A deficit of intermediate vision: Experimental observations and theoretical implications

Neurocase

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 1-12

  Ricci, Raffaella ^a   Vaishnavi, Sandeep ^a   Chatterjee, Anjan ^a,b  

^a The University of Alabama at Birmingham   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Object recognition; Pre attentive vision; Simultanagnosia; Visual agnosia

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BRAIN INJURY; CASE REPORT; CLINICAL FEATURE; FEMALE; HUMAN; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; RECOGNITION; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION; VISUAL DISORDER;

EID: 0032970720     PISSN: 13554794     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/neucas/5.1.1     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Albert ML. A simple test of visual neglect. Neurology 1973; 23: 658-64.
2. Barlow H. Critical limiting factors in the design of the eye and visual scene. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 1981; 212: 1-34.
3. Bergen JR, Julesz B. Parallel versus serial processing in rapid pattern discrimination. Nature 1983; 303: 696-8.
4. Chatterjee A, Dajani BM, Gage RJ. Psychophysical constraints on behavior in unilateral spatial neglect. Neuropsychiatry, Neuropsychology and Behavioral Neurology 1994; 7: 267-74.
5. Coslett HB, Saffran E. Simultanagnosia. To see but not two see. Brain 1991; 114: 1523-45.
6. Coslett HB, Stark M, Rajaram S, Saffran EM. Narrowing the spotlight: a visual attentional disorder in presumed Alzheimer's disease. Neurocase 1995; 1: 305-18.
7. Delis D, Robertson L, Efron R. Hemispheric specialization of memory for visual hierarchical stimuli. Neuropsychologia 1986; 24: 205-14.
8. Driver J, Baylis G, Rafal R. Preserved figure-ground segregation and symmetry perception in visual neglect. Nature 1992; 360: 73-5.
9. Farah MJ. Visual agnosia. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1990.
10. Goodglass H, Kaplan E. Assessment of aphasia and related disorders. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger, 1972.
11. Grabowecky M, Robertson LC, Treisman A. Preattentive processes guide visual search: evidence from patients with unilateral visual neglect. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1993; 5: 288-302.
12. Grosof DH, Shapley RM, Hawken MJ. Macaque V1 neurons can signal 'illusory' contours. Nature 1993; 365: 550-2.
13. Grossberg S, Mingolla E, Ros WD. Visual brain and visual perception: how does the cortex do perceptual grouping? Trends in Neuroscience 1997; 20: 106-11.
14. Halligan PW, Marshall JC. Towards a principled explanation of unilateral neglect. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1994; 11: 167-206.
15. Heilman KM, Watson RT, Valenstein E. Neglect and related disorders. In: Heilman KM, Valenstein E, editors. Clinical neuropsychology. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993: 279-336.
16. Hyvarinen L. PV-16 Color Test-quantitative, large and small stimulus - 16 hue. Villa Park, IL: Precision Vision, 1993.
17. James W. The principles of psychology. New York: Dover Publications, 1890.
18. Kanizsa G. Subjective contours. Scientific American 1977; 234: 48-52.
19. Kartsounis LD, Warrington EK. Failure of object recognition due to a breakdown of figure-ground discrimination in a patient with normal acuity. Neuropsychologia 1991; 29: 969-80.
20. Livingstone M, Hubel DH. Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, movement, and depth. Journal of Neuroscience 1987; 7: 3416-68.
21. Marr D. Vision. A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. New York: W. H. Freeman and Co., 1982.
22. Navon D. Forest before trees: the precedence of global features in visual processing. Cognitive Psychology 1977; 9: 353-83.
23. Nawrot M, Shannon E, Rizzo M. The relative efficacy of cues for two-dimensional shape perception. Vision Research 1996; 36: 1141-52.
24. Pelli DG, Robson JG, Wilkins AJ. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clinical Vision Science 1988; 2: 187-99.
25. Peterhans E, von der Heydt R. Mechanisms of contour perception in monkey visual cortex. II. Contour bridging gaps. Journal of Neuroscience 1989; 9: 1749-63.
26. Stark ME, Grafman J, Fertig E. A restricted 'spotlight' of attention in visual object recogntion. Neuropsychologia 1997; 35: 1233-49.
27. Thaiss L, De Blesse R. Visual agnosia: a case of reduced attentional 'spotlight'? Cortex 1992; 28: 601-21.
28. Treisman A, Gelade G. A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology 1980; 12: 97-136.
29. Van Essen DC, Felleman DJ, DeYoe EA, Ollavarria J, Knierim J. Modular and hierarchical organization of extrastriate visual cortex in the macaque monkey. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 1990; 55: 679-96.
30. Van Essen DC, Anderson CH, Felleman DJ. Information processing in the primate visual system: an integrated systems perspective. Science 1992; 255: 419-23.
31. Vecera S, Behrmann M. Spatial attention does not require preattentive grouping. Neuropsychology 1997; 11: 30-43.
32. von der Heydt R, Peterhans E. Mechanisms of contour perception in monkey. I. Lines of pattern discontinuity. Journal of Neuroscience 1989; 9: 1731-48.
33. Warrington EK, James M. The visual object and spatial perception battery. Bury St Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Company, 1991.
34. Weiskrantz, L, Warrington EK, Sanders MD, Marshall J. Visual capacity in the hemianopic field following a restricted occipital ablation. Brain 1974; 97: 709-28.
35. Wilson B, Cockburn J, Halligan PW. Behavioral inattention test. Titchfield, Hants.: Thames Valley Test Company, 1987.
36. Zeki S. Functional specialization in the visual cortex of the rhesus monkey. Nature 1978; 274: 423-8.