Suppr超能文献

寻找最佳刺激。

A search for the optimal stimulus.

作者信息

Mennemeier M, Rapcsak S Z, Dillon M, Vezey E

机构信息

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama.

出版信息

Brain Cogn. 1998 Aug;37(3):439-59. doi: 10.1006/brcg.1998.1007.

Abstract

How do stimulus size and item number relate to the magnitude and direction of error on center estimation and line cancellation tests? How might this relationship inform theories concerning spatial neglect? These questions were addressed by testing twenty patients with right hemisphere lesions, eleven with left hemisphere lesions and eleven normal control subjects on multiple versions of center estimation and line cancellation tests. Patients who made large errors on these tests also demonstrated an optimal or pivotal stimulus value, i.e., a particular size center estimation test or number of lines on cancellation that either minimized error magnitude relative to other size stimuli (optimal) or marked the boundary between normal and abnormal performance (pivotal). Patients with right hemisphere lesions made increasingly greater errors on the center estimation test as stimuli were both larger and smaller than the optimal value, whereas those with left hemisphere lesions made greater errors as stimuli were smaller than a pivotal value. In normal subjects, the direction of errors on center estimation stimuli shifted from the right of true center to the left as stimuli decreased in size (i.e., the crossover effect). Right hemisphere lesions exaggerated this effect, whereas left hemisphere lesions diminished and possibly reversed the direction of crossover. Error direction did not change as a function of stimulus value on cancellation tests. The demonstration of optimal and pivotal stimulus values indicates that performances on center estimation and cancellation tests in neglect are only relative to the stimuli used. In light of other studies, our findings indicate that patients with spatial neglect grossly overestimate the size of small stimuli and underestimate the size of large stimuli, that crossover represents an "apparent" shift in error direction that actually results from normally occurring errors in size perception, and that the left hemisphere is specialized for one aspect of size estimation, whereas the right performs dual roles.

摘要

刺激大小和项目数量与中心估计和直线划消测试中误差的大小及方向有怎样的关系?这种关系如何为有关空间忽视的理论提供信息?通过对20名右半球损伤患者、11名左半球损伤患者和11名正常对照受试者进行多个版本的中心估计和直线划消测试,这些问题得到了探讨。在这些测试中出现较大误差的患者也表现出一个最佳或关键刺激值,即特定大小的中心估计测试或划消测试中的线条数量,相对于其他大小的刺激,该值要么使误差幅度最小化(最佳),要么标志着正常与异常表现之间的界限(关键)。右半球损伤的患者在中心估计测试中,当刺激大于或小于最佳值时,误差会越来越大,而左半球损伤的患者在刺激小于关键值时,误差会更大。在正常受试者中,随着刺激大小减小,中心估计刺激的误差方向从真实中心的右侧移至左侧(即交叉效应)。右半球损伤会夸大这种效应,而左半球损伤则会减弱并可能反转交叉方向。在划消测试中,误差方向不会随刺激值而变化。最佳和关键刺激值的证明表明,忽视患者在中心估计和划消测试中的表现仅相对于所使用的刺激而言。根据其他研究,我们的发现表明,空间忽视患者严重高估小刺激的大小,低估大刺激的大小,交叉效应代表误差方向的“明显”转变,实际上是由正常的大小感知误差导致的,并且左半球专门负责大小估计的一个方面,而右半球则发挥双重作用。

相似文献

1
A search for the optimal stimulus.寻找最佳刺激。
Brain Cogn. 1998 Aug;37(3):439-59. doi: 10.1006/brcg.1998.1007.
2
Crossover by line length and spatial location.按线长和空间位置交叉。
Brain Cogn. 2001 Dec;47(3):412-22. doi: 10.1006/brcg.2001.1317.
5
Visuospatial neglect: the ultimate deconstruction?
Brain Cogn. 1998 Aug;37(3):419-38. doi: 10.1006/brcg.1998.1006.
8
Reading direction and spatial neglect.阅读方向与空间忽视。
Cortex. 2002 Feb;38(1):59-67. doi: 10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70638-5.

引用本文的文献

4
Task-related modulation of visual neglect in cancellation tasks.取消任务中与任务相关的视觉忽视调制。
Neuropsychologia. 2009 Jan;47(1):91-103. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.08.020. Epub 2008 Aug 26.
5
Bias in magnitude estimation following left hemisphere injury.左半球损伤后大小估计偏差
Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(8):1406-12. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.12.006. Epub 2006 Jan 24.
7
Spatial neglect.
Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2001 Nov;1(6):541-6. doi: 10.1007/s11910-001-0059-x.
8
Crossover by line length and spatial location.按线长和空间位置交叉。
Brain Cogn. 2001 Dec;47(3):412-22. doi: 10.1006/brcg.2001.1317.

本文引用的文献

1
Impaired visual search in patients with unilateral neglect: an oculographic analysis.
Neuropsychologia. 1997 Nov;35(11):1445-58. doi: 10.1016/s0028-3932(97)00058-4.
3
A mathematical model of line bisection behaviour in neglect.
Brain. 1996 Jun;119 ( Pt 3):841-50. doi: 10.1093/brain/119.3.841.
4
Fatigue versus disengagement in unilateral neglect.单侧忽视中的疲劳与脱离接触
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993 Jun;56(6):717-9. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.56.6.717.
7
Cross-over, completion and confabulation in unilateral spatial neglect.
Brain. 1995 Apr;118 ( Pt 2):455-65. doi: 10.1093/brain/118.2.455.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验