Changes in same-different laterality patterns as a function of practice and stimulus quality

Accuracy and reaction time (RT) of judgments about sameness vs. difference of (a) names of two letters and (b) shapes of two nonverbal forms were examined for stimuli presented to the center, left (LVF), and right (RVF) visual fields. For same-name letter pairs during Experiment I, responses were more accurate and faster for LVF than for RVF trials on an initial 90-trial block, but this difference was reversed by a third 90-trial block. The RVF advantage for RT was maintained over Trial Blocks 4 and 5, given during a second session, but had disappeared on Trial Blocks 6 through 9 as RT reached the same asymptotic level for both visual fields. No LVF-RVF differences were obtained at any level of practice for different-name letter pairs or for any of the form pairs. Experiment II replicated the shift from LVF toward RVF advantage that occurred over the first three trial blocks of Experiment I and demonstrated that such a shift does not occur when the letters are perceptually degraded. The results were discussed in terms of differences in cerebral hemisphere specialization for visuospatial vs. abstract stages of letter processing and changes with practice in the relative difficulty of these stages.     

Does backward masking by visual noise stop stimulus processing?

The identification of one, two, and four random letters was studied under three procedures: (1) backward masking by a visual noise; (2) concurrent masking by a visual noise; and (3) no masking. With backward masking the number of letters correctly identified was independent of the number presented. Direct judgments of the duration, brightness, contrast, sharpness, and texture of the letters were also made. Under backward masking the letters appeared to be on for a very brief duration, but with high apparent contrast. The results indicate that backward masking impairs identification by interrupting the stimulus processing, not by degrading the stimulus input.     

The recovery of a visually masked target

Ss were briefly shown pairs of letters under backward masking and disinhibitive backward masking conditions. For the backward masking condition, a single homogeneous flash of light (M1), varying in duration, followed the presentation of letters after a varying delay (IS11), and recognition of the target letters (TS) was found to be a function of M1 duration and ISI1. For the disinhibition condition, a variable second mask (M2) followed M1 after a variable delay (ISI2) and disinhibition of M1’s effect on TS recognition occurred. Provided the ISIs were adequate, a relatively powerful M2 wass found to disinhibit a moderate Ml’s effect on the TS. Current theories of visual masking were examined in the light of these findings.     

Metacontrast and brightness discrimination

An attempt was made to obtain U-shaped masking functions in two metacontrast experiments. Trained Ss judged whether a square test stimulus (TS) was bright or dim. The TS was presented alone or in conjunction with an adjacent pair of square masking stimuli (MS) whose energy equaled the bright TS. The stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA) rangedfrom 0 to 125 msec. The task minimized the role of apparent movement cues as a reliable basis for judgrnent. Similar studies have employed TS plus MS vs MS alone as the alternatives, allowing apparent movement to be a cue. Brightness accuracy was a U-shaped function of SOA. This finding is consistent with neural-net models (Weisstein, 1968). However, analysis of Ss’ response bias suggested an alternative explanation involving the MS as a comparison stimulus at short SOA. It was concluded that U-shaped masking functions are also consistent with theories based upon independent component processes, e.g., Schurman and Eriksen (1970) and Uttal (1970).     

Effects of Output Order on Hemispheric Asymmetry for Processing Letter Trigrams

Observers identified consonant–vowel–consonant trigrams with the letters arranged vertically by pronouncing the stimulus (treating the bottom letter as the first letter) and spelling it from bottom to top. On each trial, the trigram was presented to the left visual field/right hemisphere (LVF/RH), to the right visual field/left hemisphere (RVF/LH), or to both visual fields simultaneously (BILATERAL trials). Quantitative and qualitative visual field differences were identical to those found when observers used a more natural response output order, treating the top letter of the trigram as the first letter. The results suggest that, regardless of output order, attention is distributed across the three letters in a relatively slow, top-to-bottom fashion on LVF/RH and BILATERAL trials, whereas attention is distributed more rapidly and evenly across the three letters on RVF/LH trials.     

