Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T09:34:01.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Usability of a theory of visual attention (TVA) for parameter-based measurement of attention II: Evidence from two patients with frontal or parietal damage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2005

PETER BUBLAK ,
KATHRIN FINKE ,
JOSEPH KRUMMENACHER ,
RUDOLF PREGER ,
SØREN KYLLINGSBÆK ,
HERMANN J. MÜLLER  and
WERNER X. SCHNEIDER
PETER BUBLAK
Affiliation:
General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany
KATHRIN FINKE
Affiliation:
General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany
JOSEPH KRUMMENACHER
Affiliation:
General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany
RUDOLF PREGER
Affiliation:
Neurological Rehabilitation Center, Kipfenberg, Germany
SØREN KYLLINGSBÆK
Affiliation:
Center for Visual Cognition, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
HERMANN J. MÜLLER
Affiliation:
General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany
WERNER X. SCHNEIDER
Affiliation:
General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Based on a ‘Theory of Visual Attention’ (TVA), whole and partial report of brief letter arrays is presented as a diagnostic tool to estimate four clinically significant attentional components: perceptual processing speed, visual working memory storage capacity, efficiency of top-down control, and spatial distribution of attention. The procedure used was short enough to be applicable within a standard clinical setting. Two brain-damaged patients, selected based on lesion location and neuropsychological test profile, were compared to a control group of 22 healthy subjects. One patient with a right inferior parietal lesion showed a pattern of non-spatially and spatially lateralized attention deficits that is typically found in neglect patients. Results from the second patient supported the decisive role of superior frontal brain structures for top-down control of visual attention. This double dissociation supports the hypothesis that, even with a short version of whole and partial report, valid and meaningful results can be obtained in the neuropsychological assessment of attention deficits. The potential and constraints of TVA-based parameter estimation for the clinical application are discussed. (JINS, 2005, 11, 843–854.)

Keywords

Perceptual disordersHemispatial neglectNeuropsychologyNeuropsychological testsAnterior cerebral arteryMiddle cerebral arteryPrefrontal cortexParietal lobe
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 11 , Issue 7 , November 2005 , pp. 843 - 854
Copyright
© 2005 The International Neuropsychological Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bäumler, G. (1985). Farbe-Wort-Interferenztest (FWIT) nach J. R. Stroop. Goettingen: Hogrefe.
Brickenkamp, R. (1994). Test d2. Aufmerksamkeits-Belastungs-Test. Goettingen: Hogrefe.
Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523–547.Google Scholar
Corbetta, M. & Shulman, G.L. (2002). Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3, 201–215.Google Scholar
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 1–68.Google Scholar
Desimone, R. & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 18, 193–222.Google Scholar
Duncan, J., Bundesen, C., Olson, A., Humphreys, G., Chavda, S., & Shibuya, H. (1999). Systematic analysis of deficits in visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 450–478.Google Scholar
Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R.J. (1998). An Introduction to the Bootstrap. London: Chapman & Hall.
Ferber, S., Danckert, J., Joanisse, M., Goltz, H.C., & Goodale, M.A. (2003). Eye movements tell only half the story. Neurology, 60, 1826–1829.Google Scholar
Finke, K., Bublak, P., Krummenacher, J., Kyllingsbæk, S., Müller, H.J., & Schneider, W.X. (2005). Usability of a theory of visual attention (TVA) for parameter-based measurement of attention I: Evidence from normal subjects. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 11, 832–842.Google Scholar
Habekost, T. & Bundesen, K. (2003). Patient assessment based on a theory of visual attention (TVA): Subtle deficits after a right frontal-subcortical lesion. Neuropsychologia, 1578, 1–18.Google Scholar
Härting, C., Markowitsch, H.J., Neufeld, H., Calabrese, P., Deisinger, K., & Kessler, J. (2000). Wechsler Gedächtnis Test—Revidierte Fassung: Deutsche Adaptation der revidierten Fassung der Wechsler Memory Scale. Bern: Verlag Hans Huber.
Huber, H.P. (1973). Psychometrische Einzelfalldiagnostik. Weinheim: Beltz.
Husain, M. & Rorden, C. (2003). Non-spatially lateralized mechanisms in hemispatial neglect. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 26–36.Google Scholar
Jalas, M.J., Lindell, J.A., Brunila, T., Tenovuo, O., & Hämäläinen, H. (2002). Initial rightward orienting bias in clinical tasks: Normal subjects and right hemispheric stroke patients with and without neglect. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24, 479–490.Google Scholar
Kyllingsbæk, S. (in press). Modeling visual attention. Behavior Research Methods.
Lehrl, S., Triebig, G., & Fischer, B. (1995). Multiple choice vocabulary test MWT as a valid and short test to estimate premorbid intelligence. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 91, 335–345.Google Scholar
Luck, S.J. & Vogel, E.K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279–281.Google Scholar
Mort, D.J., Malhotra, P., Mannan, S.K., Rorden, C., Pambakian, A., Kennard, C., & Husain, M. (2003). The anatomy of visual neglect. Brain, 126, 1986–1997.Google Scholar
Oswald, W.D. & Roth, E. (1987). Der Zahlen-Verbindungs-Test. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
Peers, P.V., Ludwig, C.J.H., Rorden, C., Cusack, R., Bonfiglioli, C., Bundesen, C., Driver, J., Antoun, N., & Duncan, J. (2005). Attentional functions of parietal and frontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex. Advanced online publication, February.Google Scholar
Stuss, D.T., Floden, D., Alexander, M.P., Levine, B., & Katz, D. (2001). Stroop performance in focal lesion patients: dissociation of processes and frontal lobe lesion location. Neuropsychologia, 39, 771–786.Google Scholar
Wilson, B., Cockburn, J., & Halligan, P. (1987). Behavioural Inattention Test. Suffolk: Thames Valley Test Company.
Zimmermann, P. & Fimm, B. (1997). Test for Attentional Performance (TAP). Herzogenrath: Psytest.