No abstract

Patients with unilateral neglect of the left side bisect physical lines to the right whereas individuals with an intact brain bisect lines slightly to the left (pseudoneglect). Similarly, for mental number lines, which are arranged in a left-to-right ascending sequence, neglect patients bisect to the right. This study determined whether individuals with an intact brain show pseudoneglect for mental number lines. In Experiment 1, participants were presented with visual number triplets (e.g., 16, 36, 55) and determined whether the numerical distance was greater on the left or right side of the inner number. Despite changing the spatial configuration of the stimuli, or their temporal order, the numerical length on the left was consistently overestimated. The fact that the bias was unaffected by physical stimulus changes demonstrates that the bias is based on a mental representation. The leftward bias was also observed for sets of negative numbers (Experiment 2)--demonstrating not only that the number line extends into negative space but also that the bias is not the result of an arithmetic distortion caused by logarithmic scaling. The leftward bias could be caused by a rounding-down effect. Using numbers that were prone to large or small rounding-down errors, Experiment 3 showed no effect of rounding down. The task demands were changed in Experiment 4 so that participants determined whether the inner number was the true arithmetic centre or not. Participants mistook inner numbers shifted to the left to be the true numerical centre--reflecting leftward overestimation. The task was applied to 3 patients with right parietal damage with severe, moderate, or no spatial neglect (Experiment 5). A rightward bias was observed, which depended on the severity of neglect symptoms. Together, the data demonstrate a reliable and robust leftward bias for mental number line bisection, which reverses in clinical neglect. The bias mirrors pseudoneglect for physical lines and most likely reflects an expansion of the space occupied by lower numbers on the left side of the line and a contraction of space for higher numbers located on the right.

In contrast to the leftward inattention caused by right parietal damage, normal brain function shows a subtle neglect of the right and left sides in peripersonal and extrapersonal space, respectively. This study explored how these attentional biases cause healthy individuals to collide with objects on the right. In Experiment 1, participants navigated manual and electric wheelchairs through a narrow doorway. More rightward collisions were observed for the electric, but not the manual, wheelchair. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the rightward deviation for electric wheelchairs increased for wider doorways. Experiment 3 established that the rightward deviation is not the result of task-related vestibular input, using a remote control device to operate the wheelchair. The rightward deviation persisted in Experiment 4 when the doorway was removed, suggesting that the bias is the result of a mis-bisection of space. In Experiment 5, the rightward bias was replicated using an electric scooter, which is steered using handlebars. Finally, Experiment 6 required participants to point to the middle of the doorway, using a laser, before moving the scooter. Rightward mis-bisection was observed in both conditions. Rightward mis-bisection of lines in extrapersonal space provides the most parsimonious explanation of the rightward collisions and deviations.

The idea that handedness indicates something about a person's cognitive ability and personality is a perennial issue. A variety of models have been put forward to explain this relationship and predict a range of outcomes from higher levels of cognitive ability in left-handers or moderate right-handers to lower levels of achievement in left- or mixed-handers. We tested these models using a sample (n = 895) drawn from the BRAINnet database (www.brainnet.net). Participants completed a general cognitive ability (GCA) scale and a test of hand preference/performance. Moderate right-handers, as indexed by their performance measures, had higher GCA scores compared with strong left- or right-handers. The performance measure also showed lower levels of GCA for left-handers compared with right-handers. The hand preference data showed little or no association with cognitive ability-perhaps because this measure clusters individuals toward the extremes of the handedness distribution. While adding support to Annett's heterozygous advantage model, which predicts a cognitive disadvantage for strong left- or right-handers, the data also confirm recent research showing a GCA disadvantage for left-handers. Although this study demonstrates that handedness is related to cognitive ability, the effects are subtle and might only be identified in large-scale studies with sensitive measures of hand performance.

The aim of the present study was to ascertain the neural correlates for the integration of visual information with the control of the reach-to-grasp action in the healthy human brain. Nine adult subjects (18-38 years; four females and five males) were scanned using functional magnetic resonance imaging while reaching-to-grasp a three-dimensional target. Results demonstrated differential activation of the parietal cortices according to the number of potential targets to be taken into account before movement initiation and the variability of target location. Comparing conditions where a target object that can appear at an unpredictable location with conditions where the target object appears at a predictable location revealed activations in the left superior parietal lobule, the left parieto-occipital sulcus and the right intraparietal sulcus. Results are discussed in terms of visual selective attention and action planning.