Visual Field Advantage Research Articles

The upper visual field advantage for face-processing: A product of endogenous attentional bias?

The upper visual field advantage for face-processing: A product of endogenous attentional bias?

Does binocular vision drive the lower visual field advantage for grasping?

Humans achieve better performance when reaching and grasping stimuli positioned in the lower than in the upper visual field. Moreover, the brain regions involved in visuomotor control also show a lower visual field preference for hand actions (e.g., Rossit et al., 2013). The current study investigated whether the lower visual field advantage for grasping is related to the availability of binocular cues. Right-handed participants were asked to fixate on one of two light-emitting diodes such that objects could appear in either the upper or lower right visual fields. While keeping fixation, they were required to reach out and grasp objects under conditions of either monocular or binocular vision. Grasping movements were performed towards self-illuminated objects in open-loop and simultaneously with a fixation task. In line with previous studies, the analysis of kinematic parameters revealed that under monocular viewing, grip apertures were larger than under binocular viewing. Moreover under both binocular and monocular viewing, grip apertures were less variable when objects were viewed in the lower as opposed to the upper visual field. In addition, under binocular viewing there was a stronger relationship between object size and grip aperture when objects were presented in the lower visual field as compared to in the upper visual field, whereas no visual field effect was observed in the monocular condition. These results indicate that binocular cues may play an important role in the lower visual field advantage for grasping. In particular, the availability of binocular cues may allow better programming of grip scaling specifically towards objects in the lower visual field, reflecting the fact than in our everyday lives this is the region of space where we mostly interact with objects.

A validated set of tool pictures with matched objects and non-objects for laterality research

Neuropsychological and neuroimaging research has established that knowledge related to tool use and tool recognition is lateralized to the left cerebral hemisphere. Recently, behavioural studies with the visual half-field technique have confirmed the lateralization. A limitation of this research was that different sets of stimuli had to be used for the comparison of tools to other objects and objects to non-objects. Therefore, we developed a new set of stimuli containing matched triplets of tools, other objects and non-objects. With the new stimulus set, we successfully replicated the findings of no visual field advantage for objects in an object recognition task combined with a significant right visual field advantage for tools in a tool recognition task. The set of stimuli is available as supplemental data to this article.

Asymmetric Attention Networks: The Case of Children

Visuospatial attention-networks are represented in both hemispheres, with right-hemisphere dominance in adults. Little is known about the lateralization of the attentional-networks in children. To assess the lateralization of attentional-networks in children aged 5 years, performance on a Lateralized-Attention-Network-Test specifically designed for children (LANT-C) was compared with performance on the Attention-Network-Test for children (ANT-C). Participants were 82 children, aged 5-6 years (55% boys, middle-class, mainstream schooling). They were examined with both the ANT-C and the LANT-C along with evaluation of intelligence and attention questionnaires. Multiple analysis of variance showed a main effect for network, with high efficiency for orienting and lower executive efficiency (accuracy; p < .001; η2 = .282). An effect for procedure, elucidated higher efficiency in the ANT-C relatively to the LANT-C (accuracy; p < .01; η2 = .097). A procedure × network interaction effect was also found, showing that this procedure difference is present in the alerting and executive networks (accuracy; p < .05; η2 = .096). LANT-C analysis showed a left visual-field advantage in alerting, (accuracy; p < .05; η2 = .066), while executing with the right hand benefitted executive performance (response-time; p < .05; η2 = .06). Results extend previous findings manifesting a right-hemisphere advantage in children's alerting-attention, pointing to the importance of lateralization of brain function to the understanding of the integrity of attention-networks in children.