Selective attention and interhemispheric response competition in the split-brain

The interfering effect of an unattended stimulus on processing of an attended item was studied in a single split-brain participant (LB) and in normal controls. Pairs of letters were presented to the left visual field (LVF), right visual field (RVF), or bilaterally. Participants attended to the rightmost letter while attempting to ignore the leftmost letter. Responses associated with the attended and to-be-ignored letters could be compatible or incompatible. Manual response latencies were generally slower on Response Incompatible compared to Response Compatible trials. Notably, LB displayed this effect on Bilateral trials, where target and distractor were presented to opposite visual fields. LB was unable to perform a same-different matching task with bilateral letter stimuli, but was able to name bilateral letters accurately. Hence, in the bilateral condition, the ability to cross-compare letters was dissociated from attentional interference and from letter naming. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

An analysis of U-shaped metacontrast

Using a brightness-discrimination task similar to that employed by Bernstein, Proctor, Proctor, and Schurman (1973), masking functions were obtained in two experiments. In Experiment I, test stimulus (TS) and mask stimulus (MS) energies were held constant but luminance and duration were varied reciprocally. The obtained masking functions, plotted as a function of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), were of an essentially identical U shape. This suggests that (a) SOA is a more suitable measure of delay than interstimulus interval, and (b) Bloch’s law holds for the requisite discrimination. In Experiment II, TS luminance and MS luminance were varied independently. This was to see whether the MS served as a frame of reference at short SOA, as suggested previously (Bernstein et al, 1973). The results were that this was, in fact, the case and that the transition from comparative to absolute judgment strategies as SOA increases is a major contributor to U-shaped masking functions.     

About face: left-hemisphere involvement in processing physiognomies

Three experiments were concluded to investigate the involvement of the two cerebral hemispheres in processing faces. Perceptual discrimination of pairs of faces was equally speedy overall when the stimuli were presented in the right visual field (RVF) or left visual field (LVF). For faces differing in one or two features, however, a qualitatively different pattern of results was obtained for the two visual fields, and an RVF advantage emerged when the difference lay in the upper part of the faces (Experiment 1). An examination of the discriminability of the facial features from which the faces were constructed (Experiment 2) showed that the processes involved in RVF comparisons of faces were not dependent on the saliency of the features but, rather, followed a top-to-bottom serial analysis of the stimuli; the speed of the processing involved in LVF presentations was a function of the degree of similarity of the different comparison faces. Evidence for a serial type of comparison faces were used (Experiment 3). It was concluded that even though comparisons were equally speedy overall in LVF and RVF presentations, qualitatively different processes take place in the two hemispheres, which prove competent at processing faces, each in its own way. Some methodological problems inherent in tachistoscopic studies are discussed, and it is proposed that the quality of the stimulus representation achieved or required for cognitive processing may be determinant in the emergence of functional hemispheric asymmetries.     

Visual masking by light offset

Two experiments are reported which investigated whether or not the offset of light can serve as a backward masking stimulus (MS). In both studies, human Os made identification responses to graphemes (TS) presented tachistoscopically on a lighted field. Simultaneously with or at short intervals after TS offset, the lighted background field was shut off. The termination of the background field served as the MS. The results indicated a reliable masking effect due to light     

Sources of interference in the attentional blink: target-distractor similarity revisited

Observers monitored streams of words or letters (10 items/sec) for one or two targets. An attentional blink (AB) effect was observed in which identification of the first target temporarily impaired identification of the second target. Target identification was impaired when the distractors were composed of either letters or false-font characters (cf. Maki, Couture, Frigen, & Lien, 1997). An asymmetrical AB effect was observed with letters and mathematical symbols; the AB effect was largest for symbol targets and letter distractors. The characters used in these experiments were rated on their meaningfulness, familiarity, and other stimulus properties. The rating data showed that pixel density best accounted for the asymmetrical target-distractor similarity effects. Modulation of the AB effect by target-distractor similarity appears to result partly from low-level masking. But masking effects may be reduced by attentional capture by target features.     

The Contribution of Attention to the Right Visual Field Advantage for Word Recognition

Perceptual asymmetries have been explained by structural, attentional bias and attentional advantage models. Structural models focus on asymmetries in the physical access information has to the hemispheres, whereas attentional models focus on asymmetries in the operation of attentional processes. A series of experiments was conducted to assess the contribution of attentional mechanisms to the right visual field (RVF) advantage found for word recognition. Valid, invalid and neutral peripheral cues were presented at a variety of stimulus onset asynchronies to manipulate spatial attention. Results indicated a significant RVF advantage and cueing effect. The effect of the cue was stronger for the left visual field than the RVF. This interaction supports the attentional advantage model which suggests that the left hemisphere requires less attention to process words. The attentional asymmetry is interpreted in terms of the different word processing styles used by the left and right hemispheres. These results have ramifications for the methodology used in divided visual field research and the interpretation of this research.     

