Trees over forest: Unpleasant stimuli compete for attention with global features

NeuroReport

Volumn 21, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 344-348

  Hartikainen, Kaisa M ^a,c,d   Ogawa, Keith H ^b   Knight, Robert T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b SAINT MARY'S COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c TAMPERE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Finland)

^d TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Affect; Attention; Cerebral dominance; Electroengephalography; Emotion; Event related potential; Global; Hemisphere; Local; P3

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BEHAVIOR; DISTRACTIBILITY; EMOTION; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; EVOKED RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEFT HEMISPHERE; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; BRAIN; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EMOTIONS; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PARIETAL LOBE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; TIME FACTORS; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77949481340     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e328336eeb3     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Hellige JB. Hemispheric asymmetry: what's right and what's left (perspectives in cognitive neuroscience). Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1993.
2. Heilman KM, Bowers D, Valenstein E, Watson R. The right hemisphere: neuropsychological functions. J Neurosurg 1986; 64:693.
3. Ahern GL, Schomer DL, Kleefield J, Blume H, Cosgrove GR, Weintraub S, et al. Right hemisphere advantage for evaluating emotional facial expressions. Cortex 1991; 27:193-202.
4. Killgore WD, Yurgelun-Todd DA. The right-hemisphere and valence hypothesis: could they both be right (and sometimes left). Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2007; 2:240-250.
5. Canli T, Desmond JE, Zhao Z, Glover G, Gabrieli JD. Hemispheric asymmetry for emotional stimuli detected with fMRI. Neuroreport 1998; 9:3233-3239.
6. Peyrin C, Schwartz S, Seghier M, Michael C, Landis T, Vuillemier P. Hemispheric specialization of human inferior temporal cortex during courseto-fine and fine-to-coarse analysis of natural visual scenes. Neuroimage 2005; 28:464-473.
7. Peyrin C, Chauvin A, Chokron S, Marendaz C. Hemispheric specialization for spatial frequency processing in the analysis of natural scenes. Brain Cogn 2003; 53:278-282.
8. Shulman GL, Sullivan MA, Gish K, Sakoda WJ. The role of spatial frequency channels in the perception of local and global structure. Perception 1986; 15:259-273.
9. Doyon J, Milner B. Right temporal-lobe contribution to global visual processing. Neuropsychologia 1991; 29:343-360.
10. Lamb MR, Robertson LC, Knight RT. Component mechanisms underlying the processing of hierarchically organized patterns: inferences from patients with unilateral cortical lesions. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1990; 16:471-483.
11. Fink GR, Halligan PW, Marshall JC, Frith CD, Frackowiak RS, Dolan RJ. Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees? Nature 1996; 382:626-628.
12. Robertson LC, Lamb MR, Knight RT. Effects of lesions of temporal-parietal junction on perceptual and attentional processing in humans. J Neurosci 1988; 8:3757-3769.
13. Fink GR, Halligan PW, Marshall JC, Frith CD, Frackowiak RS, Dolan RJ. Neural mechanisms involved in the processing of global and local aspects of hierarchically organized visual stimuli. Brain 1997; 120:1779-1791.
14. Dreben EK, Fryer JH, McNair DM. Perceptual and conceptual information processing in schizophrenia and depression. Percept Mot Skills 1995; 80:447-465.
15. Hartikainen KM, Ogawa KH, Knight RT. Transient interference of right hemispheric function due to automatic emotional processing. Neuropsychologia 2000; 38:1576-1580.
16. Hartikainen KM, Ogawa KH, Soltani M, Knight RT. Emotionally arousing stimuli compete for attention with left hemispace. Neuroreport 2007; 18:1929-1933.
17. Preston SD, Stansfield RB. I know how you feel: task-irrelevant facial expressions are spontaneously processed at a semantic level. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 2008; 8:54-64.
18. Daffner KR, Mesulam MM, Scinto LF, Cohen LG, Kennedy BP, West WC, et al. Regulation of attention to novel stimuli by frontal lobes: an eventrelated potential study. Neuroreport 1998; 9:787-791.
19. Solbakk AK, Reinvang I, Svebak S, Nielsen CS, Sundet K. Attention to affective pictures in closed head injury: event-related brain potentials and cardiac responses. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2005; 27:205-223.
20. Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN. International affective picture system (IAPS), in Instruction manual and affective ratings. 1999; Center for Research in Psychophysiology. University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
21. Navon D. Forest before trees: the precedence of global features in visual processing. Cogn Psychol 1977; 9:353-383.
22. Vuilleumier P, Schwartz S. Beware and be aware: capture of spatial attention by fear-related stimuli in neglect. Neuroreport 2001; 12:1119-1122.
23. Liederman J. Subtraction in addition to addition: dual task performance improves when tasks are presented to separate hemispheres. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 1986; 8:486-502.
24. Basso MR, Schefft BK, Ris MD, Dember WN. Mood and global-local visual processing. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 1996; 2:249-255.
25. Gasper K, Clore GL. Attending to the big picture: mood and global versus local processing of visual information. Psychol Sci 2002; 13:34-40.