Elsevier

Cortex

Volume 38, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 253-257
Cortex

Science Discussion Topic
Spatial Awareness: A Function of the Posterior Parietal Lobe?

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70654-3Get rights and content

First page preview

First page preview
Click to open first page preview

References (38)

  • MP Young et al.

    Models of paradoxical lesion effects and rules of inference for imputing function to structure in the brain

    Neurocomputing

    (1999)
  • A Berti et al.

    Visual processing without awareness: Evidence from unilateral neglect

    Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

    (1992)
  • G Bottini et al.

    Directional hypokinesia in spatial hemineglect

    Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry

    (1992)
  • HB Coslett et al.

    Directional hypokinesia and hemispatial inattention in neglect

    Brain

    (1990)
  • F Doricchi et al.

    Misrepresentation of horizontal space in left unilateral neglect: Role of hemianopia

    Neurology

    (1999)
  • JM Ferro et al.

    Posterior internal capsule infarction associated with neglect

    Archives of Neurology

    (1984)
  • JM Ferro et al.

    Subcortical neglect: Quantitation, anatomy, and recovery

    Neurology

    (1987)
  • B Fierro et al.

    Contralateral neglect induced by right posterior parietal rTMS in healthy subjects

    Neuroreport

    (2000)
  • GR Fink et al.

    Line bisection judgments implicate right parietal cortex as assessed by fMRI

    Neurology

    (2000)
  • Cited by (36)

    • Differences in numeric, verbal, and spatial reasoning between engineering and literature students through a neurocognitive lens

      2020, Cognitive Systems Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      In one study, individuals who possessed strong spatial reasoning abilities tended to gravitate towards and excel in scientific and technical fields such as the physical sciences, engineering, and computer science; however, standard IQ tests tend not to measure this ability (Wai, Lubinski, Benbow, & Steiger, 2010). Numerous studies have indicated that visuospatial talents are associated with activations of the spatial processing network, identified primarily in the right brain hemisphere, particularly the superior temporal and posterior parietal cortices (e.g., visual fields 18 and 19) (Ivanitskii et al., 2015; Kalbfleisch & Gillmarten, 2013; Liang et al., 2017; Marshall, Fink, Halligan, & Giuseppe, 2002; Yao, Lin, King, Liu, & Liang, 2017). Although scholars have suggested that the activated regions triggered by short-term spatial memory differ from those triggered by long-term memory (Byrne, Becker, & Burgess, 2007), Burgess (2008) indicated that a neural-level model of spatial cognition can be constructed, where the hippocampus and medial temporal lobe provide allocentric environmental representations, the parietal lobe provides egocentric representations, and the retrosplenial cortex and parieto-occipital sulcus enable both types of representations to interact.

    • Both dorsal and ventral attention network nodes are implicated in exogenously driven visuospatial anticipation

      2019, Cortex
      Citation Excerpt :

      Casual directional influences between these two networks have been demonstrated before by analysis of functional and effective connectivity in fMRI (Vossel et al., 2012; Wen, Yao, Liu, & Ding, 2012) and combined TMS-fMRI (Leitao, Thielscher, Tunnerhoff, & Noppeney, 2015). Furthermore, anatomo-clinical data have revealed that (re-)orienting deficits in spatial neglect, which usually occur after damage of the right ventral network, can be accompanied by lesions in the dorsal system (Halligan, Fink, Marshall, & Vallar, 2003; Marshall, Fink, Halligan, & Vallar, 2002). Interestingly, the same deficits have been reported after focal IPS lesions without ventral damage (Gillebert et al., 2011).

    • Revisiting the Landmark Task as a tool for studying hemispheric specialization: What's really right?

      2019, Neuropsychologia
      Citation Excerpt :

      A recent study comparing the robustness and reliability of several fMRI tasks for assessing visuospatial processing concluded that, while not perfect in test-retest reliability of activations at the single-voxel level, the LT was the most robust and reliable, reproducibly determining hemispheric dominance in 93% of participants (Schuster et al., 2017). Notably, different researchers ascribe LT activations to somewhat different visual-spatial functions, using terms that include “(visuo)spatial attention” (Flöel et al., 2005a; Cai et al., 2013), “spatial processing” (Jansen et al., 2005; Badzakova-Trajkov et al., 2010), “visuospatial information processing” (Waberski et al., 2008), “spatial awareness” (Marshall et al., 2002), “visuo-spatial function” (Lux et al., 2008), “visual attention”, “visuospatial processing”, and “visuospatial functions” (Rosch et al., 2012). While the difference among these terms may seem slight, we would argue that spatial attention can be characterized as separate from spatial representation.

    • Prose Reading in Neglect

      2014, Brain and Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      The anatomical substrates of PRN are centred on the insula, putamen, superior temporal lobe and Rolandic operculum. These locations are mostly overlapping with those reported by Karnath and colleagues as typical core lesions associated with USN (Karnath, Ferber, & Himmelbach, 2001; Karnath & Himmelbach, 2002; Karnath, Himmelbach, & Rorden, 2002; see also e.g., Chechlacz et al., 2013; but see for a different view e.g., Marshall, Fink, Halligan, & Vallar, 2002). However, no specific lesion emerged which differentiates PRN+ from PRN−.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text