Literature DB >> 4027064

Parafoveal attention in congenitally deaf and hearing young adults.

I Parasnis, V J Samar.   

Abstract

This reaction-time study compared the performance of 20 congenitally and profoundly deaf, and 20 hearing college students on a parafoveal stimulus detection task in which centrally presented prior cues varied in their informativeness about stimulus location. In one condition, subjects detected a parafoveally presented circle with no other information being present in the visual field. In another condition, spatially complex and task-irrelevant foveal information was present which the subjects were instructed to ignore. The results showed that although both deaf and hearing people utilized cues to direct attention to specific locations and had difficulty in ignoring foveal information, deaf people were more proficient in redirecting attention from one spatial location to another in the presence of irrelevant foveal information. These results suggest that differences exist in the development of attentional mechanisms in deaf and hearing people. Both groups showed an overall right visual-field advantage in stimulus detection which was attenuated when the irrelevant foveal information was present. These results suggest a left-hemisphere superiority for detection of parafoveally presented stimuli independent of cue informativeness for both groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4027064     DOI: 10.1016/0278-2626(85)90024-7

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


  27 in total

1.  Bilingualism and attention: a study of balanced and unbalanced bilingual deaf users of American Sign Language and English.

Authors:  Poorna Kushalnagar; H Julia Hannay; Arturo E Hernandez
Journal:  J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ       Date:  2010-04-18

2.  Foveal Processing Under Concurrent Peripheral Load in Profoundly Deaf Adults.

Authors:  Matthew W G Dye
Journal:  J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ       Date:  2015-12-10

Review 3.  Do deaf individuals see better?

Authors:  Daphne Bavelier; Matthew W G Dye; Peter C Hauser
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2006-10-02       Impact factor: 20.229

4.  Which aspects of visual attention are changed by deafness? The case of the Attentional Network Test.

Authors:  Matthew W G Dye; Dara E Baril; Daphne Bavelier
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 3.139

5.  Visual temporal order judgment in profoundly deaf individuals.

Authors:  Elena Nava; Davide Bottari; Massimiliano Zampini; Francesco Pavani
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Cognitive adaptations arising from nonnative experience of sign language in hearing adults.

Authors:  Miadeleine Keehner; Susan E Gathercole
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-06

7.  Auditory deprivation affects biases of visuospatial attention as measured by line bisection.

Authors:  Zaira Cattaneo; Carlotta Lega; Carlo Cecchetto; Costanza Papagno
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  The sign superiority effect: Lexical status facilitates peripheral handshape identification for deaf signers.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Schotter; Emily Johnson; Amy M Lieberman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2020-09-17       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Event segmentation in a visual language: neural bases of processing American Sign Language predicates.

Authors:  Evie Malaia; Ruwan Ranaweera; Ronnie B Wilbur; Thomas M Talavage
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Impact of early deafness and early exposure to sign language on the cerebral organization for motion processing.

Authors:  D Bavelier; C Brozinsky; A Tomann; T Mitchell; H Neville; G Liu
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-11-15       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.