Inter-hemispheric recruitment as a function of task complexity, age and cognitive reserve

ABSTRACTIn a behavioral divided visual field study, we investigated the efficiency of inter-hemispheric cooperation according to (1) task computational complexity (physical-identity versus name-identity letter matching), (2) age (younger versus older adults) and (3) educational attainment, used as a proxy for cognitive reserve. Overall, the results indicated a shift from within- to across-hemisphere processing advantage with increasing task complexity, suggesting that bilateral engagement leads to enhanced performance under high-demand conditions. This pattern was influenced by age, with older adults showing no within-hemisphere advantage in the simpler task and a greater across-hemisphere advantage in the more complex one, consistent with an age-compensatory view of inter-hemispheric recruitment. Moreover, for older adults, more years of education was associated with a weaker across-hemisphere advantage. Thus, we propose that cognitive reserve may account for bilateral engagement efficiency. Finally, the groups differed in terms of laterality effects, with only younger adults demonstrating a left visual field advantage in the name-identity task, lending some support to the right hemi-aging hypothesis.

Upper visual field advantage in localizing a target among distractors.

Biases exist in many perceptual and cognitive functions. Since visual attention plays an important role in a wide range of perceptual and cognitive processes, any bias in the spatial distribution of attention is likely to be a significant source of perceptual and cognitive asymmetries. An attentional visual field task (AVF) requiring localization of a target among distractors was used to assess possible asymmetries in attentional processing in the vertical meridian. The results showed a bias favoring the upper visual field, suggesting a potentially important role of attention in perceptual and cognitive asymmetries.

Do head-on-trunk signals modulate disengagement of spatial attention?

Body schema is indispensable for sensorimotor control and learning, but whether it is associated with cognitive functions, such as allocation of spatial attention, remains unclear. Observations in patients with unilateral spatial neglect support this view, yet data from neurologically normal participants are inconsistent. Here, we investigated the influence of head-on-trunk positions (30° left or right, straight ahead) on disengagement of attention in healthy participants. Five experiments examined the effects of valid or invalid cues on spatial shifts of attention using the Posner paradigm. Experiment 1 used a forced-choice task. Participants quickly reported the location of a target that appeared left or right of the fixation point, preceded by a cue on the same (valid) or opposite side (invalid). Experiments 2, 3, and 4 also used valid and invalid cues but required participants to simply detect a target appearing on the left or right side. Experiment 5 used a speeded discrimination task, in which participants quickly reported the orientation of a Gabor. We observed expected influences of validity and stimulus onset asynchrony as well as inhibition of return; however, none of the experiments suggested that head-on-trunk position created or changed visual field advantages, contrary to earlier reports. Our results showed that the manipulations of the body schema did not modulate attentional processes in the healthy brain, unlike neuropsychological studies on neglect patients. Our findings suggest that spatial neglect reflects a state of the lesioned brain that is importantly different from that of the normally functioning brain.

Symmetry detection in typically and atypically speech lateralized individuals: A visual half-field study

Visuospatial functions are typically lateralized to the right cerebral hemisphere, giving rise to a left visual field advantage in visual half-field tasks. In a first study we investigated whether this is also true for symmetry detection off fixation. Twenty right-handed participants with left hemisphere speech dominance took part in a visual half-field experiment requiring them to judge the symmetry of 2-dimensional figures made by joining rectangles in symmetrical or asymmetrical ways. As expected, a significant left visual field advantage was observed for the symmetrical figures. In a second study, we replicated the study with 37 left-handed participants and left hemisphere speech dominance. We again found a left visual field advantage. Finally, in a third study, we included 17 participants with known right hemisphere dominance for speech (speech dominance had been identified with fMRI in an earlier study; Van der Haegen, Cai, Seurinck, & Brysbaert, 2011). Around half of these individuals showed a reversed pattern, i.e. a right visual half-field advantage for symmetric figures while the other half replicated the left visual-field advantage. These findings suggest that symmetry detection is indeed a cognitive function lateralized to the right hemisphere for the majority of the population. The data of the participants with atypical speech dominance are more in line with the idea that language and visuospatial functions are lateralized in opposite brain hemispheres than with the idea that different functions lateralize independently, although there seems to be more variability in this group.

