Object-centered attentional biases and object recognition contributions to scene segmentation in left- and right-hemisphere-damaged patients

Psychobiology

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 357-370

  Peterson, Mary A ^a,c   Gerhardstein, Peter C ^a   Mennemeier, Mark ^b   Rapcsak, Steven Z ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

^c The University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BRAIN INJURY; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; RECOGNITION; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 0032414596     PISSN: 08896313     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. ALBERT, M. S., & MOSS, M. B. (1988). Geriatric neuropsychology. New York: Guilford.
2. BAYLIS, G. C., & DRIVER, J. (1993). Visual attention and objects: Evidence for the hierarchical encoding of location hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 451-470.
3. BEHRMANN, M., & MOSCOVITCH, M. (1994). Object-centered neglect in patients with unilateral neglect: Effects of left-right coordinates of objects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 1-16.
4. BEHRMANN, M., & TIPPER, S. P. (1994). Object-based visual attention: Evidence from unilateral neglect. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV: Conscious and nonconscious processing and cognitive functioning (pp. 351-375). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. CARAMAZZA, A., & HILLS, A. E. (1990). Spatial representation of words in the brain implied by studies of a unilateral neglect patient. Nature, 346, 267-269.
6. CORBALLIS, P. M., FENDRICH, R., SHAPLEY, R., & GAZZANIGA, M. (1998). A dissociation between illusory contour perception and amodal boundary completion following callosotomy. Cognitive Neuroscience Society 1998 annual abstract program (p. 18). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. DERENZI, E. (1982). Disorders in space exploration and cognition. New York: Wiley.
8. DRIVER, J., BAYLIS, G. C., GOODRICH, S. J., & RAFAI., R. D. (1994). Axis-based neglect of visual shapes. Neuropsychologia, 32, 1353-1365.
9. DRIVER, J., BAYLIS, G. C., & RAFAL, R. D. (1992). Preserved figure-ground segregation and symmetry perception in visual neglect. Nature, 360, 73-75.
10. DRIVER, J., & HALLIGAN, P. W. (1991). Can visual neglect operate in object-centered coordinates? An affirmative single case study. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 8, 475-496.
11. DUNCAN, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 501-517.
12. EGLY, R., DRIVER, J., & RAFAL, R. D. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 161-177.
13. EGLY, R., RAFAL, R., DRIVER, J., & STARRVEVELD, Y. (1994). Covert orienting in the split brain reveals hemispheric specialization for object-based attention. Psychological Science, 5, 380-383.
14. FARAH, M. J., BRUNN, J. L., WONG, A. B., WALLACE, M. A., & CARPENTER, P. A. (1990). Frames of reference for allocating attention to space: Evidence from the neglect syndrome. Neuropsychologia, 28, 335-347.
15. GAINOTTI, G., MESSERLI, P., & TISSOT, R. (1972). Quantitative analysis of unilateral spatial neglect in relation to laterality of cerebral lesions. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, & Psychiatry, 38, 545-550.
16. GERHARDSTEIN, P., PETERSON, M. A., & RAPCSAK, S. Z. (1998). Age-related hemispheric asymmetry in object discrimination. Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology, 20, 174-185.
17. GIBSON, B. S., & PETERSON, M. A. (1994). Does orientation-independent object recognition precede orientation-dependent recognition? Evidence from a cueing paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 299-316.
18. GOLDSTEIN, G., & SHELLEY, C. (1981). Does the right hemisphere age more rapidly than the left? Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, 3, 65-78.
19. HARROWER, M. R. (1936). Some factors determining figure-ground articulation. British Journal of Psychology, 26, 407-424.
20. HEILMAN, K. M., & VAN DEN, A. (1980). Right hemisphere dominance for attention: The mechanism underlying hemispheric asymmetries of inattention (neglect). Neurology, 30, 327-330.
21. HOCHBERG, J. (1971). Perception I: Color and shape. In J. W. Kling & L. A. Riggs (Eds.), Woodworth and Schlossberg's Experimental psychology (3rd ed., pp. 395-474). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
22. HOFFMAN, D. D., & RICHARDS, W. A. (1985). Parts of recognition. In S. Pinker (Ed.), Visual cognition (pp. 65-96). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. HUMPHREYS, G. W., & RIDDOCH, M. J. (1994). Attention to within-object and between-objects spatial representations: Multiple sites for visual selection. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 11, 207-241.
24. KAHNEMAN, D., TREISMAN, A., & GIBBS, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175-215.
