2015
DOI: 10.4236/psych.2015.64041
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vection Is Unaffected by Circadian Rhythms

Abstract: We examined the effect of circadian rhythms on self-motion perception (vection). We measured the strength of vection (i.e. latency, duration, and magnitude of vection) every three hours from 9 AM to 9 PM. The results showed that vection was similar at all times measured. Thus, we concluded that vection was unaffected by circadian clock.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

2
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, there was no effect of sleep deprivation on vection strength. This result coincides with Hypothesis 2, which incorporated the idea that vection is not affected by circadian rhythms [35].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, there was no effect of sleep deprivation on vection strength. This result coincides with Hypothesis 2, which incorporated the idea that vection is not affected by circadian rhythms [35].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…At the same time, it has been reported that vection cannot be modulated by circadian rhythms, and that vection strength remained constant from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. [35]. From this fact, we can make a second hypothesis (Hypothesis 2) that vection strength would not be changed through sleep deprivation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…In our review of the recent literature, we found more than 50 papers where all three of these measures were obtained in the same experiment (see Allison, Ash, & Palmisano, 2014 ; Apthorp & Palmisano, 2014 ; Bonato & Bubka, 2006 ; Bonato, Bubka, Palmisano, Phillip, & Moreno, 2008 ; Brandt et al., 1973 ; Bubka & Bonato, 2010 ; Bubka et al., 2008 ; Gurnsey, Fleet, & Potechin, 1998 ; Guterman, Allison, Palmisano, & Zacher, 2012 ; Keshavarz et al., 2015 ; Keshavarz, Speck, Haycock, & Berti, 2017 ; Kim & Palmisano, 2008 , 2010a ; Mohler, Thompson, Riecke, & Bülthoff, 2005 ; Nakamura, 2006 , 2010 , 2012 , 2013a , 2013b , 2013c , 2013d , 2013e ; Nakamura, Palmisano, & Kim, 2016 ; Nakamura, Seno, Ito, & Sunaga, 2010 , 2013 ; Nakamura & Shimojo, 1998 , 1999 , 2003 ; Ogawa, Ito, & Seno, 2015 ; Ogawa & Seno, 2014 ; Ogawa, Seno, Matsumori, & Higuchi, 2015 ; Palmisano, 1996 ; Palmisano, Burke, & Allison, 2003 ; Palmisano & Chan, 2004 ; Palmisano, Gillam, & Blackburn, 2000 ; Palmisano & Kim, 2009 ; Palmisano et al., 2011 , 2015 ; Palmisano, Summersby, Davies & Kim, 2016 ; Riecke et al., 2006 , 2009; R...…”
Section: The Opvmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Five out of these seven laboratory experiments had been published as scientific articles (in either English or Japanese—see Ogawa, Ito, & Seno, 2015 ; Ogawa & Seno, 2016 ; Ogawa, Seno, Matsumori, & Higuchi, 2015 ; Seno & Nagata, 2016 ; Seno, Ogawa, Tokunaga, & Kanaya, 2016 ). The remaining two experiments have yet to be published as papers.…”
Section: Opvm Performance Compared With Laboratory Vection Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation