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

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.)

[1]  N. Cowan.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[2]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Usability of a theory of visual attention (TVA) for parameter-based measurement of attention I: Evidence from normal subjects , 2005, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

[3]  E. Thelen,et al.  The dynamics of embodiment: A field theory of infant perseverative reaching , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[4]  Claus Bundesen,et al.  Patient assessment based on a theory of visual attention (TVA): subtle deficits after a right frontal-subcortical lesion , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[5]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[6]  R. Desimone,et al.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

[7]  G. Bäumler,et al.  Farbe-Wort-Interferenztest (FWIT) nach J. R. Stroop , 1985 .

[8]  M. Kenward,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 2007 .

[9]  D. Stuss,et al.  Stroop performance in focal lesion patients: dissociation of processes and frontal lobe lesion location , 2001, Neuropsychologia.

[10]  G Humphreys,et al.  Systematic analysis of deficits in visual attention. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  C. Bundesen.  A theory of visual attention. , 1990, Psychological review.

[12]  Chris Rorden,et al.  Non-spatially lateralized mechanisms in hemispatial neglect , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[13]  Edward K. Vogel,et al.  The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions , 1997, Nature.

[14]  M. Goodale,et al.  Eye movements tell only half the story1 , 2003 .

[15]  C. Kennard,et al.  The anatomy of visual neglect. , 2003, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[16]  G. Triebig,et al.  Multiple choice vocabulary test MWT as a valid and short test to estimate premorbid intelligence , 1995, Acta neurologica Scandinavica.

[17]  Heikki Hamalainen,et al.  Initial Rightward Orienting Bias in Clinical Tasks: Normal Subjects and Right Hemispheric Stroke Patients With and Without Neglect , 2002, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[18]  S. Kyllingsbaek,et al.  Modeling visual attention. , 2006, Behavior research methods.

[19]  John Duncan,et al.  Attentional functions of parietal and frontal cortex. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[20]  M. A. Goodale,et al.  Eye movements tell only half the story , 2003, Neurology.