Is "left" always where the thumb is right? Stimulus-response compatibilities as a function of posture and location of the responding hand

Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 173-178

  Leuthard, Jürg ^a   Bächtold, Daniel ^a   Brugger, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Backspace; Frames of reference in space representation; Individual differences; Stimulus response compatibility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BACKSPACE; BODY POSTURE; FINGER; HAND; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGINATION; INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; NEUROPHYSIOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFERENCE FRAME; REFERENCE VALUE; REPRESENTATIONAL NEGLECT; RIGHT HANDEDNESS; RIGHT LEFT DISCRIMINATION; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; STIMULUS RESPONSE COMPATIBILITY;

ADULT; FINGERS; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HAND; HUMANS; IMAGINATION; MALE; POSTURE; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SPACE PERCEPTION; THUMB;

EID: 26044449054     PISSN: 15433633     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.wnn.0000179114.06312.36     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Critchley M. The Parietal Lobes. London: Edward Arnold, 1953.
2. Moscovitch M, Behrmann M. Coding of spatial information in the somatosensory system: evidence from patients with neglect following parietal lobe damage. J Cogn Neurosci. 1994;6:151-155.
3. Wallace RJ. Stimulus-response compatibility and the idea of a response code. J Exp Psychol. 1971;88:354-360.
4. Eimer M, Hommel B, Prinz W. Stimulus-response compatibility and response selection. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1995;90:301-313.
5. Katz AN. Spatial compatibility effects with hemifield presentation in a unimanual two-finger task. Can J Psychol. 1981;35:63-68.
6. Heister G, Ehrenstein WH, Schroeder-Heister P. Spatial S-R compatibility effects with unimanual two-finger choice reactions for prone and supine hand positions. Percept Psychophys. 1986;40:271-278.
7. Heister G, Ehrenstein WH, Schroeder-Heister P. Spatial S-R compatibility with unimanual two-finger choice reactions: effects of irrelevant stimulus location. Percept Psychophys. 1987;42:271-278.
8. Bächtold D, Baumüller M, Brugger P. Stimulus-response compatibility in representational space. Neuropsychologia. 1998;36:731-735.
9. Dehaene S. Varieties of numerical abilities. Cognition. 1992;44:1-42.
10. Ratcliff G. Spatial thought, mental rotation and the right cerebral hemisphere. Neuropsychologia. 1979;17:49-54.
11. Zacks JM, Ollinger JM, Sheridan MA, et al. A parametric study of mental spatial transformations of bodies. Neuroimage. 2002;16:857-872.
12. Hausmann M, Becker C, Gather U, et al. Functional cerebral asymmetries during the menstrual cycle: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Neuropsychologia. 2002;40:808-816.
13. Chapman LJ, Chapman JP. The measurement of handedness. Brain Cogn. 1987;6:175-183.
14. Campbell JJ. Neuropsychiatric assessment. In: Coffey CE, Cummings JL, eds. Textbook of Geriatric Neuropsychiatry, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, 2000, pp 109-124.
15. Hunt SMJ. MacProbe: a Macintosh-based experimenter's workstation for the cognitive sciences. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1994;26:345-351.
16. Vuilleumier P, Ortigue S, Brugger P. The number space and neglect. Cortex. 2004;40:399-410.
17. Farah MJ, Gazzaniga MS, Holtzman JD, et al. A left hemisphere basis for visual mental imagery. Neuropsychologia. 1985;23:115-118.
18. Shuren JE, Greer D, Heilman KM. The use of hemi-imagery for studying brain asymmetries in image generation. Neuropsychologia. 1996;34:491-492.
19. Parsons LM, Shimojo S. Perceived spatial organization of cutaneous patters on surfaces of the human body in various positions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1987;13:488-504.
20. Sekiyama K. Importance of head axes in perception of cutaneous patterns drawn on vertical body surfaces. Percept Psychophys. 1991;49:481-492.
21. Oldfield SR, Phillips JR. The spatial characteristics of tactile form perception. Perception. 1983;12:615-626.
22. Buxbaum LJ, Permaul P. Hand-centered attentional and motor asymmetries in unilateral neglect. Neuropsychologia. 2001;39:653-664.
23. Rossetti Y, Jacquin-Courtois S, Rode G, et al. Does action make the link between number and space representation? Visuo-manual adaptation improves number bisection in unilateral neglect. Psychol Sci. 2004;15:426-430.
24. Attneave F, Farrar P. The visual world behind the head. Am J Psychol. 1977;90:549-563.
25. Majid A, Bowerman M, Kita S, et al. Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends Cogn Sci. 2004;8:108-114.
26. Wortis SB, Pfeffer AZ. Unilateral auditory-spatial agnosia. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1948;108:181-186.
27. Vallar G, Guariglia C, Nico D, et al. Spatial hemineglect in back space. Brain. 1995;118:467-472.
28. Karnath H-O. Spatial orientation and the representation of space with parietal lobe lesions. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1997;352:1411-1419.