Unilateral neglect: the effect of competing stimuli on estimated line length

Normal subjects and patients with right hemisphere lesions with or without signs of left unilateral neglect judged the length of a horizontal line presented on the left or on the right side of space. In half of the trials, the line was presented with a centrally located square or diamond, and subjects had to identify the central stimulus before performing the judgment of length. The presence of the central stimulus improved accuracy of performance in controls and in patients without neglect; neglect patients, however, produced more overestimations of left-sided lines when these was presented with a central stimulus than when the lines occurred in isolation. This finding underlines the importance of attentional factors in length estimates performed by neglect patients in their neglected space.     

Hemispheric control of spatial attention

According to the activation-orienting hypothesis the distribution of attention in space is biased in the direction contralateral to the more activated hemisphere. The present investigation tested this proposal and evaluated the nature of hemispheric differences in orienting control. Activation imbalance was produced by a unilateral visual stimulus. The distribution of attention was measured using a modified line bisection task in which subjects judged the location of an intersect on a tachistoscopically presented horizontal line. The first three experiments suggest that (a) attention is biased in the direction contralateral to the stimulated hemisphere, and (b) the biases do not depend on the task relevance or hemispatial position of the stimulus producing the activation imbalance. The final three experiments suggest that when orienting conflict is introduced the rightward bias becomes more robust than the leftward bias. The findings are consistent with the activation-orienting hypothesis. Each hemisphere generates a contralateral attentional bias and the rightward bias of the left hemisphere is stronger. The relevance of these findings to understanding unilateral neglect resulting from parietal damage is discussed.     

Crossover by Line Length and Spatial Location

It is well known that line length has a systematic influence on line bisection error in neglect. Most patients with neglect misbisect long lines on the same side of true center as their brain lesion but then cross over on short lines, misbisecting them on the opposite side (i.e., crossover by line length). What is less recognized is that the spatial location of lines relative to the viewer can similarly induce a crossover effect when one considers line bisection error scores that have been averaged across individual line lengths. Patients with right hemisphere injury and neglect classically make averaged line bisection errors that fall right of true center on lines located either at midline or to the left of the viewer; however, we observed that the averaged line bisection error can fall left of true center when lines are located to the right of the viewer (i.e., crossover by spatial location). We hypothesized that crossover by both line length and spatial location stem from systematic errors in magnitude estimation, i.e., perceived line length. We tested predictions based on this hypothesis by examining how the crossover effect by line length is altered by the spatial location of lines along a horizontal axis relative to the viewer. Participants included patients with unilateral lesions of the right and left cerebral hemispheres and age-appropriate normal subjects. All groups demonstrated a crossover effect by line length at the midline location but the effect was altered by placing lines to the right and left of the viewer. In particular, patients with right hemisphere injury and neglect crossed-over across a broader range of line lengths when the lines were located to the right of the viewer rather than at either midline or left of the viewer. It is proposed that mental representations of stimulus magnitude are altered in neglect, in addition to mental representations of space, and that traditional accounts of neglect can be enhanced by including the psychophysical concept of magnitude estimation.     

Interlateral asymmetry in the time course of the effect of a peripheral prime stimulus

Evidence exists that both right and left hemisphere attentional mechanisms are mobilized when attention is directed to the right visual hemifield and only right hemisphere attentional mechanisms are mobilized when attention is directed to the left visual hemifield. This arrangement might lead to a rightward bias of automatic attention. The hypothesis was investigated by testing male volunteers, wherein a "location discrimination" reaction time task (Experiments 1 and 3) and a "location and shape discrimination" reaction time task (Experiments 2 and 4) were used. Unilateral (Experiments 1 and 2) and unilateral or bilateral (Experiments 3 and 4) peripheral visual prime stimuli were used to control attention. Reaction time to a small visual target stimulus in the same location or in the horizontally opposite location was evaluated. Stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) were 34, 50, 67, 83 and 100 ms. An important prime stimulus attentional effect was observed as early as 50 ms in the four experiments. In Experiments 2, 3 and 4, this effect was larger when the prime stimulus occurred in the right hemifield than when it occurred in the left hemifield for SOA 100 ms. In Experiment 4, when the prime stimulus occurred simultaneously in both hemifields, reaction time was faster for the right hemifield and for SOA 100 ms. These results indicate that automatic attention tends to favor the right side of space, particularly when identification of the target stimulus shape is required.     