Visual masking and carbon monoxide toxicity.

Thresholds for letters were measured with and without a masking stimulus (presented either to the same eye as the letters or to the other eye) before and after exposure of smokers and nonsmokers to 500 ppm carbon monoxide (CO) in air for 1 hr. Identification of the unmasked letters was not degraded by CO but a number of thresholds of the masked letters were significantly affected among the smokers. The effects of the CO on binocular and interocular masking were similar. These results suggest that the first effects of CO toxicity are neither on the receptors nor central but on the transmission lines in between and that smokers are more susceptible than nonsmokers to short-term increases in the level of CO. The masking phenomenon, however, does not appear to be an unusually sensitive measure of CO toxicity.     

Location, location, location: how it affects the neighborhood (effect)

Reaction times in lexical decision are more sensitive to a words' length and orthographic-neighborhood density when the stimulus is presented to the left visual field (LVF) than to the right visual field (RVF). We claim that the length effect is equivalent to the neighborhood effect, and propose a novel explanation of why the LVF, but not the RVF, is sensitive to density, based on different firing rates of abstract-letter representations encoding letters falling in the LVF versus RVF. We support this proposal with a large-scale implemented model of lexical decision utilizing spiking units, which provides a reasonable fit to the data from the English Lexicon Project under simulated central presentation, while replicating the observed hemifield asymmetries under simulated lateralized presentation.     

Does Global Context Modulate Cerebral Asymmetries? A Review and New Evidence on Word Imageability Effects

In this article we examine whether the distribution of function across the right and left cerebral hemispheres for lexical processing is influenced by the global context within which words are presented. A review of previously published studies indicates that the ubiquitous right visual field (RVF)/left hemisphere advantage for word recognition may be reduced or eliminated for nouns, content words, or high image words, but only when such items are presented along with verbs, function words, or low image words. However, paradoxically, when the former items are presented in more homogeneous contexts, the RVF advantage is uniformly observed. We propose that the processing efficiency of a hemisphere for a given stimulus depends on that item's relation to the other stimuli provided, that is, the global context. This was examined in a visual half-field experiment that varied whether high and low image nouns were presented in homogeneous (blocked lists) or heterogeneous (mixed lists) contexts. An unvarying RVF advantage was observed for high image words in homogeneous contexts, but this advantage was eliminated when the same items were presented in heterogeneous contexts. We suggest that stimulus heterogeneity maximizes reliance on differing, but complementary, computational biases across hemispheres. Hence, the extent to which the left and right hemispheres are recruited for the recognition of individual word types can vary dynamically with variation in the stimulus environment.     

Components of the laterality effect in letter recognition: Asymmetries in iconic storage

A partial report procedure and a backward masking paradigm were employed to explore lateral asymmetries in components of letter recognition. Stimulus displays were displaced off-centre into the left visual field (LVF) or the right visual field (RVF). Visual field differences in the effect of a delayed backward mask indicated an RVF superiority in the rate of read-out or encoding. Comparison of masked and unmasked full report also yielded estimates of iconic persistence. The persistence of these peripheral displays was surprisingly brief, although it was significantly longer in the LVF (₅₇ ms) than in the RVF (₃₄ ms). Precueing by colour and by location produced a larger partial report advantage in the RVF, reflecting a superiority in selective sampling. With postcueing no partial report effect was obtained at any delay, and this failure was attributed to the briefness of the iconic persistence.     

Evidence for scanning with unilateral visual presentation of letters

When letters and words are presented tachistoscopically, material from the right visual field (RVF) can be reported more accurately than that from the left visual field (LVF). The RVF superiority may reflect either left hemispheric dominance for language or directional scanning. Previous studies have deliberately focused on the cerebral asymmetry factor while "controlling" scanning and, thus, have cast some doubt on the potency of the scanning factor. Two experiments were conducted to show that scanning can induce a RVF superiority comparable to that often associated with cerebral asymmetry. The first experiment required bilingual subjects to report six English or six Hebrew letters, shown briefly in either the LVF or RVF, with order of report controlled. A RVF superiority found with English characters was matched by an equal but opposite LVF effect with Hebrew. In a second experiment, five English characters were shown briefly in either the LVF or RVF, and subjects had to identify a single character indicated by a post exposural cue. Using a spatial cue to by pass scanning, there were no field differences; with an ordinal position cue--a procedure thought to force scanning--there was a strong RVF superiority. The results show clearly that scanning can induce visual field differences.     

