Abstract
In contrast to unilateral neglect patients, who overattend to the right hemispace, normal participants attend more to the left: a phenomenon known as pseudoneglect. Two experiments examined whether pseudoneglect results from object- or space-based attentional biases. Normal participants (n=38, 22) made luminance judgments for two left/right mirror-reversed luminance gradients (greyscales task). The relative lateral position of the greyscales stimuli was manipulated so that object- and space-based coordinates were congruent or incongruent. A baseline condition was also included. A leftward bias, found for the baseline condition, was annulled in the incongruent condition, demonstrating an opposition of object- and space-based biases. The leftward bias was reduced in the congruent condition where object- and space-based biases were expected to be additive. This effect was attributed to extraneous factors, which were avoided in the second experiment by presenting the greyscales stimuli sequentially. Once again, no bias was observed in the incongruent condition where object- and space-based biases were opposed. The leftward bias in the congruent condition was the same as the baseline. The results can be explained by a combination of space- and object-based biases or by space-based biases alone and are discussed with reference to a variety of models, which describe the distribution of attention across space.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arguin M, Bub DN (1993) Evidence for an independent stimulus-centred spatial reference frame from a case of visual hemineglect. Cortex 29:349–357
Chatterjee A (1995) Cross-over, completion and confabulation in unilateral spatial neglect. Brain 118:455–465
Colliot P, Ohlmann T, Chokron S (2001) Position of egocentric reference and performance in line bisection and subjective vertical estimation tasks. Brain Cogn 46:82–86
Corbetta M, Miezin FM, Shulman GL, Peterson SE (1993) A PET study of visuospatial attention. J Neurosci 13:1202–1226
De Renzi E, Gentilini M, Faglioni P, Barbieri C (1989) Attentional shift towards the rightmost stimuli in patients with left visual neglect. Cortex 25:231–237
Driver J, Baylis GC (1989) Movement and visual attention: the spotlight metaphor breaks down. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 15:448–456
Driver J, Halligan PW (1991) Can visual neglect operate in object-centred coordinates? An affirmative single-case study. Cognit Neuropsychol 8:475–496
Egly R, Driver J, Rafal RD (1994) Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. J Exp Psychol Gen 123:161–177
Fink GR, Dolan RJ, Halligan PW, Marshall JC, Frith CD (1997) Space-based and object-based visual attention: shared and specific neural domains. Brain 120:2013–2028
Harvey M, Milner AD, Roberts RC (1995) Differential effects of line length on bisection judgements in hemispatial neglect. Cortex 31:711–722
Heilman KM, Van Den Abell T (1979) Right hemisphere dominance for mediating cerebral activation. Neuropsychologia 17:315–321
Heilman KM, Watson RT (1977) Mechanisms underlying the unilateral neglect syndrome. Adv Neurol 18:93–106
Jewell G, McCourt ME (2000) Pseudoneglect: a review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks. Neuropsychologia 38:93–110
Kerkhoff G (2000) Multiple perceptual distortions and their modulation in leftsided visual neglect. Neuropsychologia 38:1073–1086
Kinsbourne M (1987) Mechanisms of unilateral neglect. In: Jeannerod M (ed) Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 69–86
Kinsbourne M (1993) Orientational bias model of unilateral neglect: evidence from attentional gradients within hemispace. In: Robertson IH, Marshall JC (eds) Unilateral neglect: clinical and experimental studies. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hove, UK, pp 63–86
Làdavas E (1990) Selective spatial attention in patients with visual extinction. Brain 113:1527–1538
Luh KE (1995) Line bisection and perceptual asymmetries in normal individuals: what you see is not what you get. Neuropsychology 9:435–448
Mattingley JB, Berberovic N, Corben L, Bradshaw JL, Nicholls MER (2003) The greyscales task: a perceptual measure of attentional bias following right hemisphere damage. Neuropsychologia (submitted)
McCourt ME (2001) Performance consistency of normal observers in forced-choice tachistoscopic visual line bisection. Neuropsychologia 39:1065–1076
McCourt ME, Jewell G (1999) Visuospatial attention in line bisection: stimulus modulation of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia 37:843–855
Milner AD, Brechmann M, Pagliarini L (1992) To halve or to halve not: an analysis of line bisection judgements in normal subjects. Neuropsychologia 30:515–526
Mozer MC (2002) Frames of reference in unilateral neglect and visual perception: a computational perspective. Psychol Rev 109:156–185
Neisser U (1967) Cognitive psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York
Nichelli P, Rinaldi M, Cubelli R (1989) Selective spatial attention and length representation in normal subjects and in patients with unilateral spatial neglect. Brain Cogn 9:57–70
Nicholls MER, Roberts GR (2002) Pseudoneglect: a scanning, pre-motor or attentional bias? Cortex 38:113–136
Nicholls MER, Bradshaw JL, Mattingley JB (1999) Free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for the judgement of shade, numerosity and size. Neuropsychologia 37:307–314
Nicholls MER, Mattingley JB, Bradshaw JL, Krins P (2003) Trunk- and head-centred spatial coordinates do not affect free-viewing perceptual asymmetries. Brain Cogn 53:247–252
Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment of handedness: the Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–133
Ota H, Fujii T, Suzuki K, Fukatsu R, Yamadori A (2001) Dissociation of body-centred and stimulus-centred representations in unilateral neglect. Neurology 57:2064–2069
Posner MI (1980) Orienting of attention. Q J Exp Psychol 32:3–25
Post RB, Caufield KJ, Welch RB (2001) Contributions of object- and space-based mechanisms to line bisection errors. Neuropsychologia 39:856–864
Proksch J, Bavelier D (2002) Changes in the spatial distribution of visual attention after early deafness. J Cogn Neurosci 14:687–701
Reuter-Lorenz PA, Kinsbourne M, Moscovitch M (1990) Hemispheric control of spatial attention. Brain Cogn 12:240–266
Rorden C, Karnath HO, Driver J (2001) Do neck-proprioceptive and caloric-vestibular stimulation influence covert visual attention in normals, as they influence neglect? Neuropsychologia 39:364–375
Rueckert L, Deravanesian A, Baboorian D, Lacalamita A, Repplinger M (2002) Pseduoneglect and the cross-over effect. Neuropsychologia 40:162–173
Shormstein S, Yantis S (2002) Object based attention: sensory modulation or priority setting? Percept Psychophys 64:41–51
Sturm W, Reul J, Willmes K (1989) Is there a generalised right hemisphere dominance for mediating cerebral activation? Evidence from a choice reaction experiment with lateralised simple warning stimuli. Neuropsychologia 27:747–751
Tipper SP, Behrmann M (1996) Object-centred not scene-based visual neglect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:1261–1278
Umiltà C, Castiello U, Fontana M, Vestri A (1995) Object-based orienting of attention. Vis Cogn 2:165–182
Wolfe JM, O’Neill P, Bennett SC (1998) Why are there eccentricity effects in visual search? Visual and attentional hypotheses. Percept Psychophys 60:140–156
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful and insightful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nicholls, M.E.R., Hughes, G., Mattingley, J.B. et al. Are object- and space-based attentional biases both important to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries?. Exp Brain Res 154, 513–520 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1688-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1688-x