伪忽视行为表现与神经基础及交通驾驶应用

伪忽视是健康个体存在轻微偏左的不对称空间注意。影响这个现象的因素主要包括刺激材料、年龄、认知负荷和知觉负荷等。其中, 眼动搜索习惯曾经被认为是伪忽视现象的主要因素, 甚至提出伪忽视是眼动偏好现象。但是, 最近文献研究普遍认为, 伪忽视不是眼动行为, 而是注意特质。近10年的大脑神经层面的证据发现, 右脑腹侧注意网络对左侧空间注意偏好有较大的贡献, 而且在神经传导束的证据中也发现右脑大纵束二型对左侧空间注意的激活程度高于其他两种类型的传导束。另外, 注意偏好的时间分辨率研究发现, 注意的左侧空间偏向发生在注意发生后的100~200 ms之内, 眼动搜索时间则是在1500 ms之内出现最大左偏。该现象的应用研究主要体现在交通驾驶员的注意能力和驾驶视觉搜索模式的关系研究。研究意义在于为安全交通提供两条原则, 首先, 道路交通驾驶环境设置要满足驾驶员的注意特质的需求; 其次, 通过合理干预, 可以抑制视觉搜索习惯, 培养安全的驾驶搜索模式。     

Representational bias does not affect bisection of lines with a pictorially or semantically defined top by patients with left hemispatial neglect

Normal subjects may have both representational and visual-based components determining bias in bisection of horizontal, vertical, and radial lines. The influence of these components is less clear in patients with neglect. We asked 25 patients with right hemisphere stroke and clinical features of neglect to bisect lines oriented horizontally, vertically, and radially above and below eye level. Objects including human silhouette figures, arrowheads, and the words 'TOP' and 'BOTTOM' were placed at either end of each line. These figures were presented either upright or upside down in some orientations, and presented rightward and leftward in other orientations, to pictorially or semantically define a "top" to each line independent of the actual top of the visual field. Patients demonstrated a rightward bias on all horizontal line bisections, with similar bias and greater magnitude than normal subjects. Patients also demonstrated visual-based biases on some of the vertical, radial down, and radial up lines presented. However, patients did not demonstrate a significant representational bias with any of the visual cues presented on any of the line orientations. Patients with acute right hemisphere stroke demonstrate a rightward bias when asked to perform line bisection in the horizontal line orientation, as well as an upward bias in vertical line bisection. The lack of representational bias in patients with neglect may be due to a greater degree of visual-based neglect as compared to representational neglect, or it may be due to an absence of representational bias in patients with right hemisphere stroke.     

Figure-background perception in right and left hemispheres of human commissurotomy subjects

The right and left hemispheres of four complete commissurotomy subjects were tested for the ability to recognize and integrate figure and background elements of composite visual stimuli. In the first experiment the subjects were required to identify from a four-choice array in free vision the stimulus card that matched the briefly lateralized sample stimulus. For all subjects the left hemispheres was proficient at identifying the figure, but performed at near-chance level in recognizing the textured background. In contrast, the right hemisphere was equally adapt at identifying figures and backgrounds. Both hemispheres could easily identify the isolated figure or background from a choice array, demonstrating that the observed hemisphere effects were due to figure-background interactions rather than the result of any difficulty in processing specific elements of the composite stimulus. The second experiment involved the determination of the size and position of a dot that appeared against various plain and textured backgrounds. The right hemisphere of two subjects, but not the left, performed with greater accuracy when the background consisted of a 'natural' texture gradient rather than a plain white backing. Similar though less consistent results were obtained when an inverted gradient or an evenly spaced grid was used as the background. For each condition, right-hemisphere performance resembled that of normal control subjects. In contrast, the left hemisphere provided a pattern of results dissimilar to that of control subjects for the various figure-background tasks described. It appeared to be generally insensitive to background effects, except when the information provided by the background was highly unusual, as from an inverted texture gradient. The results suggest a preeminent role for the right hemisphere in the recognition of background components of a whole-field stimulus, sensitivity to the influence of the background on the perception of an object, and the ability to use natural perspective cues to assist in the accurate perception of an object.     

