| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brain, Vol. 119, No. 3, 841-850, 1996
© 1996 Guarantors of Brain
research-article |
A mathematical model of line bisection behaviour in neglect
Department of Neurology, University of Alabama Birmingham, USA
Correspondence to:
Correspondence to: Britt Anderson, MD, Department of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294–0007, USA
Subjects with left hemispatial neglect frequently demonstrate an array of abnormal behaviours on line bisection tasks. They misbisect long horizontal lines to the right of true midline. They bisect short lines to the left of true midline. They exaggerate the left-sided length of lines when placing the endpoints for ‘invisible’ lines, and they underestimate the length of the left side of long lines that are shown to them bisected accurately. No current theory of neglect explains all these features of line bisection behaviour. A mathematical model of line bisection behaviour. in neglect is presented that proposes that subjects bisect lines at the point where they perceive the ‘salience’ of the two line segments created by their bisection mark to be equal. Salience is determined by the brain's attentional systems which map salience amplitude to spatial position following a bell shaped distribution. Right hemisphere strokes simulated by decreasing the ’height‘ and ’breadth‘ of the right hemisphere salience to position function produced all of the above features of clinical neglect subjects' line bisection behaviour. Neglect may be conceived of as damage to brain systems performing mappings between stimulus characteristics (such as spatial location) and salience.
neglect; cognition; stroke; right hemisphere syndrome
Received September 14, 1995. Revised December 13, 1995. Accepted January 19, 1996.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. Vandenberghe, S. Geeraerts, P. Molenberghs, C. Lafosse, M. Vandenbulcke, K. Peeters, R. Peeters, P. Van Hecke, and G. A. Orban Attentional responses to unattended stimuli in human parietal cortex Brain, December 1, 2005; 128(12): 2843 - 2857. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. T. de Schotten, M. Urbanski, H. Duffau, E. Volle, R. Levy, B. Dubois, and P. Bartolomeo Direct Evidence for a Parietal-Frontal Pathway Subserving Spatial Awareness in Humans Science, September 30, 2005; 309(5744): 2226 - 2228. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Doricchi, P. Guariglia, F. Figliozzi, M. Silvetti, G. Bruno, and M. Gasparini Causes of cross-over in unilateral neglect: between-group comparisons, within-patient dissociations and eye movements Brain, June 1, 2005; 128(6): 1386 - 1406. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. R. Riestra, K. B. Womack, G. P. Crucian, and K. M. Heilman Is the middle between both halves?: Midpoint location and segment size estimation in neglect Neurology, November 26, 2002; 59(10): 1580 - 1584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. H. Weiss, J. C. Marshall, G. Wunderlich, L. Tellmann, P. W. Halligan, H.-J. Freund, K. Zilles, and G. R. Fink Neural consequences of acting in near versus far space: a physiological basis for clinical dissociations Brain, December 1, 2000; 123(12): 2531 - 2541. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Doricchi and P. Angelelli Misrepresentation of horizontal space in left unilateral neglect: Role of hemianopia Neurology, June 1, 1999; 52(9): 1845 - 1845. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|