Literature DB >> 22048613

Impaired attentional disengagement in older adults with useful field of view decline.

Joshua D Cosman1, Monica N Lees, John D Lee, Matthew Rizzo, Shaun P Vecera.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Typical measures of the useful field of view (UFOV) involve many components of attention. The objective of the current research was to examine the attentional operations that might underlie declines in the UFOV. METHOD AND
RESULTS: We used 2 basic attention tasks to characterize the profile of visual attention in UFOV-impaired and -unimpaired observers. Our results suggested that declines in the UFOV result from a deficit in attentional disengagement, not a decrease in attentional breadth or scope. DISCUSSION: The results suggested that UFOV decline in normal aging can be associated with a specific attentional operation, namely attentional disengagement. These results suggest that the underlying cause of UFOV decline may not be a restriction in the breadth or scope of attention. Because the UFOV is a reliable predictor of driving safety, our results point to attentional components that are critical for the visual behavior of older adults.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22048613      PMCID: PMC3391071          DOI: 10.1093/geronb/gbr116

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci        ISSN: 1079-5014            Impact factor:   4.077


  29 in total

1.  Effects of aging on the useful field of view.

Authors:  A B Sekuler; P J Bennett; M Mamelak
Journal:  Exp Aging Res       Date:  2000 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.645

2.  Attentional capture by motion onsets is modulated by perceptual load.

Authors:  Joshua D Cosman; Shaun P Vecera
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 3.  A review of the evidence for a disengage deficit following parietal lobe damage.

Authors:  B J Losier; R M Klein
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 8.989

4.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.

Authors:  G R Loftus; M E Masson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1994-12

5.  Attentional control parameters following parietal-lobe damage: evidence from normal subjects.

Authors:  Shaun P Vecera; Anastasia V Flevaris
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2005-01-04       Impact factor: 3.139

Review 6.  An application of prefrontal cortex function theory to cognitive aging.

Authors:  R L West
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  Age differences in target identification as a function of retinal location and noise level: examination of the useful field of view.

Authors:  C T Scialfa; D W Kline; B J Lyman
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  1987-03

8.  Visual localization: age and practice.

Authors:  R Sekuler; K Ball
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 2.129

9.  Some aspects of the selective process in the functional visual field.

Authors:  A F Sanders
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  1970-01       Impact factor: 2.778

10.  Vision impairment, eye disease, and injurious motor vehicle crashes in the elderly.

Authors:  C Owsley; G McGwin; K Ball
Journal:  Ophthalmic Epidemiol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.648

View more
  6 in total

1.  Active Listening Delays Attentional Disengagement and Saccadic Eye Movements.

Authors:  Benjamin D Lester; Shaun P Vecera
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-06

2.  Visual processing speed.

Authors:  Cynthia Owsley
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-12-08       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Distracted driving in elderly and middle-aged drivers.

Authors:  Kelsey R Thompson; Amy M Johnson; Jamie L Emerson; Jeffrey D Dawson; Erwin R Boer; Matthew Rizzo
Journal:  Accid Anal Prev       Date:  2011-10-24

Review 4.  Eye movements in Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Robert J Molitor; Philip C Ko; Brandon A Ally
Journal:  J Alzheimers Dis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 4.472

5.  Visual search for features and conjunctions following declines in the useful field of view.

Authors:  Joshua D Cosman; Monica N Lees; John D Lee; Matthew Rizzo; Shaun P Vecera
Journal:  Exp Aging Res       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.645

6.  Useful field of view test.

Authors:  Joanne M Wood; Cynthia Owsley
Journal:  Gerontology       Date:  2014-03-08       Impact factor: 5.140

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.