Pseudoneglect: A review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks

Neuropsychologia

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 93-110

  Jewell, George ^a   McCourt, Mark E ^a  

^a NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; DEPTH PERCEPTION; GAZE; HANDEDNESS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; META ANALYSIS; NORMAL HUMAN; SPATIAL DISCRIMINATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL ILLUSION;

ADULT; AGED; ATTENTION; BRAIN MAPPING; DOMINANCE, CEREBRAL; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PERCEPTUAL DISORDERS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SPACE PERCEPTION;

EID: 0033991770     PISSN: 00283932     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00045-7     Document Type: Article

References (128)

1. Annett M. The binomial distribution of right, mixed and left handedness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 19:1967;327-333.
2. Arguin M., Bub D.M. Evidence for an independent stimulus-centered spatial reference frame from a case of visuospatial neglect. Cortex. 29:1993;349-357.
3. Bender MB, Teuber, HL. Spatial organization of visual perception following injury to the brain. Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry 1947;58/59:39-62, 721-739.
4. MOA, R, S, T].
5. MOA].
6. Birch HG, Proctor F, Bartner M, Lowenthal M Perception in hemiplegia: II. Judgement of the median plane. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Feb. 1960 71-75 [A, C].
7. Bisiach E. Unilateral neglect and the structure of space representation. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 5:1996;62-65.
8. Bisiach E., Bulgarelli C., Sterzi R., Vallar G. Line bisection and cognitive plasticity of unilateral neglect of space. Brain and Cognition. 2:1983;32-38.
9. MOA, L].
10. Bisiach E., Capitani E., Porta E. Two basic properties of space representation. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry. 48:1985;141-144.
11. MOA].
12. Bowers D., Heilman K.M. Pseudoneglect: effects of hemispace on a tactile line bisection task. Neuropsychologia. 18:1980;491-498. [A, D, L, O, P, Q].
13. MOA].
14. MOA].
15. MOA].
16. Bradshaw J.L., Nettleton N.C., Nathan G., Wilson L.E. Bisecting rods and lines: effects of horizontal and vertical posture on left-side underestimation by normal subjects. Neuropsychologia. 23:1985;421-425.
17. MOA, L].
18. Brodie E.E., Pettigrew L.E.L. Spatial field advantages for tactile line bisection as a function of hemispheric specialization inferred from dichotic listening. Neuropsychologia. 33:1995;53-61. [A, D, H, I, L, O, P, Q].
19. MOA, L, U].
20. MOA, F].
21. Butter C.M., Evans J., Kirsch N., Kewman D. Altitudinal neglect following traumatic brain injury: a case report. Cortex. 25:1989;135-146.
22. MOA, Z].
23. MOA, G, M, N].
24. Calvanio R., Petrone P.N., Levine D.N. Left visual spatial neglect is both environment-centered and body-centered. Neurology. 37:1987;1179-1183.
25. Cappa S.F., Guariglia C., Messa C., Pizzamiglio L., Zoccollotti P. Computed tomography correlates of chronic unilateral neglect. Neuropsychology. 5:1991;195-204.
26. MOA, F].
27. Chokron S., Bartolomeo P. Patterns of dissociation between left hemineglect and deviation of the egocentric reference. Neuropsychologia. 35:1997;1503-1508.
28. MOA, F, U].
29. Chokron S., Imbert M. Egocentric reference and asymmetric perception of space. Neuropsychologia. 31:1993;267-275. [A, D, L, O, Q].
30. Chokron S., Imbert M. Influence of reading habits on line bisection. Cognitive Brain Research. 1:1993;219-222.
31. Chokron S., Imbert M. Variations of the egocentric reference among normal subjects and a patient with unilateral neglect. Neuropsychologia. 33:1995;703-711. [A, L].
32. Cooper H., Hedges L.V. The handbook of research synthesis. 1994;Russel Sage Foundation, NY.
33. Critchley M. The parietal lobes. 1966;Hafner, NY.
34. MOA, F, H, I, J, K, L].
35. MOA, F].
36. Damasio A.R., Damasio H. Neglect following damage to frontal lobe or basal ganglia. Neuropsychologia. 18:1980;123-132.
37. Driver J., Halligan P.W. Can visual neglect operate in object-centered coordinates? An affirmative single case study. Cognitive Neuropsychology. 8:1994;475-496.
38. MOA].
39. Fleming J., Behrmann M. Visuospatial neglect in normal subjects: altered spatial representations induced by a perceptual illusion. Neuropsychologia. 36:1998;469-475.
40. Fujii T., Fukatsu R., Kimura I., Saso S., Kogure K. Unilateral spatial neglect in visual and tactile modalities. Cortex. 27:1991;339-343. [A].
