HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Correspondence: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Correspondence are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Braun, J. G. Articles by Kirk, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Braun, J. G. Articles by Kirk, A.

Line bisection performance of normal adults

Two subgroups with opposite biases

From the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Andrew Kirk, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, Royal University Hospital, 103 Hospital Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 0W8, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Unilateral neglect patients may have either attentional or intentional neglect or both. Determining whether normal individuals are influenced by attentional or intentional biases will lead to a better understanding of the two types of neglect. Normal individuals may not be a homogeneous group.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether normal individuals show attentional/sensory or intentional/premotor biases when completing line bisections.

METHODS: Thirty-two normal right-handed individuals participated. On each trial, participants were asked to move a cursor using a computer mouse to the midpoint of a line presented on a computer screen. The line could appear centered on or toward either side of the screen. Participants completed the task under two conditions: either the cursor moved in the same direction as the mouse (direct condition) or the cursor moved in the opposite direction as the mouse (indirect condition).

RESULTS: Twenty-five participants showed an attentional bias, 3 showed an intentional bias, and 4 showed no bias. Of those with an attentional bias, 13 were biased to the left, and 12 were biased to the right. Those with a right-attentional bias made larger errors when the line was presented to the left, whereas those with a left-attentional bias made larger errors when the line was presented to the right.

CONCLUSIONS: Our finding that the two attentional-biased groups produced the opposite pattern of results across the three line positions suggests the processes underlying performance in the two groups may in fact differ. Further study of these two groups may lead to a better understanding of unilateral neglect.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Floel, S. Knecht, H. Lohmann, M. Deppe, J. Sommer, B. Drager, E.-B. Ringelstein, and H. Henningsen Language and spatial attention can lateralize to the same hemisphere in healthy humans Neurology, September 25, 2001; 57(6): 1018 - 1024. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]