How do incorrect results change the processing of arithmetic information? Evidence from a divided visual field experiment

Despite several recent important developments in understanding numerical processing of both isolated numbers and numbers in the context of arithmetic equations, the relative impact of congruency on high-level compared to low-level processing remains unclear. The current study investigated hemispheric differences in the processing of arithmetic material, as a function of semantic and perceptual congruency, using a delayed answer verification task and divided visual field paradigm. A total of 37 participants (22 females and 15 males, mean age 30.06, SD 9.78) were presented unilaterally or bilaterally with equation results that were either correct or incorrect and had a consistent or inconsistent numerical notation. Statistical analyses showed no visual field differences in a notation consistency task, whereas when judgements had to be made on mathematical accuracy there was a right visual field advantage for incorrect equations that were notation consistent. These results reveal a clear differential processing of arithmetic information by the two cerebral hemispheres with a special emphasis on erroneous calculations. Faced with incorrect results and with a consistent numerical notation, the left hemisphere outperforms its right counterpart in making mathematical accuracy decisions.

Lower visual field advantage in multiple object tracking is mediated by a non-attentive motion mechanism

Lower visual field advantage in multiple object tracking is mediated by a non-attentive motion mechanism

Visual movement perception in deaf and hearing individuals.

A number of studies have investigated changes in the perception of visual motion as a result of altered sensory experiences. An animal study has shown that auditory-deprived cats exhibit enhanced performance in a visual movement detection task compared to hearing cats (Lomber, Meredith, & Kral, 2010). In humans, the behavioural evidence regarding the perception of motion is less clear. The present study investigated deaf and hearing adult participants using a movement localization task and a direction of motion task employing coherently-moving and static visual dot patterns. Overall, deaf and hearing participants did not differ in their movement localization performance, although within the deaf group, a left visual field advantage was found. When discriminating the direction of motion, however, deaf participants responded faster and tended to be more accurate when detecting small differences in direction compared with the hearing controls. These results conform to the view that visual abilities are enhanced after auditory deprivation and extend previous findings regarding visual motion processing in deaf individuals.

Maintaining perceptual constancy while remaining vigilant: Left hemisphere change blindness and right hemisphere vigilance

A considerable literature suggests that the right hemisphere is dominant in vigilance for novel and survival-related stimuli, such as predators, across a wide range of species. In contrast to vigilance for change, change blindness is a failure to detect obvious changes in a visual scene when they are obscured by a disruption in scene presentation. We studied lateralised change detection using a series of scenes with salient changes in either the left or right visual fields. In Study 1 left visual field changes were detected more rapidly than right visual field changes, confirming a right hemisphere advantage for change detection. Increasing stimulus difficulty resulted in greater right visual field detections and left hemisphere detection was more likely when change occurred in the right visual field on a prior trial. In Study 2 an intervening distractor task disrupted the influence of prior trials. Again, faster detection speeds were observed for the left visual field changes with a shift to a right visual field advantage with increasing time-to-detection. This suggests that a right hemisphere role for vigilance, or catching attention, and a left hemisphere role for target evaluation, or maintaining attention, is present at the earliest stage of change detection.

Effects of attention and laterality on motion and orientation discrimination in deaf signers

Previous studies have asked whether visual sensitivity and attentional processing in deaf signers are enhanced or altered as a result of their different sensory experiences during development, i.e., auditory deprivation and exposure to a visual language. In particular, deaf and hearing signers have been shown to exhibit a right visual field/left hemisphere advantage for motion processing, while hearing nonsigners do not. To examine whether this finding extends to other aspects of visual processing, we compared deaf signers and hearing nonsigners on motion, form, and brightness discrimination tasks. Secondly, to examine whether hemispheric lateralities are affected by attention, we employed a dual-task paradigm to measure form and motion thresholds under “full” vs. “poor” attention conditions. Deaf signers, but not hearing nonsigners, exhibited a right visual field advantage for motion processing. This effect was also seen for form processing and not for the brightness task. Moreover, no group differences were observed in attentional effects, and the motion and form visual field asymmetries were not modulated by attention, suggesting they occur at early levels of sensory processing. In sum, the results show that processing of motion and form, believed to be mediated by dorsal and ventral visual pathways, respectively, are left-hemisphere dominant in deaf signers.

