Literature DB >> 12056684

Can free-viewing perceptual asymmetries be explained by scanning, pre-motor or attentional biases?

Michael E R Nicholls1, Georgina R Roberts.   

Abstract

Judgments of relative magnitude between the left and right sides of a stimulus are generally weighted toward the features contained on the left side. This leftward perceptual bias could be the result of, (a) left-to-right scanning biases, (b) pre-motor activation of the right hemisphere, or (c) a left hemispatial attentional bias. The relative merits of these explanations of perceptual asymmetry were investigated. In Experiment 1, English and Hebrew readers made luminance judgements for two left/right mirror-reversed luminance gradients (greyscales task). Despite different reading/scanning habits, both groups exhibited a leftward perceptual bias. English and Hebrew readers also performed a line bisection task. Scanning biases were controlled by asking participants to follow a marker as it moved left-to-right or right-to-left and then stop it as it reached the midpoint of the line. Despite controlling scanning, a leftward bias was observed in both groups. In Experiment 2, peripheral spatial cues were presented prior to the greyscales stimuli. English readers showed a reduction in the leftward bias for right-sided cues as compared to left-sided and neutral cues. Right-side cues presumably overcame a pre-existing leftward attentional bias. In both experiments, pre-motor activation was controlled using bimanual responses. Despite this control, a leftward bias was observed throughout the study. The data support the attentional bias account of leftward perceptual biases over the scanning and pre-motor activation accounts. Whether or not unilateral hemispheric activation provides an adequate account of this attentional bias is discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12056684     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70645-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cortex        ISSN: 0010-9452            Impact factor:   4.027


  35 in total

1.  Left of centre: asymmetries for the horizontal vertical line illusion.

Authors:  Elisha K Josev; Jason D Forte; Michael E R Nicholls
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2010-11-25

2.  Line copying: distinct "where" and "aiming" spatial bias in healthy adults.

Authors:  Priyanka P Shah; Keith O Gonzalez; A M Barrett
Journal:  Cogn Behav Neurol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.600

3.  The nature and contribution of space- and object-based attentional biases to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries.

Authors:  Catherine A Orr; Michael E R Nicholls
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-12-10       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  The perceptual consequences of the attentional bias: evidence for distractor removal.

Authors:  Matthias Niemeier; Vaughan V W Singh; Matthew Keough; Nadine Akbar
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-06-07       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Antipointing: perception-based visual information renders an offline mode of control.

Authors:  Anika Maraj; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12-12       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Spatial asymmetries in viewing and remembering scenes: consequences of an attentional bias?

Authors:  Christopher A Dickinson; Helene Intraub
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Static versus dynamic judgments of spatial extent.

Authors:  Marc Hurwitz; Derick Valadao; James Danckert
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-01-29       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Functional MRI of dynamic judgments of spatial extent.

Authors:  Marc Hurwitz; Derick Valadao; James Danckert
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Hemifield asymmetry in the potency of exogenous auditory and visual cues.

Authors:  Yamaya Sosa; Aaron M Clarke; Mark E McCourt
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-04-03       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Are object- and space-based attentional biases both important to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries?

Authors:  Michael E R Nicholls; Georgina Hughes; Jason B Mattingley; John L Bradshaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-12-18       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.