Hemispheric asymmetries in visual search

Laterality

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 711-726

  Poynter, William ^a   Roberts, Candice ^a  

^a WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Hemispheric asymmetries; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; VISION; VISUAL FIELD;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SOFTWARE; VISUAL FIELDS; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84868146806     PISSN: 1357650X     EISSN: 14640678     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1357650X.2011.626558     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Carrasco, M. and Yeshurun, Y. 1998. The contribution of covert attention to the set-size and eccentricity effects in visual search. J. Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24: 673-692.
2. Cheal, M. L. and Lyon, D. R. 1992. Benefits from attention depend on the target type in location precued discrimination. Acta Psychologica, 81: 243-267.
3. Chong, C. H. and Treisman, A. 2005. Attentional spread in the statistical processing of visual displays. Perception and Psychophysics, 67: 1-13.
4. Christman, S., Kitterle, F. L. and Hellige, J. B. 1991. Hemispheric asymmetries in the processing of absolute versus relative spatial frequency. Brain and Cognition, 16: 62-73.
5. Corballis, P., Funnell, M. and Gazzaniga, M. 2002. Hemispheric asymmetries for simple visual judgments in the split brain. Neuropsychologia, 40: 401-410.
6. Evert, D. L., McGlinchey-Berroth, R., Verfaellie, M. and Milberg, W. P. 2003. Hemispheric asymmetries for selective attention apparent only with increased task demands in healthy participants. Brain and Cognition, 53: 34-41.
7. Delis, D. C., Robertson, L. C. and Efron, R. 1986. Hemispheric specialization of memory for visual hierarchical stimuli. Neuropsychologia, 24: 205-214.
8. Fan, J., McCandliss, B., Sommer, T., Raz, A. and Posner, M.I. 2002. Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(3): 340-347.
9. Fink, G. R., Halligan, P. W., Marshall, J. C., Frith, C. D., Frackowiak, R. S. J. and Dolan, R. J. 1996. Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees?. Nature, 382: 626-628.
10. Foxe, J. J., McCourt, M. E. and Javitt, D. C. 2003. Parietal control of visuospatial attention: Line bisection judgments evaluated with high-density electrical mapping and source analysis. NeuroImage, 19: 710-726.
11. Giesbrecht, B. and Kingstone, A. 2004. Right hemisphere involvement in the attentional blink: evidence from a split-brain patient. Brain and Cognition, 55: 303-306.
12. Husain, M., Shapiro, K., Martin, J. and Kennard, C. 1997. Abnormal temporal dynamics of visual attention in spatial neglect patients. Nature, 385: 154-156.
13. Hyun, L., Woodman, G. F. and Luck, S. J. 2009. The role of attention in the binding of surface features to locations. Visual Cognition, 17: 10-24.
14. Joseph, J., Chun, M. and Nakayama, K. 1997. Attentional requirements in a 'preattentive' feature search task. Nature, 379(6567): 805-807.
15. Kingstone, A., Enns, J. T., Mangun, G. R. and Gazzaniga, M. S. 1995. Guided search is a left-hemisphere process in split-brain patients. Psychological Science, 6: 118-121.
16. Kim, M-S. and Cave, K. R. 1995. Spatial attention in visual search for features and feature conjunctions. Psychological Science, 6: 376-380.
17. Kitterle, F. L., Christman, S. and Hellige, J. B. 1990. Hemispheric differences are found in the identification, but not the detection, of low vs. high spatial frequencies. Perception and Psychophysics, 48: 297-306.
18. Lamb, M. R., Robertson, L. C. and Knight, R. T. 1989. Attention and interference in the processing of global and local information: Effects of unilateral temporal-parietal junction lesions. Neuropsychologia, 27(4): 471-483.
19. Michael, G. A. and Ojeda, N. 2005. Visual field asymmetries in selective attention: Evidence from a modified search paradigm. Neuroscience Letters, 388: 65-70.
20. Michimata, C. and Hellige, J. 1987. Effects of blurring and stimulus size on the lateralized processing of nonverbal stimuli. Neuropsychologia, 25: 397-407.
21. Nothdurft, H-C. 1999. Focal attention in visual search. Vision Research, 39: 2305-2310.
22. Palmer, T., & Tzeng, O. J. L. 1990. Cerebral asymmetry in visual attention. Brain and Cognition, 13, 46-58.
23. Pedersen, H. K. and Polich, J. 2001. Hemispheric differences for visual matrix processing: Stimulus size and spatial frequency effects. Brain and Cognition, 47: 525-538.
24. Polich, J. 1984. Hemispheric patterns in visual search. Brain and Cognition, 3: 128-139.
25. Polich, J., DeFrancesco, D. P., Garon, J. F. and Cohen, W. 1990. Hemispheric differences in visual search of simple line arrays. Psychological Research, 52: 54-61.
26. Poynter, W., Ingram, P. and Minor, S. 2010. Visual field asymmetries in attention vary with self-reported attention deficits. Brain and Cognition, 72: 355-361.
27. Robertson, L. C., Lamb, M. R., Egley, R. and Kerth, L. 1993. Spatial attention and cuing to global and local levels of hierarchical structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19: 471-487.
28. Robertson, L. C., Lamb, M. R. and Zaidel, E. 1993. Interhemispheric relations in processing hierarchical patterns: Evidence from normal and commissurotomized subjects. Neuropsychology, 7: 325-342.
29. Theeuwes, J., Kramer, A. F. and Atchley, P. 1999. Attentional effects on preattentive vision: Spatial precues affect the detection of simple features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25: 341-347.
30. Theeuwes, J., Van der Burg, E. and Belopolsky, A. 2008. Detecting the presence of a singleton involves focal attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15: 555-560.
31. Treisman, A. 1998. Feature binding, attention and object perception. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 353: 1295-1306.
32. Treisman, A. 1999. Solution to the binding problem: Progress through controversy and convergence. Neuron, 24: 105-110.
33. Treisman, A. 2006. How the deployment of attention determines what we see. Visual Cognition, 14: 411-443.
34. Treisman, A. M. and Gelade, G. 1980. A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12: 97-136.
35. Treisman, A. and Gormican, S. 1988. Feaure analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95: 15-48.
36. Treisman, A. and Souther, J. 1985. Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 114: 285-310.
37. Van Kleeck, M. H. 1989. Hemispheric differences in global versus local processing of hierarchical visual stimuli by normal subjects: New data and a meta-analysis of previous studies. Neuropsychologia, 27(9): 1165-1178.
38. Weissman, D. H. and Woldorff, M. G. 2005. Hemispheric asymmetries for different components of global/local attention occur in distinct temporo-parietal loci. Cerebral Cortex, 15: 870-876.
39. Wolfe, J. 2010. Visual search. Current Biology, 20: 346-349.
40. Umilta, C., Rizzolatti, G., Marzi, C. A., Zamboni, G., Franzini, C.Camarda, R. 1974. Hemispheric differences in the discrimination of line orientation. Neuropsychologia, 12: 165-174.