Trunk Orientation Induces Neglect-Like Lateral Biases in Covert Attention

Grubb, Jefferson D.; Reed, Catherine L.

doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00497

Cited by 28 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, Grubb and Reed (2002) were able to induce pseudoneglect in a covert attention task by leftward rotation of the torso. Hasselbach-Heitzeg and Reuter-Lorenz (2002) also found that rightward rotation reduced response times for targets on the right.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Research on spatial representation suggests independent motivation for such an ultimate frame being anchored to the head (e.g., Avillac, Denève, Olivier, Pouget, & Duhamel, 2005) or to the torso (e.g., Grubb & Reed, 2002;Karnath, Schenkel, & Fischer, 1991). A key motivation for a head-centric hypothesis is the number and significance of the sensory organs found in the head: the eyes, ears, and the vestibular labyrinth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dissociating contributions of head and torso to spatial reference frames: The misalignment paradigm

Alsmith

Ferrè

Longo

2017

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Word count: 5724 words (excluding references and title page)The Misalignment Paradigm 2 AbstractWhen we represent someone's view of a scene as egocentrically structured, where do we represent the origin of the reference frame? By analysing responses in a spatial perspectivetaking task as a function of spatial location with respect to both head and torso, we isolated the respective contribution of each part to spatial judgments. Both the head and the torso contributed to judgements, though with greater contributions from the torso. A second experiment manipulating visual contrast of the torso showed that this does not reflect lowlevel differences in visual salience between body parts. Our results demonstrate that spatial perspective-taking relies on a weighted combination of reference frames centred on different parts of the body.The Misalignment Paradigm 3

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissociating contributions of head and torso to spatial reference frames: The misalignment paradigm

Alsmith

Ferrè

Longo

2017

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast to Karnath et al (1991) and Karnath (1994), Grubb and Reed (2002) reported an effect of trunk orientation on covert orienting in healthy controls. Grubb and Reed (2002) argued that previous studies did not isolate the attentional mechanism that is most strongly impaired in HSN: the disengagement of attention from one side of space that is necessary to shift attention toward the location of a new salient event (Posner, Walker, Friederiech, & Rafal, 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 58%

“…Grubb and Reed (2002) argued that previous studies did not isolate the attentional mechanism that is most strongly impaired in HSN: the disengagement of attention from one side of space that is necessary to shift attention toward the location of a new salient event (Posner, Walker, Friederiech, & Rafal, 1984). An impairment of attentional disengagement, inferred from excessively long response times for invalidly cued targets in the contralesional half of space (Losier & Klein, 2001), has been proposed to be characteristic of HSN patients (Posner et al, 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An impairment of attentional disengagement, inferred from excessively long response times for invalidly cued targets in the contralesional half of space (Losier & Klein, 2001), has been proposed to be characteristic of HSN patients (Posner et al, 1984). To address this issue, Grubb and Reed (2002) presented healthy control participants with a cue-target task in which informative peripheral cues were used to generate orienting. In such a task, it is conventional to describe trials as valid when the target appears at the cued location and invalid when the target appears at the opposite, un-cued location.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Changes in trunk orientation do not induce asymmetries in covert orienting

Westwood

Jones

Cowper-Smith

et al. 2013

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explored the effect of trunk orientation on responses to visual targets in five experiments, following work suggesting a disengage deficit in covert orienting related to changes in the trunk orientation of healthy participants. In two experiments, participants responded to the color of a target appearing in the left or right visual field following a peripheral visual cue that was informative about target location. In three additional experiments, participants responded to the location (left/right) of a target using a spatially compatible motor response. In none of the experiments did trunk orientation interact with spatial-cuing effects, suggesting that orienting behavior is not affected by the rotation of the body relative to the head. Theoretical implications are discussed.Keywords Attention . Space . Posture . Trunk . VisionWe need to be able to accurately locate objects relative to ourselves and other objects in the environment for many of our daily activities, such as in navigating around furniture, reaching to grasp a coffee cup, or identifying the source of an unfamiliar sound. Thus, it is not surprising that neurons in many regions of the human cortex are sensitive to the spatial locations of sensory events. Neurophysiological research in macaques (Avillac, Denève, Olivier, Pouget, & Duhamel, 2005;Batista et al., 2007;Buneo, Jarvis, Batista, & Andersen, 2002;Caminiti, Johnson, Galli, Ferraina, & Burnod, 1991;Lacquaniti, Guigon, Bianchi, Ferraina, & Caminiti, 1995) and both neuroimaging (Wu & Hatsopoulos, 2006 and behavioral (Andersen, Snyder, Bradley, & Xing, 1997;Culham & Kanwisher, 2001;Graziano & Gross, 1998;Jones & Henriques, 2010;Mountcastle, Lynch, Georgopoulos, Sakata, & Acuna, 1975;Wandell, 1999) studies in humans have shown that the central nervous system (CNS) uses multiple reference frames (Previc, 1990(Previc, , 1998 to code the locations of sensory events. The present investigation focused on the bodycentered reference frame, which has been revealed through biases of spatial processing in patients suffering from hemispatial neglect (Bartolomeo & Chokron, 1999De Renzi, 1982).Hemispatial neglect (HSN) is a syndrome characterized by a spatially graded impairment in detecting and responding to sensory information (Butler, Lawrence, Eskes, & Klein, 2009). Hemispatial neglect typically affects the left side of space following a lesion to the right cortex (although this is not always the case; Bowen, McKenna, & Tallis, 1999). Some lines of evidence have suggested that the spatial impairment observed in HSN may arise from a rightward shift in the egocentric representation of body position with respect to objects in the environment (e.g., Bisiach, Capitani, & Porta, 1985;Karnath, 1994;Karnath, Schenkel, & Fischer, 1991;Rorden, Karnath, & Driver, 2001). For example, Karnath et al. (1991) found that rotating the trunk to the left eliminated the left-right asymmetry in saccadic onset times (i.e., the longer reaction times [RTs] to stimuli presented in the left visual field when the head an...

show abstract