Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The nature and contribution of space- and object-based attentional biases to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries

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

Abstract

Two experiments investigated the contribution of space- and object-based coordinates to previously reported leftward perceptual biases (pseudoneglect) at various locations across visual space. Neurologically intact participants (n=34 and 27) made luminance discriminations between two left/right mirror-reversed luminance gradients (greyscales task), which were variously displaced around the midline in the participants’ left and right hemispaces. The orientations of the stimuli were manipulated so that object- and space-based coordinates were congruent or incongruent. Experiment 1 confirmed the presence of a leftward object-based perceptual bias. The bias was moderated, however, by overattention to the more central stimulus. This central spatial effect could have resulted from the use of task-specific strategies, which were controlled by presenting the stimuli sequentially in Experiment 2. The findings of Experiment 1, a leftward object-based bias and a central spatial bias, were replicated. Overall, the results indicate a leftward object-based bias and a central spatial bias, both of which are relevant for the allocation of attention. The results are discussed with reference to a variety of models of the distribution of attention across space.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Araujo C, Kowler E, Pavel M (2001) Eye movements during visual search: the costs of choosing the optimal path. Vision Res 41:3613–3625

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Ben Hamed S, Duhamel JR, Bremmer F, Graf WD (2001) Representations of the visual field in the lateral intraparietal area of macaque monkeys. Exp Brain Res 140:1445–1458

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisiach E, Cornacchia L, Sterzi R, Vallar G (1984) Disorders of perceived auditory lateralization after lesions of the right hemisphere. Brain 107:37–52

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers D, Heilman KM (1980) Pseudoneglect: effects of hemispace on a tactile line bisection task. Neuropsychologia 18:491–498

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butter CM, Mark VW, Heilman KM (1988) An experimental analysis of the factors underlying neglect in line bisection. J Neurol Neurosur Ps 51:1581–1583

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carrasco M, Frieder KS (1997) Cortical magnification neutralises the eccentricity effect in visual search. Vision Res 37:63–82

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chokron S, Imbert M (1993) Influence of reading habits on line bisection. Cognitive Brain Res 1:219–222

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davidoff JB (1975) Hemispheric differences in the perception of lightness. Neuropsychologia 13:121–124

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Renzi E, Gentilini M, Faglioni P, Barbieri C (1989) Attentional shift towards the rightmost stimulus in patients with left visual neglect. Cortex 25:231–237

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Downing C, Pinker S (1985) The spatial structure of selective attention. In: Posner M, Marin OSM (eds) Attention and performance XI. Erlbaum, London, pp 171–187

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Driver J, Halligan PW (1991) Can visual neglect operate in object-centred coordinates? Cognitive Neuropsych 8:475–496

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan J (1984) Selective attention and the organization of visual information. J Exp Psychol General 123:161–177

    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 General 123:161–177

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Guariglia C, Antonucci G (1992) Personal and extrapersonal space: a case of neglect dissociation. Neuropsychologia 30:1001–1009

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Halligan PW, Marshall JC (1994) Toward a principled explanation of neglect. Cognitive Neuropsych 11:167–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Halligan PW, Fink GR, Marshall JC, Vallar G (2003) Spatial cognition: evidence from visual neglect. Trends Cogn Neurosci 7(3):125–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilman KM (1979) Neglect and related disorders. In: Heilman KM, Valenstein E (eds) Clinical neuropsychology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 268–307

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

    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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsbourne M (1970) The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta Psychol 33:193–201

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsbourne M (1975) The mechanisms of hemispheric control of the lateral gradient of attention. In: Rabbitt P, Dornic S (eds) Attention and performance V. Academic, London, pp 81–97

  • Kinsbourne M (1987) Mechanisms of unilateral neglect. In: Jeannerod M (ed) Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. Elsevier (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 Associates, Hove, UK, pp 63–86

  • Kwak H, Dagenbach D, Egeth H (1991) Further evidence for a time-independent shift of the focus of attention. Percept Psychophys 49(5):473–480

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Làdavas E (1990) Selective spatial attention in patients with visual extinctions. Brain 113:1527–1538

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Làdavas E, Petronio A, Umilta C (1990) The deployment of visual attention in the intact field of hemineglect patients. Cortex 26:307–317

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Làdavas E, Paladini R, Cubelli R (1993) Implicit associative priming in a patient with left visual neglect. Neuropsychologia 31:1307–1320

