2004
DOI: 10.1023/b:brat.0000047335.00110.6a
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Study on Asymmetry of Spatial Visual Field by Analysis of the fMRI BOLD Response

Abstract: The asymmetry of the left-right and upper-lower visual field is analyzed in this paper by a model approach based on the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) response. The model consists of the convolution between a Gaussian function and the perfusion function of neural response to stimulus. The model parameters are estimated by a nonlinear optimal algorithm, and te asymmetry of the left-right and upper-lower visual field is investigated by the differences of the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
15
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
3
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…4(B), blue asterisks], consistent with the advantage of the lower visual field found in previous MEG studies using high contrast checkerboards [Portin et al, 1999], vertical gratings [Tzelepi et al, 2001], and face stimuli [Liu and Ioannides, 2006], as well as an fMRI study which also used checkerboard stimuli [Chen et al, 2004]. After adjusting spatial luminance uniformity (see Materials and Methods), we confirmed the lower visual field advantage and extended upon the earlier findings for motion stimuli.…”
Section: Advantage Of the Lower Visual Fieldsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…4(B), blue asterisks], consistent with the advantage of the lower visual field found in previous MEG studies using high contrast checkerboards [Portin et al, 1999], vertical gratings [Tzelepi et al, 2001], and face stimuli [Liu and Ioannides, 2006], as well as an fMRI study which also used checkerboard stimuli [Chen et al, 2004]. After adjusting spatial luminance uniformity (see Materials and Methods), we confirmed the lower visual field advantage and extended upon the earlier findings for motion stimuli.…”
Section: Advantage Of the Lower Visual Fieldsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…11 show that the dynamic waveforms of the BOLD signals in different occipital lobe regions are distinctly different from each other, consistent with our prior ICA and model studies [27]- [29]. If comparing with the stimulus pattern, signal 1 in Fig.…”
Section: A the Difference Of The Dynamic Responsessupporting
confidence: 83%
“…In this blank trial, only the center fixation cross (0.8 ) was displayed. Subjects were required to concentrate on the fixation cross and press a button upon detection of an infrequent brightness change of the fixation cross [26], [27].…”
Section: Experimental Paradigmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several procedures have been investigated. Poisson (18), gamma (19,(36)(37)(38), and Gaussian (20,21,39) functions have been implemented to model the HRF. Currently, gamma and Gaussian functions are still used often in models.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fitting of BOLD responses is essential for quantification, and many studies have proposed procedures for HRF estimation and modeling, including Poisson functions (18), gamma functions (19), and Gaussian functions (20,21). In 2007, Lindquist and Wager (22) developed an algorithm comprising three inverse logit (IL) functions to fit HRFs, each corresponding to one of the HRF phases specified above.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%