1982
DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(82)90041-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hemispheric differences in the neural processing of stimulus location and type: Effects of selective attention on visual evoked potentials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

18
101
1
2

Year Published

1983
1983
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 220 publications
(122 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
18
101
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…As in the present study, Campanella et al (2002) utilized the visual oddball task in detecting changes in facial expression and found that occipital N2 was enhanced around 300 ms after stimulus onset in response to rare target stimuli. However, Harter et al (1982) reported that processing negativity corresponding to intraspatial attention is lateralized to the left hemisphere, which contradicts the right hemisphere lateralization of N2 in this study. As right hemisphere predominance of gaze processing has been reported elsewhere (Pelphrey, Singerman, Allison, & McCarthy, 2003;Puce, Allison, Bentin, Gore, & McCarthy, 1998;Watanabe et al, 2002), the N2 seem to correspond to face-specific processing rather than domain-general selective attention.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As in the present study, Campanella et al (2002) utilized the visual oddball task in detecting changes in facial expression and found that occipital N2 was enhanced around 300 ms after stimulus onset in response to rare target stimuli. However, Harter et al (1982) reported that processing negativity corresponding to intraspatial attention is lateralized to the left hemisphere, which contradicts the right hemisphere lateralization of N2 in this study. As right hemisphere predominance of gaze processing has been reported elsewhere (Pelphrey, Singerman, Allison, & McCarthy, 2003;Puce, Allison, Bentin, Gore, & McCarthy, 1998;Watanabe et al, 2002), the N2 seem to correspond to face-specific processing rather than domain-general selective attention.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…It is also possible that N2 reflects selective visual attention to targets, as in 'processing negativity' (Harter, Aine, & Schroeder, 1982;Näätänen, 1982) or 'selection negativity' (Czigler & Csibra, 1990, elicited by target detection and distributed to the occipital area. As in the present study, Campanella et al (2002) utilized the visual oddball task in detecting changes in facial expression and found that occipital N2 was enhanced around 300 ms after stimulus onset in response to rare target stimuli.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Right-hemisphere superiority in certain visuospatial tasks such as the perception of line orientation (Fontenot & Benton, 1972) is usually interpreted in terms of asymmetry among higher centers (Fried, Mateer, Ojemann, Wohns, & Fedio, 1982;Moscovitch, 1979). However, these centers might act by feeding back onto the primary visual cortex to alter its functional properties (Bridgeman, 1982;Dobson, 1980;Harter, Aine, & Schroeder, 1982). In the present experiments, the simple perception of vertical gratings was studied as a first step in clarifying these questions.…”
mentioning
confidence: 90%
“…For example, Harter, Aine, and Schroeder (1982) reported an N200 component that was seen to reflect attention to spatial or shape properties of stimuli. Hillyard, Miinte, and Neville (1985) observed a parieto-occipital N 190 component that was attenuated for unattended stimuli but also appeared independent of the direction of voluntary attention when the stimulus was presented in a hitherto empty visual field.…”
Section: Erp Amplitudesmentioning
confidence: 99%