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loftus GR, Masson MEJ (1994) Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychon B Rev 1:476–490

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattingley JB, Bradshaw JL, Nettleton NC, Bradshaw JA (1994) Can task specific perceptual bias be distinguished from unilateral neglect? Neuropsychologia 32:805–817

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mattingley JB, Berberovic N, Corben L, Slavin MJ, Nicholls MER, Bradshaw, JL (2004) The greyscales task: a perceptual measure of attentional bias following unilateral hemispheric damage. Neuropsychologia 42(3):387–394

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCourt ME, Garlinghouse M (2000) Asymmetries in visuospatial attention are modulated by viewing distance and visual field elevation: pseudoneglect in peripersonal and extrapersonal space. Cortex 36:715–731

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • McCourt ME, Olafson C (1997) Cognitive and perceptual influences in line bisection: Stimulus modulation of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia 35:369–380

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCourt ME, Garlinghouse M, Slater J (2000) Centripetal versus centrifugal bias in visual line bisection: Focusing attention on two hypotheses. Front Biosci 5:D58–71

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mesulam MM (1983) The functional anatomy and hemispheric specialization for directed attention: the role of the parietal lobe and its connectivity. Trends Neurosci 6:384–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesulam MM (1990) Large-scale neurocognitive networks and distributed processing for attention, language and memory. Ann Neurol 28:597–613

    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 

  • Nicholls MER, Roberts G (2002) Can free-viewing perceptual asymmetries be explained by scanning, pre-motor or attentional biases? Cortex 38:113–136

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls MER, Bradshaw JA, Mattingley JB (2001) Unilateral hemispheric activation does not affect free-viewing perceptual asymmetries. Brain Cogn 46:219–223

    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 Cognition 53(2):247–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls MER, Hughes G, Mattingley JB, Bradshaw JL (2004) Are object and space-based attentional biases both important to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries? Exp Brain Res 154:513–520

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapcsak SZ, Watson RT, Heilman KM (1987) Hemispace-visual field interactions in visual extinction. J Neurol Neurosur Ps 50:1117–1124

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Riddoch MJ, Humphreys GW (1983) The effect of cueing on unilateral neglect. Neuropsychologia 21:589–599

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzolatti G, Camarda R (1987) Neural circuits for spatial attention and unilateral neglect. In: Jeannerod M (ed) Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. Elsevier (North-Holland), Amsterdam, pp 289–314

  • Rizzolatti G, Gentilucci M, Matelli M (1985) Selective spatial attention: one centre, one circuit or many circuits? In: Posner MI, Marin OSM (eds) Attention and performance XI. Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 251–265

  • Schenkenberg T, Bradford DC, Ajax ET (1980) Line bisection and unilateral visual neglect in patients with neuroleptic impairment. Neurology 30:509–517

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder LH, Grieve KL, Brotchie P, Andersen RA (1998) Separate body- and world-referenced representations of visual space in parietal cortex (letters to Nature). Nature 394:887–891

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tant ML, Kuks JB, Kooijman AC, Cornelissen FW, Brouwer WH (2002) Grey scales uncover similar attentional effects in homonymous hemianopia and visual hemi-neglect. Neuropsychologia 40:1474–1481

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tipper SP, Behrmann M (1996) Object-centred not scene-based visual neglect. J Exp Psychol Human 22(5):1261–1278

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vallar G, Perani D (1986) The anatomy of unilateral neglect after right hemisphere stroke lesions: A CT/scan correlation in man. Neuropsychologia 24:609–622

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe JM, O’Neill P, Bennett SC (1998) Why are the eccentricity effects in visual search? Visual and attentional hypotheses. Percept Psychophys 60:140–156

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zipser D, Andersen RA (1988) A back-propagation programmed network that stimulates response properties of a subset of posterior parietal neurones. Nature 331:679–684

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Chris Davis and Jason Mattingley of the University of Melbourne and the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, 3010, Parkville, Victoria, Australia

    Catherine A. Orr & Michael E. R. Nicholls

Authors
  1. Catherine A. Orr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael E. R. Nicholls
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine A. Orr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Orr, C.A., Nicholls, M.E.R. The nature and contribution of space- and object-based attentional biases to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries. Exp Brain Res 162, 384–393 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-2196-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-2196-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation