Literature DB >> 18663435

Pseudoneglect for mental alphabet lines is affected by prismatic adaptation.

Michael E R Nicholls1, Adrian Kamer, Andrea M Loftus.   

Abstract

While patients with right parietal damage and spatial neglect bisect lines to the right, the general population bisects lines to the left; a phenomenon known as pseudoneglect. The leftward bias also occurs for mental representations, such as number and alphabet lines. Prismatic adaptation can have a dramatic effect on attentional bias and corrects neglect and pseudoneglect for physical and mental number lines. This study examined whether prismatic adaptation can correct leftward bisection biases for alphabet lines, which may have a different spatial arrangement compared to number lines. In pre-adaptation testing, students (n = 42) were shown letter trigrams (e.g. C H P) and judged whether the alphabetical distance before or after the inner-letter was larger. Participants were then split into three groups and were adapted to left-shifting, control or right-shifting prims. After adaptation, the mental alphabet bisection task was re-administered. The length of left side of the alphabet lines was overestimated by all three groups in the pre-adaptation phase. Right-shifting prisms and control spectacles had no effect on the leftward bias whereas exposure to left-shifting prisms corrected the bias. The results replicate an effect observed for mental number lines and demonstrate that low-level sensory-motor shifts can correct attentional biases associated with high-level representations, such as letters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18663435     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-008-1502-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  37 in total

1.  The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized.

Authors:  Wim Gevers; Bert Reynvoet; Wim Fias
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2003-04

2.  Unilateral neglect of representational space.

Authors:  E Bisiach; C Luzzatti
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 4.027

3.  Prism adaptation improves voluntary but not automatic orienting in neglect.

Authors:  Tanja C W Nijboer; Rob D McIntosh; Gudrun M S Nys; H Chris Dijkerman; A David Milner
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2008-02-12       Impact factor: 1.837

4.  Attentional SNARC: there's something special about numbers (let us count the ways).

Authors:  Michael D Dodd; Stefan Van der Stigchel; M Adil Leghari; Gery Fung; Alan Kingstone
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2008-06-06

5.  Selective spatial attention and length representation in normal subjects and in patients with unilateral spatial neglect.

Authors:  P Nichelli; M Rinaldi; R Cubelli
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 2.310

6.  Free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for the judgement of brightness, numerosity and size.

Authors:  M E Nicholls; J L Bradshaw; J B Mattingley
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.139

7.  Differential influences of prism adaptation on reflexive and voluntary covert attention.

Authors:  Christopher Striemer; Jeffery Sablatnig; James Danckert
Journal:  J Int Neuropsychol Soc       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.892

8.  Time to imagine space: a chronometric exploration of representational neglect.

Authors:  Paolo Bartolomeo; Anne-Catherine Bachoud-Lévi; Philippe Azouvi; Sylvie Chokron
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2005-02-12       Impact factor: 3.139

9.  Long-lasting amelioration of visuospatial neglect by prism adaptation.

Authors:  Francesca Frassinetti; Valentina Angeli; Francesca Meneghello; Stefano Avanzi; Elisabetta Làdavas
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 13.501

10.  Left to right: representational biases for numbers and the effect of visuomotor adaptation.

Authors:  Andrea M Loftus; Michael E R Nicholls; Jason B Mattingley; John L Bradshaw
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2007-10-29
View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  The spatial representation of numbers: evidence from neglect and pseudoneglect.

Authors:  Carlo Umiltà; Konstantinos Priftis; Marco Zorzi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 2.  Representational pseudoneglect: a review.

Authors:  Joanna L Brooks; Sergio Della Sala; Stephen Darling
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2014-01-12       Impact factor: 7.444

Review 3.  In (or outside of) your neck of the woods: laterality in spatial body representation.

Authors:  Sylvia Hach; Simone Schütz-Bosbach
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-02-19

4.  Prism adaptation does not alter object-based attention in healthy participants.

Authors:  Janet H Bultitude; Alexandra List; Anne M Aimola Davies
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2013-11-04

5.  Prism adaptation does not alter configural processing of faces.

Authors:  Janet H Bultitude; Paul E Downing; Robert D Rafal
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2013-10-14

6.  Force field adaptation does not alter space representation.

Authors:  Carine Michel; Lucie Bonnetain; Sarah Amoura; Olivier White
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Improvement of phonemic fluency following leftward prism adaptation.

Authors:  Patrizia Turriziani; Gabriele Chiaramonte; Giuseppa Renata Mangano; Rosario Emanuele Bonaventura; Daniela Smirni; Massimiliano Oliveri
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 8.  Beyond the Sensorimotor Plasticity: Cognitive Expansion of Prism Adaptation in Healthy Individuals.

Authors:  Carine Michel
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-01-05
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.