Shifting attention in viewer- and object-based reference frames after unilateral brain injury

• Published in: Neuropsychologia 2011-06, Vol.49 (7), p.2090-2096
• Main Authors: List, Alexandra, Landau, Ayelet N., Brooks, Joseph L., Flevaris, Anastasia V., Fortenbaugh, Francesca C., Esterman, Michael, Van Vleet, Thomas M., Albrecht, Alice R., Alvarez, Bryan D., Robertson, Lynn C., Schendel, Krista
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Acoustic Stimulation; Adult; Adult and adolescent clinical studies; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Attention; Attention - physiology; Biological and medical sciences; Brain Injuries - etiology; Brain Injuries - psychology; Brain injury; Cues; Electroencephalography; Eye Movements - physiology; Female; Fixation, Ocular - physiology; Functional Laterality - physiology; Humans; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Neglect; Objects; Organic mental disorders. Neuropsychology; Orientation; Photic Stimulation; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychopathology. Psychiatry; Reaction Time - physiology; Reading; Reference frames; Space; Stroke - complications; Stroke - psychology; Subarachnoid Hemorrhage - complications; Subarachnoid Hemorrhage - psychology; Visual Perception - physiology
• ISSN: 0028-3932; 1873-3514; 1873-3514
• DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.04.003

► 29 unilaterally brain injured patients (13 left, 16 right). ► Reaction time measured for vertical midline and lateral targets. ► Viewer- and object-based reference frames probed. ► Spatial impairments map onto object-based reference frames contralesionally. ► Side of brain injury did not modulate object-based effects. The aims of the present study were to investigate the respective roles that object- and viewer-based reference frames play in reorienting visual attention, and to assess their influence after unilateral brain injury. To do so, we studied 16 right hemisphere injured (RHI) and 13 left hemisphere injured (LHI) patients. We used a cueing design that manipulates the location of cues and targets relative to a display comprised of two rectangles (i.e., objects). Unlike previous studies with patients, we presented all cues at midline rather than in the left or right visual fields. Thus, in the critical conditions in which targets were presented laterally, reorienting of attention was always from a midline cue. Performance was measured for lateralized target detection as a function of viewer-based (contra- and ipsilesional sides) and object-based (requiring reorienting within or between objects) reference frames. As expected, contralesional detection was slower than ipsilesional detection for the patients. More importantly, objects influenced target detection differently in the contralesional and ipsilesional fields. Contralesionally, reorienting to a target within the cued object took longer than reorienting to a target in the same location but in the uncued object. This finding is consistent with object-based neglect. Ipsilesionally, the means were in the opposite direction. Furthermore, no significant difference was found in object-based influences between the patient groups (RHI vs. LHI). These findings are discussed in the context of reference frames used in reorienting attention for target detection.