolving literature on oculomotor and postural control, including “perceptual feedback”, “corollary discharge”, “velocity storage”, “second integrator” and “body schema”. In its full implementation the mathematics for solving the Ricatti equations for the optimal gains is daunting - but the idea is actually quite simple.




Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Borah, J., Young, L.R, and Curry, R.E., 1978, Sensory mechanism modeling“, AFHRL-TR-78–83, 1978.Google Scholar
  2. Borah, J., Young, L.R., and Curry, RE., 1988, Optimal estimator model for human spatial orientation“, in Representation of Three-Dimensional Space in the Vestibular, Oculomotor, and Visual Systems: A Symposium of the Barany Society, Cohen, B. and Henn, V., eds, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 545:51–73, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Dichgans, J., Held, R., Young, L.R., and Brandt, Th., 1972, Moving visual scenes influence the apparent direction of gravity“, Science 178:1217–1219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kenyon, R.V., and Young, L.R, 1986, MIT/Canadian vestibular experiments on the Spacelab-1 mission: 5. Postural responses following exposure to weightlessness“, Experimental Brain Research 64:335–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Merfeld, D.M., Young, L.R., Oman, C.M., and Shelhamer, MI, 1993, A multidimensional model of the effect of gravity on the spatial orientation of the monkey“, Journal of Vestibular Research,3(2):141–161.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Oman, C.M., 1990, Motion sickness: a synthesis and evaluation of the sensory conflict theory“, Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology, 68:294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Oman, C.M., and Shubentsov, I., 1992, Space sickness symptom severity correlates with average head acceleration“, in Mechanisms and Control of Emesis, eds., Bianchi, A.L., Grelot, L., Miller, A.D., and King, G.L., Colloque INSERM/John Libbey Eurotext Ltd. 233:185–194.Google Scholar
  8. Ormsby, C.C., and Young, L.R., 1977, Integration of semicircular canal and otolith information for multisensory orientation stimuli”, Mathematical Biosciences 34:1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Watt, D.G.D., Landolt, J.P., and Young, L.R., 1992, Effects of long-term weightlessness on roll circularvection“, Proceedings of the Seventh CASI Conference on Astronautics, Ottawa.Google Scholar
  10. Young, L.R., Jackson, D.K., Groleau, N., and Modestino, S.A., 1991, Multisensory integration in micro-gravity“, in Sensing And Controlling Motion: Vestibular and Sensorimotor Function, Cohen, B., Tomko, D.L., and Guedry F., eds., Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 656:340–353. Originally presented at the NYAS conference, Sensing and Controlling Motion, Palo Alto.Google Scholar
  11. Young, L.R., Jackson, D.K., Groleau, N., and Modestino, S.A., 1992, Multisensory integration in microgravity, in Sensing And Controlling Motion: Vestibular and Sensorimotor Function, Cohen, B., Tomko, D.L. and Guedry F., eds., Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 656:340–353.Google Scholar
  12. Young, L.R., Mendoza, J.C., Groleau, N., and Wojcik, P.W., 1994, Tactile Influences on Astronaut Visual Spatial Orientation: Human Neurovestibular Experiments on Spacelab Life Sciences 2“, (submitted to J Applied Physiol.).Google Scholar
  13. Young, L.R., Oman, C.M., Curry, R.E., and Dichgans, J.M., 1973, A descriptive model of multi-sensor human spatial orientation with applications to visually induced sensations of motion, AIAA Paper No. 73–915, AIAA Visual and Motion Simulation Conference, Palo.Google Scholar
  14. Young, L.R., Shelhamer, M., 1990, Microgravity enhances the relative contribution of visually-induced motion sensation, Aviation Space Environmental Medicine 61:525–530.Google Scholar
  15. Young, L.R., Shelhamer, M., and Modestino, S., 1986, MIT/Canadian vestibular experiments on the Spacelab-1 mission: 2. Visual vestibular tilt interaction in weightlessness “, Experimental Brain Research 64:299–307.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurence R. Young
    • 1
  1. 1.Man-Vehicle LaboratoryMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations