ABSTRACT
Reports about patients who omitted stimuli in one half of the visual field although there was no visual field defect that could explain these omissions, have been published since the end of the last century (Holmes, 1918; Oppenheim, 1885; Pineas, 1931; Poppelreuter, 1917). Patients who did not “... report, respond, or orient to novel and meaningful stimuli presented in the hemispace contralateral to a brain lesion” were considered as having a hemispatial neglect (Heilman, Bowers, Valenstein, & Watson, 1987, p. 116). The diagnosis of a hemispatial neglect was only regarded as justified if the failure to report, respond or orient to stimuli was not due to a sensory or motor inability (Heilman, 1979).
