↓ Skip to main content

“Left Neglected,” but Only in Far Space: Spatial Biases in Healthy Participants Revealed in a Visually Guided Grasping Task

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
“Left Neglected,” but Only in Far Space: Spatial Biases in Healthy Participants Revealed in a Visually Guided Grasping Task
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2014.00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie de Bruin, Devon C. Bryant, Claudia L. R. Gonzalez

Abstract

Hemispatial neglect is a common outcome of stroke that is characterized by the inability to orient toward, and attend to stimuli in contralesional space. It is established that hemispatial neglect has a perceptual component, however, the presence and severity of motor impairments is controversial. Establishing the nature of space use and spatial biases during visually guided actions amongst healthy individuals is critical to understanding the presence of visuomotor deficits in patients with neglect. Accordingly, three experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of object spatial location on patterns of grasping. Experiment 1 required right-handed participants to reach and grasp for blocks in order to construct 3D models. The blocks were scattered on a tabletop divided into equal size quadrants: left near, left far, right near, and right far. Identical sets of building blocks were available in each quadrant. Space use was dynamic, with participants initially grasping blocks from right near space and tending to "neglect" left far space until the final stages of the task. Experiment 2 repeated the protocol with left-handed participants. Remarkably, left-handed participants displayed a similar pattern of space use to right-handed participants. In Experiment 3 eye movements were examined to investigate whether "neglect" for grasping in left far reachable space had its origins in attentional biases. It was found that patterns of eye movements mirrored patterns of reach-to-grasp movements. We conclude that there are spatial biases during visually guided grasping, specifically, a tendency to neglect left far reachable space, and that this "neglect" is attentional in origin. The results raise the possibility that visuomotor impairments reported among patients with right hemisphere lesions when working in contralesional space may result in part from this inherent tendency to "neglect" left far space irrespective of the presence of unilateral visuospatial neglect.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 35 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 16%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 46%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Linguistics 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 6 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2014.
All research outputs
#12,830,739
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,810
of 11,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,020
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#9
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 305,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.