12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Relationship between visuospatial attention and paw preference in dogs

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The relationship between visuospatial attention and paw preference was investigated in domestic dogs. Visuospatial attention was evaluated using a food detection task that closely matches the so-called “cancellation” task used in human studies. Paw preference was estimated by quantifying the dog’s use of forepaws to hold a puzzle feeder device (namely the “Kong”) while eating its content. Results clearly revealed a strong relationship between visuospatial attention bias and motor laterality, with a left-visuospatial bias in the left-pawed group, a right-visuospatial bias in the right-pawed group and with the absence of significant visuospatial attention bias in ambi-pawed subjects. The current findings are the first evidence for the presence of a relationship between motor lateralization and visuospatial attentional mechanisms in a mammal species besides humans.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A cortical network for directed attention and unilateral neglect.

          Unilateral neglect reflects a disturbance in the spatial distribution of directed attention. A review of unilateral neglect syndromes in monkeys and humans suggests that four cerebral regions provide an integrated network for the modulation of directed attention within extrapersonal space. Each component region has a unique functional role that reflects its profile of anatomical connectivity, and each gives rise to a different clinical type of unilateral neglect when damaged. A posterior parietal component provides an internal sensory map and perhaps also a mechanism for modifying the extent of synaptic space devoted to specific portions of the external world; a limbic component in the cingulate gyrus regulates the spatial distribution of motivational valence; a frontal component coordinates the motor programs for exploration, scanning, reaching, and fixating; and a reticular component provides the underlying level of arousal and vigilance. This hypothetical network requires at least three complementary and interacting representations of extrapersonal space: a sensory representation in posterior parietal cortex, a schema for distributing exploratory movements in frontal cortex, and a motivational map in the cingulate cortex. Lesions in only one component of this network yield partial unilateral neglect syndromes, while those that encompass all the components result in profound deficits that transcend the mass effect of the larger lesion. This network approach to the localization of complex functions offers an alternative to more extreme approaches, some of which stress an exclusive concentration of function within individual centers in the brain and others which advocate a more uniform (equipotential or holistic) distribution. In human beings, unilateral neglect syndromes are more frequent and severe after lesions in the right hemisphere. Also, right hemisphere mechanisms appear more effective in the execution of attentional tasks. Furthermore, the attentional functions of the right hemisphere span both hemispaces, while the left hemisphere seems to contain the neural apparatus mostly for contralateral attention. This evidence indicates that the right hemisphere of dextrals has a functional specialization for the distribution of directed attention within extrapersonal space.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effects of parietal injury on covert orienting of attention.

            The cognitive act of shifting attention from one place in the visual field to another can be accomplished covertly without muscular changes. The act can be viewed in terms of three internal mental operations: disengagement of attention from its current focus, moving attention to the target, and engagement of the target. Our results show that damage to the parietal lobe produces a deficit in the disengage operation when the target is contralateral to the lesion. Effects may also be found on engagement with the target. The effects of brain injury on disengagement of attention seem to be unique to the parietal lobe and do not appear to occur with our frontal, midbrain, and temporal control series. These results confirm the close connection between parietal lobes and selective attention suggested by single cell recording. They indicate more specifically the role that parietal function has on attention and suggest one mechanism of the effects of parietal lesions reported in clinical neurology.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pseudoneglect: a review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks.

              An exhaustive qualitative (vote-counting) review is conducted of the literature concerning visual and non-visual line bisection in neurologically normal subject populations. Although most of these studies report a leftward bisection error (i.e., pseudoneglect), considerable between-study variability and inconsistency characterize this literature. A meta-analysis of this same literature is performed in which the total quantitative data set, comprising 73 studies (or sub-studies) and 2191 subjects, is analyzed with respect to 26 performance factors. The meta-analytic results indicate a significant leftward bisection error in neurologically normal subjects, with an overall effect size of between -0.37 and -0.44 (depending on integration method), which is significantly modulated to varying degrees by a number of additional task or subject variables. For example, visual bisection tasks, midsagittal-pointing tasks and tactile bisection tasks all lead to leftward errors, while kinesthetic tasks result in rightward errors. Tachistoscopic forced-choice testing methods reveal much greater estimates of bisection error (effect size = -1.32) than do manual method-of-adjustment procedures (effect size= -0.40). Subject age significantly modulates line bisection performance such that older subjects err significantly rightward compared to younger subjects, and to veridical line midpoint. Male subjects make slightly larger leftward errors than do female subjects. Handedness has a small effect on bisection errors, with dextrals erring slightly further to the left than sinistral subjects. The hand used to perform manual bisection tasks modulated performance, where use of the left hand lead to greater leftward errors than those obtained using the right hand. One of the most significant factors modulating bisection error is the direction in which subjects initiate motor scanning (with either eye or hand), where a left-to-right scan pattern leads to large leftward errors while a right-to-left scan pattern leads to rightward errors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group
                2045-2322
                22 August 2016
                2016
                : 6
                : 31682
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Veterinary Medicine, Section of Behavioral Sciences and Animal Bioethics,University of Bari “Aldo Moro” , Italy
                Author notes
                Article
                srep31682
                10.1038/srep31682
                4992877
                27545695
                c14a6728-3ab5-48a6-8c47-b7d0a94d47ee
                Copyright © 2016, The Author(s)

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 08 March 2016
                : 25 July 2016
                Categories
                Article

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article