Literature DB >> 8861237

Is left always right? Directional deviations in visual line bisection as a function of hand and initial scanning direction.

E E Brodie1, L E Pettigrew.   

Abstract

Directional deviations in visual line bisection were investigated using normal subjects. Significant main effects were found for hand and initial scan direction resulting from significantly greater deviations to the left by the left hand compared with the right hand and by a scan from the left compared with a scan from the right. These results suggest that the amelioration of neglect can only be inferred from the left hand deviations of neglect patients if they are significantly leftwards of the objective middle and that the degree of leftward deviation in normal subjects results from an interaction between right hemispheric activation and unilateral allocation of attention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8861237     DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(95)00130-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  14 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.  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

3.  Functional MRI of dynamic judgments of spatial extent.

Authors:  Marc Hurwitz; Derick Valadao; James Danckert
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Non-musicians also have a piano in the head: evidence for spatial-musical associations from line bisection tracking.

Authors:  Matthias Hartmann
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2016-09-30

5.  Does gravity influence the visual line bisection task?

Authors:  A Drakul; C J Bockisch; A A Tarnutzer
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Time-on-task effect in pseudoneglect.

Authors:  André Dufour; Pascale Touzalin; Victor Candas
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-12-05       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Biases of spatial attention in vision and audition.

Authors:  Yamaya Sosa; Wolfgang A Teder-Sälejärvi; Mark E McCourt
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2010-06-20       Impact factor: 2.310

8.  Grasping at sticks: pseudoneglect for perception but not action.

Authors:  Laura E Hughes; Tim C Bates; Anne Aimola Davies
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-06-24       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 9.  Representational pseudoneglect: a review.

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

10.  Behavioural asymmetries on the greyscales task: The influence of native reading direction.

Authors:  Trista E Friedrich; Lorin J Elias
Journal:  Cult Brain       Date:  2014-10-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.