MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101658753 · doi:10.1017/s1355617711001585

Dorsal Stream Contributions to Perceptual Asymmetries

2011· article· en· W2101658753 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole A. Thomas, Oliver Schneider, Carl Gutwin, Lorin Elias

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemispatial neglectPsychologyAttentional biasVisual fieldDorsumPerceptionCognitive psychologyAudiologyMotion perceptionNeglectNeuroscienceCognitionMedicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurologically normal individuals show a bias toward the left side of space, referred to as pseudoneglect due to its similarity to clinical hemispatial neglect. The left bias appears to be stronger in the lower visual field during free-viewing, which could result from preferential dorsal stream processing. The current experiments used modified greyscales tasks, incorporating motion and isoluminant color, to explore whether targeting dorsal or ventral stream processing influenced the strength of the left bias. It was expected that the left bias would be stronger on the motion task than on a task incorporating isoluminant color. In Study 1, similar left biases were observed during prolonged viewing for luminance, motion and red, but not green color. The unexpected finding of a leftward bias for red under prolonged viewing was replicated in Study 2. A leftward bias for motion was also evident during 150 ms viewing in Study 2. In Study 3, the left bias was not apparent when using a blue/yellow condition, suggesting the left bias for red under prolonged viewing was likely unique to red. Furthermore, the leftward bias for red disappeared under brief viewing conditions. It is suggested that dorsal stream processing likely underlies visual field differences in pseudoneglect.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International Neuropsychological SocietySame topicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric DysfunctionFrench-language works237,207