41. MOA, F, G, H, I, L].
42. MOA, L, O, P, Q].
43. Goldstein G., Shelly C. Does the right hemisphere age more rapidly than the left? Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology. 3:1981;65-78.
44. Halligan P.W., Manning L., Marshall J.C. Hemispheric activation vs spatio-motor cueing in visual neglect: a case study. Neuropsychologia. 29:1991;165-176.
45. MOA, M, N].
46. MOA, M, N].
47. Halligan P.W., Marshall J.C. Figural modulation of visuospatial neglect: a case study. Neuropsychologia. 29:1991;619-628.
48. MOA, I, M, N].
49. Halligan P.W., Marshall J.C. Right-sided cueing can ameliorate left neglect. Neuropsychology Rehabilitation. 4:1994;63-73.
50. MOA, L].
51. Hatta T., Yamamoyto M. Hemispheric asymmetries in a tactile bisection task: effects of hemispace of presentation. Neuropsychologia. 24:1986;265-269. [A, D, H, I, L, O, P, Q].
52. Hedges I., Olkin I. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. 1985;Academic Press Inc, NY.
53. Heilman K.M., Valenstein E. Frontal lobe neglect in man. Neurology. 22:1972;660-664.
54. Heilman K.M., Valenstein E. Mechanisms underlying hemispatial neglect. Annals of Neurology. 5:1979;166-170.
55. Heilman K.M., Watson R.T., Valenstein E. Neglect and related disorders. Heilman K.M., Valenstein E. Clinical Neuropsychology. 3rd ed. 1993;279-336 Oxford University Press, NY.
56. Hier D.B., Davidson K.R., Richards E.P., Mohr J.P. Hypertensive putaminal hemorrhage. Annals of Neurology. 1:1977;152-159.
57. Hjaltason H., Caneman G. Visual and tactile rod bisection in unilateral neglect. Cortex. 29:1993;583-588.
58. MOA].
59. Ishiai T., Furukawa T., Tsukagoshi H. Visuospatial processes of line bisection and the mechanisms underlying unilateral spatial neglect. Brain. 112:1989;1485-1502.
60. Jeannerod M., Biguer B. The directional coding of reaching movements. A visuomotor conception of spatial neglect. Jeannerod M. Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. 1987;87-113 Elsevier Science Publishers BV, North Holland. [A, C].
61. MOA, G].
62. Kageyama S., Imagase M., Okubo M., Takayama Y. Neglect in three dimensions. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 48:1994;207-210.
63. Karnath H.O., Schenkel P., Fischer B. Trunk orientation as the determining factor of the contralateral deficit in the neglect syndrome and as the physical anchor of the internal representation of body orientation in space. Brain. 114:1991;1997-2014.
64. MOA, G].
65. Kinsbourne M. The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta Psychologica. 33:1970;193-201.
66. Kinsbourne M. Hemi-neglect and hemisphere rivalry. Advances in Neurology. 18:1977;41-49.
67. MOA, F].
68. Kunnapas T.M. Visual field and subjective center of a diamond. Journal of Psychology. 47:1959;305-316.
69. Ladavas E., Carletti M., Gori G. Automatic and voluntary orienting of attention in patients with visual neglect: horizontal and vertical dimensions. Neuropsychologia. 32:1994;1195-1208.
70. Laeng B., Butchel M.A., Butter C.M. Tactile rod bisection: hemispheric activation and sex differences. Neuropsychologia. 34:1996;1115-1121. [A, D, F, H, I, L].
71. Levander M., Tegner R., Caneman G. Tactile line bisection in normal subjects. Neuropsychologia. 76:1993;831-836.
72. Levick S.E., Lorig T., Wexler B.E., Gur R.E., Gur R.C., Schwartz G.E. Asymmetrical visual deprivation: a technique to differentially influence lateral hemisphere function. Perceptual & Motor Skills. 76:1993;1363-1382.
73. MOA, M, N].
74. MOA, H, I, M, N].
75. Mark V.W., Heilman K.M. Bodily neglect and orientational biases in unilateral neglect syndrome and normal subjects. Neurology. 40:1990;640-643. [A, C].
76. Marshall J.C., Halligan P.W. When right goes left: an investigation of line bisection in a case of visual neglect. Cortex. 25:1989;503-515. [A, M, N].
77. Marshall J.C., Halligan P.W. The psychophysics of visuospatial neglect: a new orientation. Medical Science Research. 18:1990;429-430.
78. Marshall R.S., Lazar R.M., Sharma R. Stimulus context in hemineglect. Brain. 121:1998;2003-2010.
79. MOA, R, S, T].
80. FC, L] 1998.
81. McCourt ME, Garlinghouse M Stimulus modulation of pseudoneglect: influence of line geometry. Neuropsychologia, (in press).
82. FC, F, M, N, O, P, Q] 1998.
83. McCourt M.E., Mark V.W., Radonovich K.J., Willison S.K., Freeman P. The effects of gender, menstrual phase and practice on the perceived location of the midsagittal plane. Neuropsychologia. 35:1997;717-724. [A, B, C].
84. FC, H, I, L].