The influence of dimensionality on eye fixations.

Eye fixation patterns were explored for sixty adult subjects, each of whom viewed one of three stimuli, either in a three-dimensional model format or in a two-dimensional photographic format. The stimuli consisted of one symmetrical and two asymmetrical color representational drawings displayed in the form of a photograph or of a model. Total fixation times (in ms) were computed for seven portions of each stimulus: top, bottom, left, right, foreground, middle ground, and background. Results indicated that for all stimuli, subjects viewing the 3-D model spent significantly more time fixating the foreground and significantly less time fixating the background than subjects viewing the 2-D photograph. For the two asymmetrical stimuli subjects in the two groups differed significantly in their fixation patterns for the left/right variables. It was concluded that eye fixation patterns vary as a function of dimensionality.     

Aesthetic preference and lateral dominance

Aesthetic preferences for photographs with the main focal content either to the left or right of the photograph's center were examined in right- and left-handed subjects. Verbal responses or manual responses were required. In one experiment with 261 introductory psychology student-subjects, left-handers more often preferred photographs with the more important part on the left ("left-geared") than did right-handers. Exp. 2, involving 84 right-handed student subjects, showed that left-geared photographs presented on the left side were preferred more often than left-geared photographs presented on the right side, and left-geared photographs presented on the left side were more often chosen when a left-handed manual response was required. Interactions between handedness, position of the stimulus, language hemisphere, and response mode make it extremely difficult to ascertain whether the right hemisphere is really more involved in aesthetic decisions.     

The influence of emotional faces on the spatial allocation of attention

Background objectives: Studies suggest that the right hemisphere is dominant for emotional facial recognition. In addition, whereas some studies suggest the right hemisphere mediates the processing of all emotions (dominance hypothesis), other studies suggest that the left hemisphere mediates positive emotions the right mediates negative emotions (valence hypothesis). Since each hemisphere primarily attends to contralateral space, the goals of this study was to learn if emotional faces would induce a leftward deviation of attention and if the valence of facial emotional stimuli can influence the normal viewer’s spatial direction of attention. Methods: Seventeen normal right handed participants were asked to bisect horizontal lines that had all combinations of sad, happy or neutral faces at ends of these lines. During this task the subjects were never requested to look at these faces and there were no task demands that depended on viewing these faces. Results: Presentation of emotional faces induced a greater leftward deviation compared to neutral faces, independent of where (spatial position) these faces were presented. However, faces portraying negative emotions tended to induce a greater leftward bias than positive emotions. Conclusions: Independent of location, the presence of emotional faces influenced the spatial allocation of attention, such that normal subjects shift the direction of their attention toward left hemispace and this attentional shift appears to be greater for negative (sad) than positive faces (happy).     

How does reading direction modulate perceptual asymmetry effects?

Left-side bias effects refer to a bias towards the left side of the stimulus/space in perceptual/visuospatial judgments, and are argued to reflect dominance of right hemisphere processing. It remains unclear whether reading direction can also account for the bias effect. Previous studies comparing readers of languages read from left to right with those read from right to left (e.g., French vs. Hebrew) have obtained inconsistent results. As a language that can be read from left to right or from right to left, Chinese provides a unique opportunity for a within-culture examination of reading direction effects. Chinese participants performed a perceptual judgment task (with both face and Chinese character stimuli; Experiment 1) and two visuospatial attention tasks (the greyscales and line bisection tasks; Experiment 2) once before and once after a reading task, in which they read Chinese passages either from left to right or from right to left for about 20 min. After reading from right to left, participants showed significantly reduced left-side bias in Chinese character perceptual judgments but not in the other three tasks. This effect suggests that the role of reading direction on different forms of left-side bias may differ, and its modulation may be stimulus-specific.     

