Literature DB >> 2912475

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

P Nichelli1, M Rinaldi, R Cubelli.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess whether perceptual representation along the horizontal axis is affected by hemispace position of the stimulus or by orienting attention to one side. Ten control subjects and 10 right brain damaged patients with left unilateral spatial neglect (USN) were asked to bisect lines of five lengths in three space positions (left, center, right) and under three cueing conditions (no cue, left cue, right cue). Normal controls showed significant displacement of bisection opposite to the side of hemispace presentation and toward the side of cueing. USN patients showed a bisection error toward the right end which increased with lines placed in the left hemispace and decreased with lines placed in the right hemispace and when attention was oriented toward the left side. We conclude that (1) In absence of cues normal subjects tend to overestimate the portions of space closer to their body midline; (2) both normal and USN patients tend to overestimate portions of space that they direct their attention to; (3) USN patients' performance without cueing is consistent with an attentional shift toward the right hemispace implying a gradient of overestimation of the right-most portions of space. A common neural substratum for directing attention and space representation can explain these findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2912475     DOI: 10.1016/0278-2626(89)90044-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Cogn        ISSN: 0278-2626            Impact factor:   2.310


  34 in total

1.  Examining the influence of 'noise' on judgements of spatial extent.

Authors:  Derick F Valadao; Marc Hurwitz; James Danckert
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-10-16       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  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

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.  A case study of new assessment and training of unilateral spatial neglect in stroke patients: effect of visual image transformation and visual stimulation by using a Head Mounted Display system (HMD).

Authors:  Toshiaki Tanaka; Tohru Ifukube; Shunichi Sugihara; Takashi Izumi
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2010-05-16       Impact factor: 4.262

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.  Static versus dynamic judgments of spatial extent.

Authors:  Marc Hurwitz; Derick Valadao; James Danckert
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-01-29       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Ineffective leftward search in line bisection and mechanisms of left unilateral spatial neglect.

Authors:  S Ishiai; K Seki; Y Koyama; S Gono
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 4.849

8.  Are object- and space-based attentional biases both important to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries?

Authors:  Michael E R Nicholls; Georgina Hughes; Jason B Mattingley; John L Bradshaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-12-18       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Decreased leftward 'aiming' motor-intentional spatial cuing in traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Daymond Wagner; Paul J Eslinger; A M Barrett
Journal:  Neuropsychology       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Pseudoneglect for mental alphabet lines is affected by prismatic adaptation.

Authors:  Michael E R Nicholls; Adrian Kamer; Andrea M Loftus
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.