The orienting response drives pseudoneglect - evidence from an objective pupillometric method

Abstract

Spatial attention is generally slightly biased leftward (“pseudoneglect”), a phenomenon typically assessed with paper-and-pencil tasks, limited by the requirement of explicit responses and the inability to assess on a subsecond timescale. Pseudoneglect is often stable within experiments, but differs vastly between investigations and is sometimes directed to the left, sometimes to the right. To date, no exhaustive explanation to this phenomenon has been provided. Here, we objectively assessed lateralized attention over time, exploiting the phenomenon that changes in the pupil reflect the allocation of attention in space. Pupil sizes of 41 healthy participants fixating the center were influenced stronger by the differential background luminance of the left side compared to the right side of the visual display. These differences were mainly driven by visual information in the periphery. Differences in pupil sizes positively related with greyscales scores. Time-based analyses within trials show strongest effects early on. With increasing trial number (not time), the initial leftward bias shifted central in pupillometry-based and greyscales measures. This suggests that the orienting response determines the degree of attention bias. In our amplification hypothesis we pose that the quality of pseudoneglect (i.e., the direction) is determined by higher order factors such as hemispheric imbalances, whereas the quantity (i.e., the degree) is determined by the orienting network. This account might explain numerous—previously thought opposing—findings. We here show how pupil light responses reveal pseudoneglect, in a next step, this might allow clinical diagnosis of hemispatial neglect.