The valence-specific laterality effect in free viewing conditions: The influence of sex, handedness, and response bias

The right hemisphere has often been viewed as having a dominant role in the processing of emotional information. Other evidence indicates that both hemispheres process emotional information but their involvement is valence specific, with the right hemisphere dealing with negative emotions and the left hemisphere preferentially processing positive emotions. This has been found under both restricted (Reuter-Lorenz & Davidson, 1981) and free viewing conditions (Jansari, Tranel, & Adophs, 2000). It remains unclear whether the valence-specific laterality effect is also sex specific or is influenced by the handedness of participants. To explore this issue we repeated Jansari et al.'s free-viewing laterality task with 78 participants. We found a valence-specific laterality effect in women but not men, with women discriminating negative emotional expressions more accurately when the face was presented on the left-hand side and discriminating positive emotions more accurately when those faces were presented on the right-hand side. These results indicate that under free viewing conditions women are more lateralised for the processing of facial emotion than are men. Handedness did not affect the lateralised processing of facial emotion. Finally, participants demonstrated a response bias on control trials, where facial emotion did not differ between the faces. Participants selected the left-hand side more frequently when they believed the expression was negative and the right-hand side more frequently when they believed the expression was positive. This response bias can cause a spurious valence-specific laterality effect which might have contributed to the conflicting findings within the literature.     

The effects of head and eye turns on the right ear advantage in dichotic listening

The aim of the present experiment was to investigate the effects of head and eye turns on the ear advantage in dichotic listening (DL) to CV-syllables. Since head and eye turns also mean focusing attention to either the left or right side in space, a second aim was to evaluate recent arguments that ear advantages seen in DL are caused by the perceived position in space of the sound source. Forty right-handed females had 36 trials of CV-syllables under four different instructions. One group (n = 20) was instructed to turn their head (but not their eyes) to the right, the left, or straight ahead during stimulus presentations. The fourth condition was a standard (no instruction) condition. A second group (n = 20) had the same instructions but were told to turn their eyes instead of their heads. Conditions were pseudo-counterbalanced across subjects. Consistent with other studies, results showed a right ear advantage (REA) in both groups during all conditions. However, the REA was largest for the standard condition. Also, more subjects showed a REA during the standard condition, and especially compared to the turn-right condition. It is concluded that dichotic performance is not caused by selective attention to either side in space, and that lateral turns of the head and the eyes contralateral to the left hemisphere have an inhibitory (if anything) effect on the REA.     

What determines the eyes’ landing position in words?

The place at which the eyes first fixate in a word during continuous reading, called thepreferred landing position(PLP), is usually located halfway between the beginning and the middle of the word. To propose a mechanism that might account for the off-center location of the PLP, six eye movement experiments were conducted using a lexical decision task (Experiment 1) and a stimulus bisection task (Experiments 2–6). The type of stimulus—linguistic (words and nonwords) versus nonlinguistic (strings of hashes, dotted lines, and solid lines)—and the stimulus presentation side (left vs. right) were manipulated. The results showed that (1) stimulus discreteness versus continuousness is an important factor in saccade computation and (2) PLP asymmetry can be explained in terms of attentional and/or oculomotor processes.     

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

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.     

