The influence of stimulus proximity on judgments of spatial relationships in patients with chronic unilateral right or left hemisphere stroke.
The influence of stimulus proximity on judgments of spatial relationships in patients with chronic unilateral right or left hemisphere stroke.
复制标题
刺激接近度对慢性单侧右半球或左半球卒中患者空间关系判断的影响。
DOI：
10.1080/13803395.2014.940855
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Heilman,KennethM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Williamson,JohnB;Haque,Salsabil;Burtis,Brandon;Harciarek,Michal;Lamb,Damon;Zilli,Eduardo;Heilman,KennethM
目的了解慢性右半球损伤（RHD）和左半球损伤（LHD）对近端和远端空间注意偏倚的影响。先前的研究表明，左半球主要负责近端空间，右半球主要负责远端空间。本研究的目的是对比慢性LHD和RHD患者近端和远端行切线术。设计/方法参与者为32名LHD和26名RHD患者，他们在测试前平均持续中风3.4年，同时还有9名健康对照者。受试者尝试在近端空间和远端空间分别平分30条线。结果RHD和LHD患者在近端空间的对侧偏大于远端空间（LHD患者向右偏，RHD患者向左偏）。与对照组相比，LHD患者在近端空间差异最大，RHD患者在远端空间差异最大。结论距离对RHD和LHD患者空间判断的影响是相反的。相对而言，两组患者在近端空间对侧平分线，在远端空间同侧（相对于近端）平分线。RHD患者的近端和远端判断差异最大。造成这些差异的原因尚不清楚。然而，这些偏差可能与注意或行动意图的掌握或习得的补偿策略有关，接近可能会增加注意或意图的分配，从而增强这种掌握或使用这种补偿策略。另一个影响因素可能是左右脑半球分别支配近端和远端空间呈现的信息。
ObjectiveThis was to learn how chronic right hemispheric damage (RHD) versus left hemispheric damage (LHD) may influence attentional biases in proximal and distal space.BackgroundPrior research has suggested that the left hemisphere primarily attends to proximal space and the right hemisphere to distal space. The purpose of this study was to contrast line bisection performed in proximal versus distal space in patients with chronic LHD versus RHD.Design/methodParticipants were 32 LHD and 26 RHD patients who sustained a stroke a mean of 3.4 years prior to testing, along with 9 healthy controls. Subjects attempted to bisect 30 lines in proximal space and 30 lines in distal space.ResultsPatients with both RHD and LHD had a greater contralesional bias in proximal than distal space (rightward bias for patients with LHD and leftward bias for patients with RHD). Compared to controls, patients with LHD were most different in proximal space, and patients with RHD were most different in distal space.ConclusionsProximity appears to influence spatial judgments of patients with RHD and LHD in an opposing manner. Relatively, both patient groups bisect lines contralesionally in proximal space and ipsilesionally (relative to proximal) in distal space. Patients with RHD have the biggest difference between their proximal and distal judgments. The reason for these differences is unknown. However, these biases may be related to an attentional or action-intentional grasp or a learned compensation strategy, and proximity may increase the allocation of attention or intention and thereby enhance this grasp or use of this compensation strategy. Another contributing factor may be dominance of the left and right hemisphere for information presented in proximal and distal space, respectively.