ArticleNeuropsychologia2020
The reliability of pseudoneglect is task dependent.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Meta-analysis shows a malleable rightward bias in the expectations of objects in space.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- A Meta-Analysis of Line Bisection and Landmark Task Performance in Older Adults.Neuropsychology review · 2022Pooled it
- Distortion of perceived visual space after prolonged horizontal eccentric gaze holding.Vision research · 2026Article
- Investigating visual search mechanisms and enhancing the diagnostic potential of the trail making test using eTMT.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Measuring the influence of contrast, ambiguity, and side of spatial context on perceptual dominance during binocular rivalry.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Gaze data of 4243 participants shows link between leftward and superior attention biases and age.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Physically real and virtual reality exposed line bisection response patterns: visuospatial attention allocation in virtual reality.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Ambiguous handedness and visuospatial pseudoneglect in schizotypy in physical and computer-generated virtual environments.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bisection tasks that require individuals to identify the midpoint of a line are often used to assess the presence of biases to spatial attention in both healthy and patient populations. These tasks have helped to uncover a phenomenon called pseudoneglect, a bias towards the left-side of space in healthy individuals. First identified in the tactile domain, pseudoneglect has been subsequently demonstrated in other sensory modalities such as vision. Despite this, the specific reliability of pseudoneglect within individuals across tasks and time has been investigated very little. In this study, we investigated the reliability of response bias within individuals across four separate testing sessions and during three line bisection tasks: landmark, line bisection and tactile rod bisection. Strong reliability was expected within individuals across task and session. Pseudoneglect was found when response bias was averaged across all tasks, for the entire sample. However, individual data showed biases to both left and right, with some participants showing no clear bias, demonstrating individual differences in bias. Significant, cross-session within-individual reliability was found for the landmark and tactile rod bisection tasks respectively, but no significant reliability was observed for the line bisection task. These results highlight the inconsistent nature of pseudoneglect within individuals, particularly across sensory modality. They also provide strong support for the use of the landmark task as the most reliable measure of pseudoneglect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.