视觉空间伪忽视与表征伪忽视神经机制的异同

伪忽视（pseudoneglect）是指个体存在的轻微偏左的不对称空间注意,而视觉空间伪忽视（visuo-spatial pseudoneglect）和表征伪忽视(representational pseudoneglect)是其两种主要表现形式。研究初期,研究者认为两种伪忽视基于相同的注意定向左偏机制,但近年来研究发现,它们仍存在神经机制的差异。本文主要从两种伪忽视神经机制的异同出发,梳理分析近期研究结果,以期增进对伪忽视的理解。未来研究可以从认知时间进程角度或设计更为完善的研究范式进一步探讨这两种伪忽视神经机制的异同。     

Right up there: hemispatial and hand asymmetries of altitudinal pseudoneglect

Background

Pseudoneglect is a normal left sided spatial bias observed with attempted bisections of horizontal lines and a normal upward bias observed with attempted bisections of vertical lines. Horizontal pseudoneglect has been attributed to right hemispheric dominance for the allocation of attention. The goal of this study was to test the hypothesis that the upward bias in vertical line bisection may also relate to right hemispheric dominance for the allocation of attention and/or action-intention.

Methods

Twenty right handed healthy adults were asked to bisect vertical lines presented in the midsagittal plane (center space) and in sagittal planes to the left and right of the midsagittal plane (left and right hemispace) when using a pen held in either the right or left hand.

Results

Vertical line bisections were biased upward in all three sagittal planes and higher in left than right hemispace. However, bisections made with the left hand were lower than those made with the right hand.

Discussion

Whereas these results suggest a left hemispace-right hemispheric visuospatial attentional upward bias and a relative left hemispheric-right hand upward action-intentional bias, further studies are needed to document this intentional versus attentional bias and to understand the brain mechanisms that produce these biases.     

What determines the eyes' landing position in words?

The place at which the eyes first fixate in a word during continuous reading, called the preferred landing position (PLP), is usually located halfway between the beginning and the middle of the word. To propose a mechanism that might account for the off-center location of the PLP, six eye movement experiments were conducted using a lexical decision task (Experiment 1) and a stimulus bisection task (Experiments 2-6). The type of stimulus--linguistic (words and nonwords) versus nonlinguistic (strings of hashes, dotted lines, and solid lines)--and the stimulus presentation side (left vs. right) were manipulated. The results showed that (1) stimulus discreteness versus continuousness is an important factor in saccade computation and (2) PLP asymmetry can be explained in terms of attentional and/or oculomotor processes.     

Unilateral hemispheric activation does not affect free-viewing perceptual asymmetries

Strong leftward perceptual biases have been reported for the selection of the darker of two left/right mirror-reversed luminance gradients under free-viewing conditions. This study investigated the effect of unilateral hemispheric activation on this leftward bias in two groups of dextrals (N = 52 and N = 24). In Experiment 1, activation was manipulated by asking participants to tap with their left or right fingers along their midline. In Experiment 2, participants clenched their left or right hands in their respective hemispaces. Participants selected the stimulus that was darker on the left-hand side 73% of the time. Despite manipulations of activation strength and hemispace, activation had no effect on the asymmetry. If activation was important, the leftward bias should have been enhanced when the left hand/right hemisphere was active and reduced (or reversed) when the right hand/left hemisphere was active. The contribution of left-to-right scanning biases to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries is discussed as an alternative.     

Dissociable Neural Subsystems Underlie Abstract and Specific Object Recognition

Participants named objects presented in the left or right visual field during a test phase, after viewing centrally presented same-exemplar objects, different-exemplar objects, and words that name objects during an initial encoding phase. In two experiments, repetition priming was exemplar-abstract yet visual when test objects were presented directly to the left cerebral hemisphere, but exemplar-specific when test objects were presented directly to the right cerebral hemisphere, contrary to predictions from single-system theories of object recognition. In two other experiments, stimulus degradation during encoding and task demands during test modulated these results in predicted ways. The results support the theory that dissociable neural subsystems operate in parallel (not in sequence) to underlie visual object recognition: An abstract-category subsystem operates more effectively than a specific-exemplar subsystem in the left hemisphere, and a specific-exemplar subsystem operates more effectively than an abstract-category subsystem in the right hemisphere.