85. McGlinchey-Berroth R., Bullis D.P., Milberg W.P., Verfaellie M., Alexander M., D'Esposito M. Assessment of neglect reveals dissociable behavioral but not neuroanatomical subtypes. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2:1996;441-451.
86. MOA, F].
87. MOA, O, P, Q, R].
88. Mennemeier M., Wertman E., Heilman K.M. Neglect of near peripersonal space: evidence for multidirectional attentional systems in humans. Brain. 115:1992;37-50.
89. Mesulam M.M. A cortical network for directed attention and unilateral neglect. Annals of Neurology. 10:1981;309-325.
90. Meudell P.R., Greenhalgh M. Age related differences in left and right hand skill and in visuospatial performance: their possible relationships to the hypothesis that the right hemisphere ages more rapidly than the left. Cortex. 23:1987;431-445.
91. MOA, O, P, Q].
92. MOA].
93. Mozer M., Halligan P., Marshall J. The end of the line for a brain-damaged model of unilateral neglect. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 9:1997;171-190.
94. MOA, M, N, O, P, Q].
95. FC, F, M, N] 1998.
96. Oldfield R.C. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 9:1971;97-113.
97. MOA, C, L] 1994.
98. Pizzamiglio L., Frasca R., Guariglia C., Incoccia C., Antonucci G. Effect of optokinetic stimulation in patients with visual neglect. Cortex. 26:1990;535-540.
99. Pouget A., Sejnowski T.J. Spatial transformations in the parietal cortex using basis functions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 9:1997;222-237.
100. MOA, L, O, P, Q].
101. MOA].
102. Reuter-Lorenz P.A., Kinsbourne M., Moscovitch M. Hemispheric control of spatial attention. Brain and Cognition. 12:1990;240-266.
103. MOA, U, Z].
104. Robinson D.L., Kertzman C. Visuospatial attention: effects of age, gender, and spatial reference. Neuropsychologia. 28:1990;291-301.
105. MOA, H, I, L].
106. Rosenberger P. Discriminative aspects of visual hemi-inattention. Neurology. 24:1974;17-23.
107. Rosselli M., Rosselli A., Vergara I., Ardila A. Topography of the hemi-inattention syndrome. International Journal of Neuroscience. 27:1985;165-172.
108. Sampaio E., Chokron S. Pseudoneglect and reversed pseudoneglect among left-handers and right-handers. Neuropsychologia. 30:1992;797-805. [A, D, E, H, I, J, K, L, U].
109. MOA, D, E, H, I, L, O, P, Q].
110. MOA].
111. MOA, L, O, P, Q].
112. Schwarzer R META program for meta-analysis (version 5.3). Available at: http://www.yorku.ca/faculty/academic/schwarze/meta e.htm 1989.
113. Shelton P.A., Bowers D., Heilman K.M. Peripersonal and vertical neglect. Brain. 113:1990;191-205.
114. Shuren J.E., Jacobs D.H., Heilman K.M. The influence of center of mass effect on the distribution of spatial attention in the vertical and horizontal dimensions. Brain and Cognition. 34:1997;293-300.
115. Shuren J., Wertman E., Heilman K.M. The neglected page. Cortex. 30:1994;171-175.
116. MOA, G].
117. Tegner R., Caneman G., Levander M. Apparent right neglect in patients with left visual neglect. Cortex. 26:1990;455-458.
118. Tegner R., Levander M. The influence of stimulus properties on visual neglect. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. 54:1991;882-887.
119. Tipper S., Behrman M. Object centered not scene based visual neglect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 22:1996;1261-1278.
120. MOA, F].
121. Vallar G., Perani D. The anatomy of unilateral neglect after right-hemisphere stroke lesions: a clinical/CT scan correlation study in man. Neuropsychologia. 24:1986;609-622.
122. Vallar G., Perani D. The anatomy of spatial neglect in humans. Jennerod M. Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. 1987;235-258 North Holland, Amsterdam.
123. Watson R.T., Heilman K.M., Cauthen J.C., King F.A. Neglect after cingulectomy. Neurology. 23:1973;1003-1007.
124. Watson R.T., Valenstein E., Heilman K.M. Thalamic neglect. Possible role of the medial thalamus and nucleus reticularis in behavior. Archives of Neurology. 38:1981;501-506.
125. Werner H., Wapner S., Bruell J.H. Experiments on sensory-tonic field theory of perception: VI. Effect of position of head, eyes, and of object position on the apparent median plane. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 46:1953;293-299.
126. Werth R., Poppel E. Compression and lateral shift of mental coordinate systems in a line bisection task. Neuropsychologia. 26:1988;741-745.
127. MOA, F, H, I, M, N, U].
128. Young A.W., deHaan E.H.F., Newcombe F., Hay D.C. Facial neglect. Neuropsychologia. 28:1990;391-415.