{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/95296"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/95296","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"Cortical competition: a neurally plausible account of hemisphere-specific processing resources?","abstract":"Recent studies have shown performance advantages in visual tasks when task-relevant stimuli are presented in different visual hemifields as opposed to a single hemifield. A common interpretation of these findings is that each cortical hemisphere has an independent tank of processing resources and that overloading a single hemisphere leads to performance degradation. However, it is not clear what such processing resources might be. We explore three ways of interpreting processing resources and their relationship to hemifield independence: resources as a kind of neural fuel, as a limitation on the coordination of attentional deployment, and as competition (interference) between representations in visual cortex. We report three experiments centered on hemifield independence that provide constraints on each of the three models. Experiments 1 and 2 show that, while fixing hemifield-level display density, local display density seems to drive hemifield independence. We argue that the competition model a priori predicts this effect and offer suggestions for how the other models can be adapted to account for it. Experiment 3 shows that hemifield independence can be modulated by attention: when the location of target is validly cued hemifield independence disappears. Once again, this effect is predicted by the competition model but is not inconsistent with the other two models. Taken as a whole, we argue that these three experiments provide constraints on any successful explanation of hemifield independence and suggest that the competition model naturally satisfies these constraints.","abstract_html":"Recent studies have shown performance advantages in visual tasks when task-relevant stimuli are presented in different visual hemifields as opposed to a single hemifield. A common interpretation of these findings is that each cortical hemisphere has an independent tank of processing resources and that overloading a single hemisphere leads to performance degradation. However, it is not clear what such processing resources might be. We explore three ways of interpreting processing resources and their relationship to hemifield independence: resources as a kind of neural fuel, as a limitation on the coordination of attentional deployment, and as competition (interference) between representations in visual cortex. We report three experiments centered on hemifield independence that provide constraints on each of the three models. Experiments 1 and 2 show that, while fixing hemifield-level display density, local display density seems to drive hemifield independence. We argue that the competition model a priori predicts this effect and offer suggestions for how the other models can be adapted to account for it. Experiment 3 shows that hemifield independence can be modulated by attention: when the location of target is validly cued hemifield independence disappears. Once again, this effect is predicted by the competition model but is not inconsistent with the other two models. Taken as a whole, we argue that these three experiments provide constraints on any successful explanation of hemifield independence and suggest that the competition model naturally satisfies these constraints.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Clevenger, John H"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"M.A.","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Beck, Diane M.","Simons, Daniel J."],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2017,"date_issued":"2017-03-01T15:46:14Z","date_published":"2017-03-01T15:46:14Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:37Z","subjects":["attention","competition","resources"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Copyright 2016 John Clevenger"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/95296","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Beck, Diane M.","Simons, Daniel J."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Clevenger, John H"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2017-03-01T15:46:14Z","2016-10-13","2016-12"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.A."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["attention","competition","resources"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 2016 John Clevenger"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/95296"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Recent studies have shown performance advantages in visual tasks when task-relevant stimuli are presented in different visual hemifields as opposed to a single hemifield. A common interpretation of these findings is that each cortical hemisphere has an independent tank of processing resources and that overloading a single hemisphere leads to performance degradation. However, it is not clear what such processing resources might be. We explore three ways of interpreting processing resources and their relationship to hemifield independence: resources as a kind of neural fuel, as a limitation on the coordination of attentional deployment, and as competition (interference) between representations in visual cortex. We report three experiments centered on hemifield independence that provide constraints on each of the three models. Experiments 1 and 2 show that, while fixing hemifield-level display density, local display density seems to drive hemifield independence. We argue that the competition model a priori predicts this effect and offer suggestions for how the other models can be adapted to account for it. Experiment 3 shows that hemifield independence can be modulated by attention: when the location of target is validly cued hemifield independence disappears. Once again, this effect is predicted by the competition model but is not inconsistent with the other two models. Taken as a whole, we argue that these three experiments provide constraints on any successful explanation of hemifield independence and suggest that the competition model naturally satisfies these constraints.","Submission original under an indefinite embargo labeled 'Open Access'. The submission was exported from vireo on 2017-02-28 without embargo terms","The student, John Clevenger, accepted the attached license on 2016-10-12 at 17:05.","The student, John Clevenger, submitted this Thesis for approval on 2016-10-12 at 17:06.","This Thesis was approved for publication on 2016-10-13 at 13:36.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #10189 on 2017-02-28 at 14:46:35","Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-01T15:46:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 CLEVENGER-THESIS-2016.pdf: 438587 bytes, checksum: bebc89937291ae9cfcc6971f0fb9991d (MD5) LICENSE.txt: 4211 bytes, checksum: 8af1cff29a555fd9496927aba3c31193 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-10-13"]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Cortical competition: a neurally plausible account of hemisphere-specific processing resources?"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Beck, Diane M.","Simons, Daniel J."],"dc:creator":["Clevenger, John H"],"dc:date":["2017-03-01T15:46:14Z","2016-10-13","2016-12"],"dc:description":["Recent studies have shown performance advantages in visual tasks when task-relevant stimuli are presented in different visual hemifields as opposed to a single hemifield. A common interpretation of these findings is that each cortical hemisphere has an independent tank of processing resources and that overloading a single hemisphere leads to performance degradation. However, it is not clear what such processing resources might be. We explore three ways of interpreting processing resources and their relationship to hemifield independence: resources as a kind of neural fuel, as a limitation on the coordination of attentional deployment, and as competition (interference) between representations in visual cortex. We report three experiments centered on hemifield independence that provide constraints on each of the three models. Experiments 1 and 2 show that, while fixing hemifield-level display density, local display density seems to drive hemifield independence. We argue that the competition model a priori predicts this effect and offer suggestions for how the other models can be adapted to account for it. Experiment 3 shows that hemifield independence can be modulated by attention: when the location of target is validly cued hemifield independence disappears. Once again, this effect is predicted by the competition model but is not inconsistent with the other two models. Taken as a whole, we argue that these three experiments provide constraints on any successful explanation of hemifield independence and suggest that the competition model naturally satisfies these constraints.","Submission original under an indefinite embargo labeled 'Open Access'. The submission was exported from vireo on 2017-02-28 without embargo terms","The student, John Clevenger, accepted the attached license on 2016-10-12 at 17:05.","The student, John Clevenger, submitted this Thesis for approval on 2016-10-12 at 17:06.","This Thesis was approved for publication on 2016-10-13 at 13:36.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #10189 on 2017-02-28 at 14:46:35","Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-01T15:46:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 CLEVENGER-THESIS-2016.pdf: 438587 bytes, checksum: bebc89937291ae9cfcc6971f0fb9991d (MD5) LICENSE.txt: 4211 bytes, checksum: 8af1cff29a555fd9496927aba3c31193 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-10-13"],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/95296"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 2016 John Clevenger"],"dc:subject":["attention","competition","resources"],"dc:title":["Cortical competition: a neurally plausible account of hemisphere-specific processing resources?"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.A."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:37Z"}