Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 227

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Deficits of visual attention and saccadic eye movements after lesions of parietooccipital cortex in monkeys

Lynch, J. C., McLaren, J. W.·1989·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

1. Visual attention is often profoundly disturbed in humans after damage to the cortex of the posterior parietal lobe, particularly of the minor hemisphere, with some patients being totally unaware of visual stimuli in the hemifield of extrapersonal space contralateral to the cortical damage. This severe form of visual inattention is usually called contralateral neglect and has occasionally been reported following posterior parietal lesions in monkeys. However, in monkeys, only qualitative observations have been published and those reports are not in agreement concerning the severity of the deficit. The present experiments were designed to measure quantitatively the amount of disruption of selective visual attention which is produced by lesions of posterior parietal and parietooccipital cortical lesions in monkeys. 2. Five monkeys were trained to visually fixate and follow with their gaze a small visual stimulus as it suddenly moved varying distances (8, 16, or 24 degrees) from the midline into the left or right visual hemifields. Two animals then received a unilateral cortical lesion limited to the inferior parietal lobule (IPL). Three animals received unilateral lesions which included both the inferior parietal lobule and a portion of adjacent dorsal prestriate cortex (IPL-PS). 3. Visual inattention is commonly divided into two levels of severity. The more severe form, contralateral neglect, is the complete absence of behavioral response to a stimulus in the visual field contralateral to hemisphere damage. The less severe deficit, usually called visual extinction, is a tendency to ignore the contralateral of two visual stimuli when they appear simultaneously and symmetrically placed with respect to the center of the subject's surroundings. The five monkeys in this study were tested on a stimulus paradigm which simultaneously measured the severity of visual neglect and also the amount and duration of visual extinction which were produced by the cortical lesions. 4. All monkeys displayed contralateral visual extinction after unilateral posterior parietal or parietooccipital lesions. Three of the five monkeys showed a reversal of the visual extinction after a second, symmetrical lesion was placed in the opposite hemisphere. No monkey showed evidence of full-blown contralateral neglect after lesions limited to the parietooccipital cortex, either in the formal testing situation or during informal neurological examinations. The severity of the observed inattention did not appear to be related to the size of the cortical lesions.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1989.61.1.74

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 227

Metadata

Authors
Lynch, J. C., & McLaren, J. W.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1989-01-01
Volume
61
Issue
1
Pages
74-90
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W1884957448
Cited by
227
References
0
FWCI
6.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Deficits of visual attention and saccadic eye movements after lesions of parietooccipital cortex in monkeys. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.1989.61.1.74
The paper
Lynch, J. C., & McLaren, J. W. (1989). Deficits of visual attention and saccadic eye movements after lesions of parietooccipital cortex in monkeys. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1989.61.1.74

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.