Suppr超能文献

病灶同侧与对侧忽视取决于注意力需求。

Ipsilesional versus contralesional neglect depends on attentional demands.

作者信息

Na D L, Adair J C, Choi S H, Seo D W, Kang Y, Heilman K M

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Cortex. 2000 Sep;36(4):455-67. doi: 10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70532-x.

Abstract

Right hemisphere injuries often produce contralesional hemispatial neglect (CN). In contrast to CN, some patients with right hemisphere damage can also show so-called ipsilesional neglect (IN). Previous reports found that patients tend to show IN on line bisection tasks but CN on other tasks such as target cancellation. To learn why these two tasks induce different spatial biases in patients with right hemisphere injury, conventional (i.e. solid) line bisection was compared with two novel bisection tasks consisting of horizontally aligned strings of characters. The subjects' task was to mark a target character that was at or closest to the true midpoint of the simulated line. Four of the 5 patients showed a dissociation whereby IN occurred for solid lines while CN was observed on character lines. The two patients assessed with an antisaccade paradigm showed a "visual grasp" for leftward stimuli. The present results suggest that neglect on line bisection may reflect two opposing forces, an approach behavior or "visual grasp" toward left hemispace and an attentional bias toward right hemispace.

摘要

右半球损伤通常会导致对侧半空间忽视(CN)。与CN不同的是,一些右半球受损的患者也可能表现出所谓的同侧忽视(IN)。先前的报告发现,患者在直线二等分任务中倾向于表现出IN,但在其他任务(如目标删除)中则表现出CN。为了了解为什么这两项任务会在右半球损伤患者中引发不同的空间偏差,将传统的(即实心)直线二等分与两项由水平排列的字符串组成的新型二等分任务进行了比较。受试者的任务是标记位于模拟线真正中点或最接近真正中点的目标字符。5名患者中有4名表现出分离现象,即对实线出现IN,而在字符线上观察到CN。用反扫视范式评估的两名患者对向左的刺激表现出“视觉抓取”。目前的结果表明,直线二等分中的忽视可能反映了两种相反的力量,一种是对左半空间的趋近行为或“视觉抓取”,另一种是对右半空间的注意力偏差。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验