Literature DB >> 18556933

A unilateral field advantage for detecting repeated elements.

Serena Jenelle Butcher1, Patrick Cavanagh.   

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that letter repetitions are detected more rapidly when presented bilaterally (one letter in each visual field) than when presented unilaterally (both in the same field) when subjects have to report matches independently of case or font (e.g., Aa). This pattern of results is referred to as a bilateral field advantage. Here, we present evidence of an opposite pattern of results for detecting repeated items when they are physically identical. In our repetition detection paradigm, subjects indicated whether there was a repetition of any two of four presented items, one in each quadrant of the visual field. Stimulus classes tested included letters, color, size, orientation, and motion paths. The subjects were significantly faster at detecting unilateral versus bilateral repetitions for four out of the five stimuli classes tested, with a trend in the same direction for the fifth. This unilateral field advantage suggests that low-level processes group physically identical items more efficiently within hemifields than across.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18556933      PMCID: PMC2766572          DOI: 10.3758/pp.70.4.714

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  20 in total

1.  An unbalanced distribution of inputs across the hemispheres facilitates interhemispheric interaction.

Authors:  D H Weissman; M T Banich; E I Puente
Journal:  J Int Neuropsychol Soc       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.892

2.  Organization of callosal linkages in visual area V2 of macaque monkey.

Authors:  P L Abel; B J O'Brien; J F Olavarria
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  2000-12-11       Impact factor: 3.215

3.  Perceptual completion across the vertical meridian and the role of early visual cortex.

Authors:  Jonathan Pillow; Nava Rubin
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2002-02-28       Impact factor: 17.173

4.  Interhemispheric integration of letter stimuli presented foveally or extra-foveally.

Authors:  Michal Lavidor; Andrew W Ellis
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.027

5.  Retinotopy and functional subdivision of human areas MT and MST.

Authors:  Alexander C Huk; Robert F Dougherty; David J Heeger
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-08-15       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 6.  The nature of foveal representation.

Authors:  Michal Lavidor; Vincent Walsh
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 34.870

7.  Interhemispheric interaction: how do the hemispheres divide and conquer a task?

Authors:  M T Banich; A Belger
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 4.027

8.  Functional implications of the anatomical organization of the callosal projections of visual areas V1 and V2 in the macaque monkey.

Authors:  H Kennedy; C Dehay
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  The effect of stimulus intensity on visual evoked potential estimates of interhemispheric transmission time.

Authors:  C R Lines; M D Rugg; A D Milner
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Occipital cortex in man: organization of callosal connections, related myelo- and cytoarchitecture, and putative boundaries of functional visual areas.

Authors:  S Clarke; J Miklossy
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  1990-08-08       Impact factor: 3.215

View more
  4 in total

1.  Eye-hand coordination during target selection in a pop-out visual search.

Authors:  Joo-Hyun Song; Robert M McPeek
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Cross-hemispheric collaboration and segregation associated with task difficulty as revealed by structural and functional connectivity.

Authors:  Simon W Davis; Roberto Cabeza
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Lateralization of Executive Function: Working Memory Advantage for Same Hemifield Stimuli in the Monkey.

Authors:  Hua Tang; Mitchell R Riley; Christos Constantinidis
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 4.677

4.  Global depth perception alters local timing sensitivity.

Authors:  Nestor Matthews; Leslie Welch; Elena K Festa; Anthony A Bruno; Kendra Schafer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.