25. KINSBOURNE, M. (1970). The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta Psychologia, 33, 193-201.
26. KÖHLER, W. (1947). Gestalt psychology. New York: New American Library. (Original work published 1929)
27. MARSHALL, J. C., & HALLIGAN. P. W. (1994). The yin and yang of visuo-spatial neglect: A case study. Neuropsychologia, 32, 1037-1057.
28. MATTINGLY, J. B., PRICE, M. C., & DRIVER, J. (1996). Figure-ground segmentation and visual neglect. Cognitive Neuroscience Society 1996 annual meeting abstract program (p. 104). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. MENNEMEIER, M., VEZEY, E., CHATTERJEE, A., RAPCSAK, S. Z., & HEILMAN, K. M. (1997). Contributions of left and right cerebral hemispheres to line bisection. Neuropsychologia, 35, 703-715.
30. MILNER, A. D., BRECHMANN, M., & PASGLIARINI, A. (1992). To halve and halve not: An analysis of line bisection judgments in normal subjects. Neuropsychologia, 30, 515-526.
31. NEISSER, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton Century Crofts.
32. OGDEN, J. A. (1987). The neglected left hemisphere and its contribution to visuo-spatial neglect. In M. Jeannerod (Ed.), Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect (pp. 215-235). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
33. PALMER, S., & ROCK, I. (1994). Rethinking perceptual organization: The role of uniform connectedness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 29-55.
34. PETERSON, M. A. (1994a). The proper placement of uniform connectedness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 509-514.
35. PETERSON, M. A. (1994b). Shape recognition can and does occur before figure-ground organization. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3, 105-111.
36. PETERSON, M. A. (in press). What's in a stage name? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
37. PETERSON, M. A., DE GELDER, B., RAPCSAK, S. Z., GERHARDSTEIN, P. C., & BACHOUD-LÉVI, A. C. (1998). Intact object recognition effects on figure-ground segmentation in a visual agnosic. Investigation Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 39, 1870.
38. PETERSON, M. A., & GERHARDSTEIN, P. C. (1998). Object-centered attentional biases in the left and right hemispheres in young and elderly normal observers. Manuscript in preparation.
39. PETERSON, M. A., & GIBSON, B. S. (1993). Shape recognition contributions to figure-ground organization in three-dimensional display. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 383-429.
40. PETERSON, M. A., & GIBSON, B. S. (1994a). Must shape recognition follow figure-ground organization? An assumption in peril. Psychological Science, 5, 253-259.
41. PETERSON, M. A., & GIBSON, B. S. (1994b). Object recognition contributions to figure-ground organization: Operations on outlines and subjective contours. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 551-564.
42. PETERSON, M. A., HARVEY, E. H., & WEIDENBACHER, H. L. (1991). Shape recognition inputs to figure-ground organization: Which route counts? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 17, 1075-1089.
43. PETERSON, M. A., RAPCSAK, S. Z., & GERHARDSTEIN, P. (1994). Deficits in pre-figural recognition processes in patients with unilateral lesions: A new distinction. Cognitive Neuroscience Society 1994 annual meeting abstract program (p. 108). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44. POLSTER, M. R., & RAPCSAK, S. Z. (1994). Hierarchical stimuli and hemispheric specialization: Two case studies. Cortex, 30, 487-497.
45. REUTER-LORENZ, P. A., DRAIN, M., & HARDY-MORAIS, C. (1996). Object-centered attentional biases in the intact brain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 540-550.
46. REUTER-LORENZ, P. A., KINSBOURNE, M., & MOSCOVITCH, M. (1990). Hemispheric control of spatial attention. Brain & Cognition, 12, 240-266.
47. RUBIN, E. (1958). Figure and ground. In D. Beardslee & M. Wertheimer (Eds. and Trans.), Readings in perception (pp. 35-101). Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand. (Original work published 1915)
48. SNODGRASS, J. G., & VANDERWART, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 6, 174-215.
49. STARK, M. E., & COSLETT, H. B. (1993). The "Navon effect" - Forest before trees? It depends on how old you are and how many trees are in the forest [Abstract]. Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology, 15, 46.
50. TIPPER, S. P., & BEHRMANN, M. (1996). Object-centered not scene-based visual neglect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 1261-1278.
51. VECERA, S. P., & O'REILLY, R. C. (1998). Figure-ground organization and object recognition processes: An interactive account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 441-462,
52. WALLACH, H. (1949). The role of memory in visual perception. Journal of Personality, 18, 6-13.