Temporal aspects of selective masking

In two experiments, rows of random letter sequences were presented for 100 ms and were patterned masked at varying delays after display offset. In Experiment I recall was probed by visual partial report cues, while auditory probes were employed in Experiment II. Compared to no-masking control conditions, the masking stimulus had a selective effect at the different positions of the rows. The masking stimulus produced the largest decrements in recall of letters from the centre positions of the displays but had a minimal effect on performance at either end of the rows. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that improvements in recall were limited to the centre positions of the rows at increased delays of mask. Subsidiary analyses revealed that processing of the end letters of the displays terminates shortly after display offset while processing of the centre letters continues for at least 500 ms. The results are consistent with the notion that processing of multi-letter arrays commences at the ends of the rows and that the selective masking effect reflects the order of processing of the contents of iconic memory. However, these results were evident only in Experiment II which employed auditory partial report cues. When the partial report cues were visual, there were no effects of masking and minimal increases in performance at increased delays of mask. The discrepant results of the two experiments are discussed in terms of process interruption caused by obligatory attention to the partial report cues.     

Hemispheric differences in processing handwritten cursive

Hemispheric asymmetry was examined for native English speakers identifying consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) non-words presented in standard printed form, in standard handwritten cursive form or in handwritten cursive with the letters separated by small gaps. For all three conditions, fewer errors occurred when stimuli were presented to the right visual field/left hemisphere (RVF/LH) than to the left visual field/right hemisphere (LVF/RH) and qualitative error patterns indicated that the last letter was missed more often than the first letter on LVF/RH trials but not on RVF/LH trials. Despite this overall similarity, the RVF/LH advantage was smaller for both types of cursive stimuli than for printed stimuli. In addition, the difference between first-letter and last-letter errors was smaller for handwritten cursive than for printed text, especially on LVF/RH trials. These results suggest a greater contribution of the right hemisphere to the identification of handwritten cursive, which is likely related visual complexity and to qualitative differences in the processing of cursive versus print.     

Hemispheric differences in stimulus identification

Subjects were presented with either verbal (letters) or nonverbal (outline forms) stimuli to their left or right cerebral hemispheres. Verbal items presented with a lateral masking stimulus were identified more quickly and accurately when presented to the right hemisphere rather than to the left. When the letters were presented without a masking stimulus, weak hemispheric effects were obtained. Nonverbal forms demonstrated faster reaction time and fewer errors for right-hemisphere presentations under both masked and unmasked conditions. Retinal locus of the display item was also varied and produced faster responding with fewer errors when the stimulus was presented foveally rather than peripherally under all display conditions. These effects were attributed to the use of a manual response procedure that effectively reduced the ability of subjects to employ names for the stimulus objects.     

Interhemispheric cooperation and non-cooperation during word recognition: evidence for callosal transfer dysfunction in dyslexic adults

Participants report briefly-presented words more accurately when two copies are presented, one in the left visual field (LVF) and another in the right visual field (RVF), than when only a single copy is presented. This effect is known as the 'redundant bilateral advantage' and has been interpreted as evidence for interhemispheric cooperation. We investigated the redundant bilateral advantage in dyslexic adults and matched controls as a means of assessing communication between the hemispheres in dyslexia. Consistent with previous research, normal adult readers in Experiment 1 showed significantly higher accuracy on a word report task when identical word stimuli were presented bilaterally, compared to unilateral RVF or LVF presentation. Dyslexics, however, did not show the bilateral advantage. In Experiment 2, words were presented above fixation, below fixation or in both positions. In this experiment both dyslexics and controls benefited from the redundant presentation. Experiment 3 combined whole words in one visual field with word fragments in the other visual field (the initial and final letters separated by spaces). Controls showed a bilateral advantage but dyslexics did not. In Experiments 1 and 3, the dyslexics showed significantly lower accuracy for LVF trials than controls, but the groups did not differ for RVF trials. The findings suggest that dyslexics have a problem of interhemispheric integration and not a general problem of processing two lexical inputs simultaneously.