Literature DB >> 21362412

Upper and lower visual field differences in perceptual asymmetries.

Nicole A Thomas1, Lorin J Elias.   

Abstract

A leftward spatial bias has been observed with visuospatial attention tasks, including line bisection and the greyscales task. Upper and lower visual field differences have been observed on various tasks, with a lower visual field advantage occurring for motion, global processing and coordinate spatial judgments. Upper visual field advantages occur for visual search, local processing and categorical judgments. In perceptual asymmetries research, upper and lower visual field differences have not typically been scored separately, as most presentations have been central. Mixed results have made it difficult to determine whether lateral biases are stronger in the upper or the lower visual field. As length of presentation time differed in prior studies, this factor was examined to determine whether it would lead differential biases to emerge in each visual field. The greyscales task was used to investigate the interaction of visual field and presentation time within subjects (N=43). Eye tracking was used during the task and supported the hypothesis of a stronger left bias in the lower visual field. Presentation time and visual field interacted to influence performance. Prolonged presentation led to a stronger leftward bias in the lower visual field whereas the leftward bias was stronger in the upper visual field during brief presentation. Results showed a relation between the lower and left visual fields and the upper and right visual fields, which has not previously been shown in perceptual asymmetries. Further, it is suggested that functional differences between the visual streams could underlie the visual field differences in perceptual asymmetries.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21362412     DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.02.063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Res        ISSN: 0006-8993            Impact factor:   3.252


  22 in total

1.  Investigating the spatial and temporal modulation of visuotactile interactions in older adults.

Authors:  Samuel Couth; Emma Gowen; Ellen Poliakoff
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Remember down, look down, read up: Does a word modulate eye trajectory away from remembered location?

Authors:  Armina Janyan; Ivan Vankov; Oksana Tsaregorodtseva; Alex Miklashevsky
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2015-09

3.  Differential neurodynamics and connectivity in the dorsal and ventral visual pathways during perception of emotional crowds and individuals: a MEG study.

Authors:  Hee Yeon Im; Cody A Cushing; Noreen Ward; Kestutis Kveraga
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 3.282

4.  Line bisection by eye and by hand reveal opposite biases.

Authors:  Ute Leonards; Samantha Stone; Christine Mohr
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-06-01       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Structural and functional correlates of visual field asymmetry in the human brain by diffusion kurtosis MRI and functional MRI.

Authors:  Caitlin O'Connell; Leon C Ho; Matthew C Murphy; Ian P Conner; Gadi Wollstein; Rakie Cham; Kevin C Chan
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2016-11-09       Impact factor: 1.837

6.  fMRI of the rod scotoma elucidates cortical rod pathways and implications for lesion measurements.

Authors:  Brian Barton; Alyssa A Brewer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-04-06       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Central fixations with rightward deviations: saccadic eye movements on the landmark task.

Authors:  Nicole A Thomas; Tobias Loetscher; Michael E R Nicholls
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Asymmetries in attention as revealed by fixations and saccades.

Authors:  Nicole A Thomas; Tobias Loetscher; Michael E R Nicholls
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Spatial probability dynamically modulates visual target detection in chickens.

Authors:  Devarajan Sridharan; Deepa L Ramamurthy; Eric I Knudsen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cooperation or competition of the two hemispheres in processing characters presented at vertical midline.

Authors:  Rolf Verleger; Marie Dittmer; Kamila Smigasiewicz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.