FMRI reveals a lower visual field preference for hand actions in human superior parieto-occipital cortex (SPOC) and precuneus

Humans are more efficient when performing actions towards objects presented in the lower visual field (VF) than in the upper VF. The present study used slow event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine whether human brain areas implicated in action would show such VF preferences. Participants were asked to fixate one of four different positions allowing objects to be presented in the upper left, upper right, lower left or lower right VF. In some trials they reached to grasp the object with the right hand while in others they passively viewed the object. Crucially, by manipulating the fixation position, rather than the position of the objects, the biomechanics of the movements did not differ across conditions. The superior parieto-occipital cortex (SPOC) and the left precuneus, brain areas implicated in the control of reaching, were significantly more activated when participants grasped objects presented in the lower VF relative to the upper VF. Importantly, no such VF preferences were observed in these regions during passive viewing. This finding fits well with evidence from the macaque neurophysiology that neurons within visuomotor regions over-represent the lower VF relative to the upper VF and indicate that the neural responses within these regions may reflect a functional lower VF advantage during visually-guided actions.

A left cerebral hemisphere’s superiority in processing spatial-categorical information in a non-verbal semantic format

It has been shown that the left and right cerebral hemispheres (LH and RH) respectively process qualitative or “categorical” spatial relations and metric or “coordinate” spatial relations. However, categorical spatial information could be thought as divided into two types: semantically-coded and visuospatially-coded categorical information. We examined whether a LH’s advantage in processing semantic-categorical information is observed in a non-verbal format, and also whether semantic- and visuospatial-categorical processing are differentially lateralized. We manipulated the colors and positions of the standard traffic light sign as semantic- and visuospatial-categorical information respectively, and tested performance with the divided visual field method. In the semantic-categorical matching task, in which the participants judged if the semantic-categorical information of a successive cue and target was the same, a right visual field advantage was observed, suggesting a LH’s preference for processing semantic-categorical information in a non-verbal format. In the visuospatial-categorical matching task, in which the participants judged if the visuospatial-categorical information of a successive cue and target was identical, a left visual field advantage was obtained. These results suggest that the processing of semantic-categorical information is lateralized in LH, and we discuss the dissociation between the two types of categorical information.

Differences between visual hemifields in identifying rapidly presented target stimuli: letters and digits, faces, and shapes

The right hemisphere has been shown to play a dominant role in processing of visuo-spatial information. Recently, this role has been studied in the two-stream rapid serial visual presentation task. In this task, two alphanumerical targets are embedded in left and right simultaneous streams of rapidly changing letters. The second target (T2) is identified better in the left than in the right visual field. This difference has been interpreted as advantage of the right hemisphere (RH). However, a disadvantage of the left hemisphere (LH) could not be excluded so far. The LH, specialized for processing of verbal stimuli, might be overloaded due to constant input of letters from both visual fields. In the present study, this overload hypothesis was tested by reducing demands on verbal processing (Experiment 1), and by overloading the RH with non-verbal stimuli: faces (Experiment 2) and irregular shapes (Experiment 3). The left visual field advantage proved to be largely independent from the level of verbal load and from stimulus type. Therefore, although not entirely disproving the overload hypothesis, these results suggest as the most parsimonious explanation this asymmetry reflects a RH advantage, presumably in perceptual and attentional processing, rather than a LH disadvantage caused by verbal overload.

Does the upper visual field advantage in face-processing relate to participant bias in attentional allocation?

