Crossover is not a consequence of neglect: A test of the orientation/estimation hypothesis

Stimulus- and state-dependence of systematic bias in spatial attention: Additive effects of stimulus-size and time-on-task

“…Our results replicate those of previous studies that have found a slight but consistent overall leftward bias on the landmark task in long lines (McCourt, 2001;McCourt and Jewell, 1999;Rueckert et al, 2002; an effect of line length on subjective line midpoint in healthy participants (McCourt and Jewell, 1999;Mennemeier et al, 2002;Rueckert et al, 2002;Heber et al, 2010), and a time-on-task effect consisting of a left-to rightward shift in subjective midpoint after prolonged practice on long lines (Manly et al, 2005;Dufour et al, 2007), here after approximately 1 h of task performance. In addition, we show for the first time that this time-ontask effect transferred to un-practiced short lines (i.e., is additive across long and short lines), indicating a common denominator of line bisection performance on both long and short lines, and speaking against models which assume distinct processes (such as orientation/estimation or Local/ global distinction).…”

“…Previous studies investigating the robustness of this line length effect in normal participants display mixed findings, though differing bisection tasks and experimental designs have been employed (Manning et al, 1990;Luh, 1995;Laeng et al, 1996;McCourt and Jewell, 1999;Jewell and McCourt, 2000;Mennemeier et al, 2001Mennemeier et al, , 2002Rueckert et al, 2002;Varnava et al, 2002;Heber et al, 2010). The most commonly employed tasks include the landmark task, a perceptual line bisection judgement task designed to dissociate the contribution of perceptual and motor factors (Milner et al, 1992;Harvey et al, 2000;Olk and Harvey, 2002), and manual line bisection, of which the former shows more reliable cross-over with short lines (Rueckert et al, 2002) suggesting perceptual bisection tasks to be optimal for detection of the line length effect in healthy participants.…”

Influence of Age and Sex on Line Bisection: A Study of Normal Performance with Implications for Visuospatial Neglect

“…Line length has a systematic influence on bisection error in most neglect patients (Halligan & Marshall, 1988;Ishiai et al, 1997;Mennemeier et al, 2002;Monaghan & Shillcock, 1998;Ricci & Chatterjee, 2001). Rightward deviation in many patients (but not all: Bisiach et al, 1983) with (left) neglect decreases with line length such that they appear more 'accurate' on medium lines (e.g.…”

Line bisection performance in patients with personality disorders

“…For example, errors to the right are more pronounced in patients suffering from a lesion of the right hemisphere, especially involving the inferior parietal and temporoparietal regions (e.g., Heilman & van den Abell, 1980;Mennemeier, Vezey, Lamar, & Jewell, 2002;Perri, Bartolomeo, & Gainotti, 2000;Schenkenberg et al, 1980). Right cortical regions have been shown to play a role in the selective attention, arousal, and vigilance (Pardo & Raichle, 1991;Rueckert & Grafman, 1996).…”