UCL  IRIS
Institutional Research Information Service
UCL Logo
Please report any queries concerning the funding data grouped in the sections named "Externally Awarded" or "Internally Disbursed" (shown on the profile page) to your Research Finance Administrator. Your can find your Research Finance Administrator at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/finance/research/rs-contacts.php by entering your department
Please report any queries concerning the student data shown on the profile page to:

Email: portico-services@ucl.ac.uk

Help Desk: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ras/portico/helpdesk
Publication Detail
The role of perceptual load in neglect: rejection of ipsilesional distractors is facilitated with higher central load.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal article
  • Publication Sub Type:
    Clinical Trial
  • Authors:
    Lavie N, Robertson IH
  • Publication date:
    01/10/2001
  • Pagination:
    867, 876
  • Journal:
    J Cogn Neurosci
  • Volume:
    13
  • Issue:
    7
  • Status:
    Published
  • Country:
    United States
  • Print ISSN:
    0898-929X
  • Language:
    eng
  • Keywords:
    Aged, Cerebral Arteries, Cerebral Infarction, Cognition Disorders, Female, Functional Laterality, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Perception, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Stroke
Abstract
Neglect is known to produce a bias towards the ipsilesional side. Here we examined whether this bias is automatic or can be modulated by manipulating perceptual load in a relevant task [e.g., Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 451-468]. Three patients with left neglect and three healthy controls made speeded choice responses to a target letter in the center of the display while attempting to ignore an irrelevant distractor presented on left or right. Perceptual load was manipulated by inducing a search for the target that appeared with another central stimulus, which was either a blob (low load) or a nontarget letter (higher load). Response competition effects from ipsilesional distractors were significantly reduced by higher load. The same increase of load, however, did not decrease distractor effects in the control group, as expected [e.g., Lavie, N., & Cox, S. (1997). On the efficiency of attentional selection: Efficient visual search results in inefficient rejection of distraction. Psychological Science, 8, 395-398]. These results demonstrate that ipsilesional bias in neglect is not fully automated and emphasize an additional restriction of perceptual capacity. Moreover, they supported our prediction that reduced perceptual capacity in neglect can lead to improved distractor rejection with just small increases in perceptual load.
Publication data is maintained in RPS. Visit https://rps.ucl.ac.uk
 More search options
UCL Researchers
Author
Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience
University College London - Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Tel:+44 (0)20 7679 2000

© UCL 1999–2011

Search by