4.7 Article

Spatial neglect in near and far space investigated by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

Journal

BRAIN
Volume 125, Issue -, Pages 2012-2022

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/brain/awf211

Keywords

visual neglect; parietal cortex; near and far space; TMS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Localized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to disrupt visuospatial perception in the near and far space of six healthy volunteer subjects. In addition to the baseline condition, they were stimulated over the right posterior parietal cortex, the right or left dorsal occipital cortex or the right ventral occipital cortex, during the brief presentation of a transected horizontal line. Subjects had to indicate whether the part of the line to the left or right of the transection appeared longer. The stimulus display was back-projected on a screen at a viewing distance of either 50 or 150 cm ('near' and 'far' space, respectively). Reaction times and choices were measured. In a forced-choice paradigm, subjects showed 'pseudoneglect', the natural tendency of neurologically intact subjects to perceive the left side of a centrally transected line as slightly longer than the right. These errors occurred more for lines in near space than for lines in far space. Magnetic stimulation of the right posterior parietal cortex or the right ventral occipital lobe selectively induced a significant shift to the right in the perceived midpoint for near- and far-space lines, respectively. The results reproduced in normal subjects the dissociation between neglect in near and far space that has been described in patients with different right-hemisphere lesions. This dissociation supports the contention that there is a dorsal/near space-ventral/far space segregation of processing in the visual system which reflects the behavioural goals of the two putative visual streams.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available