Literature DB >> 16042026

Unilateral visual cueing and asymmetric line geometry share a common attentional origin in the modulation of pseudoneglect.

Mark E McCourt1, Matt Garlinghouse, Patricia A Reuter-Lorenz.   

Abstract

Numerous factors influence the leftward bias (pseudoneglect) in perceived line midpoint of normal subjects in line bisection tasks. Cues are a potent factor; left and right cues promote shifts in perceived midpoint to the left and right, respectively. Trapezoidal lines have recently been shown to influence perceived line midpoint, displacing it toward the larger side. The present experiments test the hypothesis that the effect of line geometry, like that of unilateral cues, results from an exogenous recruitment of spatial attention. Normal right-handed subjects (N = 60) participated in two experiments employing a tachistoscopic forced-choice line bisection task. Experiment 1 crossed the effect of cue position and cue contrast, and confirmed that a significant interaction could be obtained. Experiment 2 crossed the effect of line geometry and cue position, revealing that line geometry and cue location both significantly influence perceived line midpoint, and produce a significant interaction. According to Additive Factors Logic the finding that spatial cueing interacts with line geometry suggests that both types of stimuli modulate spatial attention at a common site of processing, supporting the conclusion that the effect of line geometry itself derives from asymmetric cueing. An explanation for the interaction is offered that is based on the existence of a hypothesized compressive nonlinearity that maps attentional bias to perceptual error.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16042026     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70190-4

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


  19 in total

1.  Spatial distortions in localization and midline estimation in hemianopia and normal vision.

Authors:  Francesca C Fortenbaugh; Thomas M VanVleet; Michael A Silver; Lynn C Robertson
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 1.886

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 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

4.  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

5.  Perceptual-attentional and motor-intentional bias in near and far space.

Authors:  John P Garza; Paul J Eslinger; Anna M Barrett
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 2.310

6.  Flanker interference effects in a line bisection task.

Authors:  Sergio Chieffi; Tina Iachini; Alessandro Iavarone; Giovanni Messina; Andrea Viggiano; Marcellino Monda
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  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

8.  Time-on-task effect in pseudoneglect.

Authors:  André Dufour; Pascale Touzalin; Victor Candas
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-12-05       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Hemispheric asymmetry and callosal integration of visuospatial attention in schizophrenia: a tachistoscopic line bisection study.

Authors:  Mark E McCourt; Marina Shpaner; Daniel C Javitt; John J Foxe
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2008-05-16       Impact factor: 4.939

10.  Object-centred pseudoneglect for non-verbal visual stimuli.

Authors:  Lorenzo Pia; Marco Neppi-Modona; Alessia Folegatti
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.