Skip to main content
Log in

Are object- and space-based attentional biases both important to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries?

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee A (1995) Cross-over, completion and confabulation in unilateral spatial neglect. Brain 118:455–465

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta M, Miezin FM, Shulman GL, Peterson SE (1993) A PET study of visuospatial attention. J Neurosci 13:1202–1226

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driver J, Baylis GC (1989) Movement and visual attention: the spotlight metaphor breaks down. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 15:448–456

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driver J, Halligan PW (1991) Can visual neglect operate in object-centred coordinates? An affirmative single-case study. Cognit Neuropsychol 8:475–496

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey M, Milner AD, Roberts RC (1995) Differential effects of line length on bisection judgements in hemispatial neglect. Cortex 31:711–722

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heilman KM, Van Den Abell T (1979) Right hemisphere dominance for mediating cerebral activation. Neuropsychologia 17:315–321

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heilman KM, Watson RT (1977) Mechanisms underlying the unilateral neglect syndrome. Adv Neurol 18:93–106

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jewell G, McCourt ME (2000) Pseudoneglect: a review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks. Neuropsychologia 38:93–110

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kerkhoff G (2000) Multiple perceptual distortions and their modulation in leftsided visual neglect. Neuropsychologia 38:1073–1086

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luh KE (1995) Line bisection and perceptual asymmetries in normal individuals: what you see is not what you get. Neuropsychology 9:435–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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)

    Google Scholar 

  • McCourt ME (2001) Performance consistency of normal observers in forced-choice tachistoscopic visual line bisection. Neuropsychologia 39:1065–1076

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCourt ME, Jewell G (1999) Visuospatial attention in line bisection: stimulus modulation of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia 37:843–855

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mozer MC (2002) Frames of reference in unilateral neglect and visual perception: a computational perspective. Psychol Rev 109:156–185

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls MER, Roberts GR (2002) Pseudoneglect: a scanning, pre-motor or attentional bias? Cortex 38:113–136

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls MER, Bradshaw JL, Mattingley JB (1999) Free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for the judgement of shade, numerosity and size. Neuropsychologia 37:307–314

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment of handedness: the Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–133

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Posner MI (1980) Orienting of attention. Q J Exp Psychol 32:3–25

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Post RB, Caufield KJ, Welch RB (2001) Contributions of object- and space-based mechanisms to line bisection errors. Neuropsychologia 39:856–864

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Proksch J, Bavelier D (2002) Changes in the spatial distribution of visual attention after early deafness. J Cogn Neurosci 14:687–701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reuter-Lorenz PA, Kinsbourne M, Moscovitch M (1990) Hemispheric control of spatial attention. Brain Cogn 12:240–266

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rueckert L, Deravanesian A, Baboorian D, Lacalamita A, Repplinger M (2002) Pseduoneglect and the cross-over effect. Neuropsychologia 40:162–173

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shormstein S, Yantis S (2002) Object based attention: sensory modulation or priority setting? Percept Psychophys 64:41–51

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tipper SP, Behrmann M (1996) Object-centred not scene-based visual neglect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:1261–1278

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Umiltà C, Castiello U, Fontana M, Vestri A (1995) Object-based orienting of attention. Vis Cogn 2:165–182

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

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

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael E. R. Nicholls.

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1688-x

Keywords

Navigation