The effects of stimulus size on bisection judgements in near and far space

Visual Cognition

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 319-340

  Wilkinson, David ^a   Halligan, Peter ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BRAIN INJURY; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISTANCE PERCEPTION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NEUROPSYCHOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; VISION; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION;

EID: 0037395745     PISSN: 13506285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13506280244000113     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Barrett, A. M., Crucian, G. P., Kim, M., & Heilman, K. M. (2000). Attentional grasp in far extrapersonal space after thalamic infarction. Neuropsychologia, 38, 778-784.
2. Berti, A., & Frassinetti, F. (2000). When far becomes near: Remapping of space by too use. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 415-420.
3. Beschin, N., & Robertson, I. H. (1997). Personal versus extrapersonal neglect: A group study of their dissociation using a reliable clinical test. Cortex, 33, 379-384.
4. Bowers, D., & Heilman, K. M. (1980). Pseudoneglect: Effects of hemispace on a tactile line bisection task. Neuropsychologia, 18, 491-498.
5. Briggs, G. G., & Nebes, R. D. (1975). Patterns of hand preference in a student population. Cortex, 11, 230-238.
6. Chewning, J., Adair, J. C., Heilman, K. B., & Heilman, K. W. (1998). Attentional bias in normal subjects performing visual and tactile radial line bisections. Neuropsychologia, 36, 1097-1101.
7. Chokron, S., Bartolomeo, P., Perenin, M. T., Helft, G., & Imbert, M. (1998). Scanning direction and line bisection: A study of normal subjects and unilateral neglect patients with opposite reading habits. Cognitive Brain Research, 7, 173-178.
8. Cowey, A., Small, M., & Ellis, S. (1994). Visuospatial neglect can be worse in far than in near space. Neuropsychologia, 32, 1059-1066.
9. Cowey, A., Small, M., & Ellis, S. (1999). No abrupt change in visual hemineglect from near to far space. Neuropsychologia, 37, 1-6.
10. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
11. Dobbins, A. C., Jeo, R. M., Fiser, J., & Allmann, J. M. (1998). Distance modulation of neural activity in the visual cortex. Science, 281, 552-555.
12. Edwards, M. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1999). Pointing and grasping in unilateral visual neglect: Effect of on-line visual feedback in grasping. Neuropsychologia, 37, 959-973.
13. Geldmacher, D. S., & Heilman, K. W. (1994). Visual field influence on radial line bisection. Brain and Cognition, 26, 65-72.
14. Halligan, P. W., & Marshall, J. C. (1988). How long is a piece of string? A study of line bisection in a case of visual neglect. Cortex, 24, 321-328.
15. Halligan, P. W., & Marshall, J. C. (1991). Left neglect for near but not far space in man. Nature, 350, 498-500.
16. Halligan, P. W., & Marshall, J. C. (1993). The bisection of horizontal and radial lines: A case study of normal controls and ten patients with left visuospatial neglect. International Journal of Neuroscience, 70, 149-167.
17. Harvey, M., Milner, A. D., & Roberts, R. C. (1995). An investigation of hemispatial neglect using the landmark task. Brain and Cognition, 27, 59-78.
18. Heilman, K. M., Chatterjee, A., & Doty, L. C. (1995). Hemispheric asymmetries of near-far spatial attention. Neuropsychology, 9, 58-61.
19. Jeannerod, M., & Biguer, B. (1987). The directional coding of reaching movements: A visuo-motor conception of spatial neglect. In M. Jeannerod (Ed.), Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect (pp. 87-113). Amsterdam: North Holland/Elsevier.
20. Jeerakathil, T. J., & Kirk, A. A. A. (1994). A representational vertical bias. Neurology, 44, 703-706.
21. Kline, P. (1993). The handbook of psychological testing. London: Routledge.
22. Manning, L., Halligan, P. W., & Marshall, J. C. (1990). Individual line variation in line bisection: A study of normal subjects with application to the interpretation of visual neglect. Neuropsychologia, 28, 647-655.
23. McCourt, M. E., & Garlinghouse, M. (2000). Asymmetries of visuospatial attention are modulated by viewing distance and visual field elevation: Pseudoneglect in peripersonal and extrapersonal space. Cortex, 36, 715-731.
24. McCourt, M. E., & Olafson, C. (1997). Cognitive and perceptual influences on visual line bisection: Psychophysical and chronometric aspects of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia, 35, 369-380.
25. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York/London: McGraw-Hill.
26. Pitzalis, S., Di Russo, F., Spinelli, D., & Zoccolotti, P. (2001). Influence of radial and vertical dimensions on lateral neglect. Experimental Brain Research, 136, 281-294.
27. Rizzolatti, G., & Carmada, R. (1991). Neural circuits for spatial attention and unilateral neglect. In M. Jeannerod (Ed.), Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. Amsterdam: North-Holland/Elsevier.
28. Rizzolatti, G., Mattelli, M., & Pavesi, G. (1983). Deficits in attention and movement following the removal of the postarcuate (area 6) and prearcuate (area 8) cortex in macaque monkeys. Brain, 106, 655-673.
29. Shelton, P. A., Bowers, D., & Heilman, K. M. (1990). Peripersonal and vertical neglect. Brain, 113, 191-205.
30. Tegnér, R., & Levander, M. (1991). The influence of stimulus properties on visual neglect. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 54, 882-887.
31. Vuilleumier, P., Valenza, N., Mayer, E., Reverdin, A., & Landis, T. (1998). Near and far visual space in unilateral neglect. Annals of Neurology, 43, 406-410.
32. Weiss, P. H., Marshall, J. C., Wunderlich, G., Tellmann, L., Halligan, P. W., Freund, H.-J., et al. (2000). Neural consequences of acting in near versus far space: A physiological basis for clinical dissociations. Brain, 123, 2531-2541.
33. Wilkinson, D., & Halligan, P. W. (2002). The effects of stimulus symmetry on landmark judgments in left and right visual fields. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1045-1058.