File(s) stored somewhere else
Please note: Linked content is NOT stored on Carnegie Mellon University and we can't guarantee its availability, quality, security or accept any liability.
Competition between simultaneous stimuli modulated by location probability in hemispatial neglect
Many aspects of spatial neglect can be explained as arising from competition for attentional selection, with salient ipsilesional stimuli emerging as the winner more often than contralesional stimuli. The outcome of the competition, however, can be affected both by bottom-up perceptual factors such as the gestalt properties of the display and by top-down factors such as expectancy or stimulus blocking. This study examines whether the competition for attentional selection can be modulated by manipulating the probability of the target's location in hemispatial neglect. Five patients with left-sided hemispatial neglect and a group of control participants performed a visual target discrimination task. In equal probability blocks, the target appeared randomly in any of six possible horizontal locations (three left, three right) whereas in biased blocks, the target appeared in the mid-location on the left on 50% of the trials and in each of the other locations on 10% of the trials. The target appeared either alone or was accompanied by a distractor on the opposite side. The results showed that the spatial bias facilitated detection of all left-sided targets in the neglect group, but was more spatially specific in the control group. Furthermore, while distractors on either side interfered with target processing in both groups, the patterns differed across the visual field. Finally, the magnitude of facilitation due to the bias was greatest in the condition with the most inhibition, i.e. a left-sided target accompanied by a right-sided distractor in the neglect group. These data underscore the competitive push–pull relationship between different bottom-up and top-down attentional factors, particularly within neglect patients, in whom a strong ipsilesional attentional bias already exists.