Neuropsychology Central

[N2Psych4Now]

Is there any difference between the terms "hemineglect" and "contralateral neglect"? Can they be used interchangeably?

[bgavett]

They should not be used interchangeably. Contralateral neglect is more specific, in that it specifies that the visual field opposite the lesion is not perceived. On the other hand, hemineglect is much less specific. For example, a lesion to the optic chiasm would produce lateral hemineglect - neglect of the lateral aspect of both left and right visual fields. This is certainly not the same as contralateral neglect.

[N2Psych4Now]

Thanks. This is getting confusing, I have seen a lot of conflicting information. It also seems that there is more research floating around on hemineglect as opposed to contralateral neglect.

[lash]

Brandon, is that right? Lateral hemineglect refers to a bilateral neglect phenomenon? I haven't studied neglect in a little over 10 years, but based on what little information I remember, I would've thought that the "hemi" part of hemineglect would automatically restrict the deficit to either the left or right. (As you pointed out, it is still not the same as contralateral neglect, so I'm straying slightly from the thread topic.) Wonder what the hemi means in this case then.
_________________
Lee Ashendorf, Ph.D.
Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA
Co-Webmaster, Neuropsychology Central

[N2Psych4Now]

Sorry to be rather anoying, but I'm still confused. My impression was that contralateral neglect consists of neglecting stimuli contralateral to the lesion. This is usually seen after right hemispheric damage, therefore the left side would be neglected. This type of neglect may consist of not attending to ones own body (on the left), inattention to visual stimuli (on the left), etc.

My textbook states "hemineglect or hemi-inattention, despite having intact sensory and motor functioning, individuals with hemineglect ignore, or do not pay attention to, one side of space. Hemineglect is mainly considered a space-based phenomenon because the neglect of information occurs with reference to spatial frame (i.e., information contralateral to the lesion is ignored), and because all types of information, regardless of modality, are ignored on the neglected side of space."

Additionally, I secured a reference from the library, because it had been cited in numerous articles on neglect (contralateral, hemi, etc.). This reference defines neglect as "the failure to report, respond, or orient to novel or meaningful stimuli presented to the side opposite a brain lesion, when this failure cannot be attributed to either sensory or motor defects."

Even with the difference in terms, each claims to refer to neglect contralateral to the brain lesion, which, from my point of view sounds a lot like contralateral neglect. It seems like hemineglect would refer to either ipsilateral or contralateral neglect, because there is no reference to which side is being neglect. It seems like hemineglect would just be "half neglect". I suppose this is my payback for choosing such an obscure, but interesting topic. Thank you VERY much for all the help

[alfinge]

[bgavett]

I think the reason for this confusion is due to the fact that the term lateral hemineglect is probably better referred to as lateral hemianop(s)ia. Apparently at least one person refers to this phenomenon as lateral hemineglect, because I think I pulled it from an old biopsych text. But I probably did more to confuse the situation than to answer the question.

I suppose it's always prudent to refer to neglect as either "contralateral neglect" or "left neglect" (after a right hemisphere lesion), because ipsilateral neglect can occur, although it does so very rarely. In that case, hemineglect would be accurate, but contralateral neglect would not be. So, long story short, hemineglect and contralateral neglect should not be used interchangeably.

Apologies for the poor use of terminology and for the extreme delay in responding!

-Brandon