AvMed.IN, ‘RPD as a disorientation countermeasure’ sounds a very interesting concept.
Perhaps the contributions of situation assessment and knowledge in RPD will provide a route towards an understanding of how these can reduce the prevalence of disorientation.
There was an interesting article in New Scientist 10 Nov 2010 “The rational case for irrational thinking” which discusses research, culture, etc depending on the view taken - WEIRD. "Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich and Democratic".
A minor point related to cultural frames of reference, they can differ; this might relate to disorientation training, the conflict between body-sensed frame of reference / instrument displays and the natural frame of reference.
Is disorientation of form of reversion to a natural frame of reference?
As a thought about combat pilots and frames of reference, in a 1 v1 combat the norm may be to describe the adversary relative to your self, e.g. forward, to the right, and above.
In a multi-aircraft combat scenario, dependant on communications, the frame of reference changes to a fixed based reference (Nav fix) e.g. N,E,S,W, and relative altitude from the reference point.
There could be aspects of CRM here – an individual view vs a group view, the latter dependent on communication.
Also, there may be similarities with problems of cabin-crew to flight-deck communication in large aircraft. First, it is necessary to specify the frame of reference – upper deck, left rear door, facing forward. In some aircraft the doors/cabins are so similar the crew might not know where they are! (Label the doors).
What’s the first aspect of a mobile phone call – Hi, I’m here … location described …”