Spatial attention: Differential shifts in pseudoneglect direction with time-on-task and initial bias support the idea of observer subtypes

被引:54
作者
Benwell, Christopher S. Y. [1 ,2 ]
Thut, Gregor [1 ]
Learmonth, Gemma [2 ]
Harvey, Monika [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Glasgow, Inst Neurosci & Psychol, Ctr Cognit Neuroimaging, Glasgow G12 8Q8, Lanark, Scotland
[2] Univ Glasgow, Sch Psychol, Glasgow G12 8QB, Lanark, Scotland
基金
英国经济与社会研究理事会;
关键词
Attentional biases; Landmark; Line bisection; Hemispatial neglect; Lateralisation; LINE-BISECTION JUDGMENTS; VISUOSPATIAL ATTENTION; HEMISPHERE STROKE; VISUAL NEGLECT; PERFORMANCE; ASYMMETRIES; STIMULUS; SIZE; PERCEPTION; AWARENESS;
D O I
10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.09.030
中图分类号
B84 [心理学]; C [社会科学总论]; Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
010107 [宗教学]; 030301 [社会学]; 070906 [古生物学及地层学(含古人类学)];
摘要
Asymmetry in human spatial attention has long been documented. In the general population the majority of individuals tend to misbisect horizontal lines to the left of veridical centre. Nonetheless in virtually all previously reported studies on healthy participants, there have been subsets of people displaying rightward biases. In this study, we report differential time-on task effects depending on participants' initial pseudoneglect bias: participants with an initial left bias in a landmark task (in which they had to judge whether a transection mark appeared closer to the right or left end of a line) showed a significant rightward shift over the course of the experimental session, whereas participants with an initial right bias shifted leftwards. We argue that these differences in initial biases as well as the differential shifts with time-on task reflect genuine observer subtypes displaying diverging behavioural patterns. These observer subtypes could be driven by differences in brain organisation and/or lateralisation such as varying anatomical pathway asymmetries (Thiebaut de Schotten et al., 2011). (C) 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2747 / 2756
页数:10
相关论文
共 59 条
[1]
Right spatial neglect after left hemisphere stroke - Qualitative and quantitative study [J].
Beis, JM ;
Keller, C ;
Morin, N ;
Bartolomeo, P ;
Bernati, T ;
Chokron, S ;
Leclercq, M ;
Louis-Dreyfus, A ;
Marchal, F ;
Martin, Y ;
Perennou, D ;
Pradat-Diehl, P ;
Prairial, C ;
Rode, G ;
Rousseaux, M ;
Samuel, C ;
Sieroff, E ;
Wiart, L ;
Azouvi, P .
NEUROLOGY, 2004, 63 (09) :1600-1605
[2]
Dopaminergic genotype biases spatial attention in healthy children [J].
Bellgrove, M. A. ;
Chambers, C. D. ;
Johnson, K. A. ;
Daibhis, A. ;
Daly, M. ;
Hawi, Z. ;
Lambert, D. ;
Robertson, I. H. .
MOLECULAR PSYCHIATRY, 2007, 12 (08) :786-792
[3]
Attenuation of spatial attentional asymmetries with poor sustained attention [J].
Bellgrove, MA ;
Dockree, PM ;
Aimola, L ;
Robertson, IH .
NEUROREPORT, 2004, 15 (06) :1065-1069
[4]
Stimulus- and state-dependence of systematic bias in spatial attention: Additive effects of stimulus-size and time-on-task [J].
Benwell, Christopher S. Y. ;
Harvey, Monika ;
Gardner, Stephanie ;
Thut, Gregor .
CORTEX, 2013, 49 (03) :827-836
[5]
Spatial neglect in near and far space investigated by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation [J].
Bjoertomt, O ;
Cowey, A ;
Walsh, V .
BRAIN, 2002, 125 :2012-2022
[6]
PSEUDONEGLECT - EFFECTS OF HEMISPACE ON A TACTILE LINE BISECTION TASK [J].
BOWERS, D ;
HEILMAN, KM .
NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA, 1980, 18 (4-5) :491-498
[7]
LEFTWARDS ERROR IN BISECTING THE GAP BETWEEN 2 POINTS - STIMULUS QUALITY AND HAND EFFECTS [J].
BRADSHAW, JL ;
BRADSHAW, JA ;
NATHAN, G ;
NETTLETON, NC ;
WILSON, LE .
NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA, 1986, 24 (06) :849-855
[8]
WHY IS THERE A LEFT SIDE UNDERESTIMATION IN ROD BISECTION [J].
BRADSHAW, JL ;
NATHAN, G ;
NETTLETON, NC ;
WILSON, L ;
PIERSON, J .
NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA, 1987, 25 (04) :735-738
[9]
Line bisection performance of normal adults - Two subgroups with opposite biases [J].
Braun, JB ;
Kirk, A .
NEUROLOGY, 1999, 53 (03) :527-532
[10]
Putting attention on the line: Investigating the activation-orientation hypothesis of pseudoneglect [J].
Bultitude, Janet H. ;
Davies, Anne M. Aimola .
NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA, 2006, 44 (10) :1849-1858