Event Abstract Back to Event Does the upper visual field advantage in face-processing relate to participant bias in attentional allocation? Genevieve L. Quek1* and Matthew Finkbeiner1 1 Macquarie University, Cognitive Science, Australia It has recently been established that face-processing is more robust in the upper visual field (UVF) than the lower visual field (LVF). Here we investigate whether this UVF advantage results from a potential participant bias to direct attention towards the upper hemifield. Participants made reaching movements to classify the sex of a target face which appeared either immediately above or below central fixation. The target was preceded by a nonconscious prime face which was either congruent or incongruent with the target (i.e. same or opposite sex). We used the masked congruence effect (MCE), or the extent to which the prime modulated the response to the subsequent target, as our dependent measure. The critical manipulation was the proportion of prime-target pairs which appeared in each vertical hemifield. In the first block of trials, the faces appeared with equal probability in both hemifields. Here we expected to replicate past results by observing a UVF advantage reflected in the timecourse of the MCE. In the second block of trials, the faces appeared below fixation 80% of the time. If the UVF advantage for faces results from an endogenous attentional bias the favours the upper hemifield, then the 80:20 ratio of LVF to UVF targets in the second block should shift participants’ expectations of where the face will appear, eliminating or even inverting the UVF advantage. Results and implications are discussed. Keywords: sex categorization, masked priming, Attention, reaching, vertical asymmetry Conference: ACNS-2013 Australasian Cognitive Neuroscience Society Conference, Clayton, Melbourne, Australia, 28 Nov - 1 Dec, 2013. Presentation Type: Poster Topic: Attention Citation: Quek GL and Finkbeiner M (2013). Does the upper visual field advantage in face-processing relate to participant bias in attentional allocation?. Conference Abstract: ACNS-2013 Australasian Cognitive Neuroscience Society Conference. doi: 10.3389/conf.fnhum.2013.212.00044 Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters. The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated. Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed. For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions. Received: 15 Oct 2013; Published Online: 25 Nov 2013. * Correspondence: Ms. Genevieve L Quek, Macquarie University, Cognitive Science, North Ryde, New South Wales, 2109, Australia, genevieve.lauren.quek@gmail.com Login Required This action requires you to be registered with Frontiers and logged in. To register or login click here. Abstract Info Abstract The Authors in Frontiers Genevieve L Quek Matthew Finkbeiner Google Genevieve L Quek Matthew Finkbeiner Google Scholar Genevieve L Quek Matthew Finkbeiner PubMed Genevieve L Quek Matthew Finkbeiner Related Article in Frontiers Google Scholar PubMed Abstract Close Back to top Javascript is disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser settings in order to see all the content on this page.

Left visual-field advantage for detecting learned targets in rapid serial visual presentation

Left visual-field advantage for detecting learned targets in rapid serial visual presentation

The effects of bilingualism on efficiency and lateralization of attentional networks

The present study investigated the impact of bilingualism on efficiency of alerting, orienting and executive attention by means of the Lateralized Attention Network Test (LANT). Young adult bilinguals who had been exposed to their second language before the age of four years showed a reduced conflict cost and a larger alerting effect in terms of response time (RT), while no difference between bilinguals and monolinguals was observed in overall RT. Bilinguals also outperformed monolinguals on accuracy in both conflict and non-conflict trials, though the effect in the latter condition was very small. Moreover, while a left visual field advantage for accuracy of conflict resolution was present in the monolingual group, bilinguals did not show the asymmetry. The findings suggest that bilingualism enhances the efficiency of executive network while reducing its lateralization. The larger alerting effect in bilinguals is hypothesized to be related to bilinguals’ more efficient executive control, which may support processes of response anticipation or temporal orienting.

Serial position effects in the identification of letters, digits, symbols, and shapes in peripheral vision

Three experiments measured serial position functions for character-in-string identification in peripheral vision. In Experiment 1, random strings of five letters (e.g., P F H T M) or five symbols (e.g., λ Б Þ Ψ ¥) were briefly presented to the left or to the right of fixation, and identification accuracy was measured at each position in the string using a post-cued two-alternative forced-choice task (e.g., was there a T or a B at the 4th position). In Experiment 2 the performance to letter stimuli was compared with familiar two-dimensional shapes (e.g., square, triangle, circle), and in Experiment 3 we compared digit strings (e.g., 6 3 7 9 2) with a set of keyboard symbols (e.g., % § @ < ?). Eye-movements were monitored to ensure central fixation. The results revealed a triple interaction between the nature of the stimulus (letters/digits vs. symbols/shapes), eccentricity, and visual field. In all experiments this interaction reflected a selective left visual field advantage for letter or digit stimuli compared with symbol or shape stimuli for targets presented at the greatest eccentricity. The results are in line with the predictions of the modified receptive field hypothesis proposed by Tydgat and Grainger (2009), and the predictions of the SERIOL2 model of letter string encoding.