Testing the activation-orientation account of spatial attentional asymmetries using transcranial direct current stimulation

Neuropsychologia

Volumn 50, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 2573-2576

  Loftus, A M ^a   Nicholls, M E R ^b  

^a CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Activation; Attention; Posterior parietal cortex; Pseudoneglect; Transcranial direct current stimulation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GREYSCALES TASK; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEFT POSTERIOR PARIETAL CORTEX; MALE; MENTAL TASK; NERVE CELL STIMULATION; NEUROPHYSIOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; POSTERIOR PARIETAL CORTEX; PSEUDONEGLECT; RIGHT POSTERIOR PARIETAL CORTEX; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT CURRENT STIMULATION; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; ORIENTATION; PARIETAL LOBE; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION;

EID: 84865545058     PISSN: 00283932     EISSN: 18733514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.07.003     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bultitude J.H., Davies A.M.A. Putting attention on the line: Investigating the activation-orientation hypothesis of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:1849-1858.
2. Chapman H., Eramudugolla R., Gavrilescu M., Strudwick M., Loftus A., Cunnington R., et al. Neuropsychologia 2010, 48:2595-2601.
3. Clower D.M., Hoffman J.M., Votaw J.R., Faber T.L., Woods R.P., Alexander G.E. Role of posterior parietal cortex in the recalibration of visually guided reaching. Nature 1996, 383:618-621.
4. Fink G.R., Marshall J.C., Weiss P.H., Toni I., Zilles K. Task instructions influence the cognitive strategies involved in line bisection judgements: Evidence from modulated neural mechanisms revealed by fMRI. Neuropsychologia 2002, 40:119-130.
5. Foxe J.J., McCourt M.E., Javitt D.C. Right hemisphere control of visuospatial attention: Line-bisection judgments evaluated with high-density electrical mapping and source analysis. NeuroImage 2003, 19:710-726.
6. Göbel S.M., Calabria M., Farné A., Rossetti Y. Parietal rTMS distorts the mental number line: Simulating "spatial" neglect in healthy subjects. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:860-868.
7. Harris I.M., Miniussi C. Parietal lobe contribution to mental rotation demonstrated with rTMS. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2003, 15(3):315-323.
8. Heilman K.M., Watson R.T., Valenstein E. Neglect and related disorders. Clinical neuropsychology 1993, 279-336. Oxford University Press, New York. K.M. Heilman, E. Valenstein (Eds.).
9. Jacobson L., Koslowsky M., Lavidor M. tDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: A meta-analytical review. Experimental Brain Research 2012, 216:1-10.
10. Jewell G., McCourt M.E. Pseudoneglect: A review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks. Neuropsychologia 2000, 38:93-110.
11. Kinsbourne M. The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta Psychologica 1970, 33:193-201.
12. Kinsbourne M. Mechanisms of unilateral neglect. Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect 1987, 69-86. Elsevier, Amsterdam. M. Jeannerod (Ed.).
13. Kinsbourne M. Orientational bias model of unilateral neglect: Evidence from attentional gradients within hemispace. Unilateral neglect: Clinical and experimental studies 1993, 63-86. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove, UK. I.H. Robertson, J.C. Marshall (Eds.).
14. Lang N., Nitsche M., Dileone M., Mazzone P., De André-Arés J., Diaz-Jara L., et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation effects on I-wave activity in humans. Journal of Neurophysiology 2011, 105:2802-2810.
15. Loftus A.M., Nicholls M.E.R., Mattingley J.B., Bradshaw J.L. Left to right: Representational biases for numbers and the effect of visuomotor adaptation. Cognition 2008, 107:1048-1058.
16. Loftus A.M., Vijayakumar N., Nicholls M.E.R. Prism adaptation overcomes pseudoneglect for the greyscales task. Cortex 2009, 45:537-543.
17. McCourt M.E., Jewell G. Visuospatial attention in line bisection: Stimulus modulation of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia 1999, 37:843-855.
18. Nicholls M.E.R., Bradshaw J.L., Mattingley J.B. Free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for the judgement of brightness, numerosity and size. Neuropsychologia 1999, 37:307-314.
19. Nicholls M.E.R., Loftus A.M. Pseudoneglect and neglect for mental alphabet lines. Brain Research 2007, 1152:130-138.
20. Nicholls M.E.R., Roberts G.R. Pseudoneglect: A scanning, pre-motor or attentional bias?. Cortex 2002, 38:113-136.
21. Nitsche M.A., Paulus W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. Journal of Physiology 2000, 527:633-639.
22. Okubo M., Nicholls M.E.R. A stimulus-dependent dissociation between the cerebral hemispheres under free-viewing conditions. Experimental Brain Research 2006, 172:49-56.
23. Reuter-Lorenz P.A., Kinsbourne M., Moscovitch M. Hemispheric control of spatial attention. Brain and Cognition 1990, 12(2):240-266.
24. Siman-Tov T., Mendelsohn A., Schonberg T., Avidan G., Podlipsky I., Pessoa L., et al. Bihemispheric leftward bias in a visuospatial attention-related network. Journal of Neuroscience 2007, 27:11271-11278.
25. Sosa Y., Clarke A.M., McCourt M.E. Hemifield asymmetry in the potency of exogenous auditory and visual cues. Vision Research 2011, 51:1207-1215.
26. Sparing R., Thimm M., Hesse M.D., Kust J., Karbe H., Fink G.R. Bidirectional alterations of interhemispheric parietal balance by non-invasive cortical brain stimulation. Brain 2009, 132:3011-3020.
27. Vallar G., Bolognini N. Behavioural facilitation following brain stimulation. Implications for neurorehabilitation. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 2011, 21(5):618-649.
28. Waberski T.D., Gobbelé R., Lamberty K., Buchner H., Marshall J.C., Fink G.R. Timing of visuo-spatial information processing: Electrical source imaging related to line bisection judgements. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:1201-1210.
29. Zaghi S., Acar M., Hultgren B., Boggio P.S., Fregni F. Noninvasive brain stimulation with low-intensity electrical currents: Putative mechanisms of action for direct and alternating current stimulation. Neuroscientist 2010, 16(3):285-307.