Monaural right-ear advantage in a target-identification task

Subjects were monaurally presented with consonant—vowel syllables to the right or left ear, with or without simultaneous noise to the other ear. The subject's task on each trial was to indicate whether or not the item presented was the target item /ba/. A right-ear advantage in reaction time was obtained: 14 msec for target items, 6 msec for nontarget items. The size of this effect was comparable in the presence vs. absence of competing noise. No consistent individual differences were found in the size of the right-ear advantage for this task, although such differences were obtained in a dichotic-perception pretest.It is argued that data of this type do not permit inferences about the use of particular ear/hemisphere neural pathways.     

Monaural ear differences for reaction times to speech with a many-to-one mapping paradigm

On each trial, subjects were presented monaurally with single synthetic speech syllables. In Experiment I, when /ba/ and /ta/ specified one response, and /da/ and /ka/ another response, a right-ear advantage in reaction time was observed; when/ba/ specified one response and all the other stimuli specified the other response, no ear effect was observed. Unsuccessful attempts to obtain a monaural right-ear advantage for consonants in some reaction-time tasks might be due to some kind of prephonetic matching between a representation of the stimulus attended to and the presented stimulus, the output of this match providing sufficient information for response. In Experiment II, /bi/ and /b ? / specified one response and /b?/ and/bu/ the other response, but no ear effect was observed. It was concluded that the right-ear advantage displayed for consonants in the corresponding condition of Experiment I was not the pure effect of a particular stimulus-response mapping, but depended also on the phonetic properties of consonants.     

The effects of contralateral noise on reaction time to monaural stimuli

Experiment I measured reaction time (RT) to monaural tones of six frequencies presented along with white noise to the contralateral ear. RT with the hand ipsilateral to the stimulus was an average of 9.63 msec faster than RT with the contralateral hand. Contralateral RT was significantly affected by the stimulus frequency. Experiment II measured ipsilateral and contralateral RT to monaural tones with and without contralateral noise. Noise-on results agreed with the results of Experiment I, while noise-off results showed no difference between ipsilateral and contralateral RT. No right-ear advantage was found. The ipsilateral-contralateral RT difference found with noise on is interpreted as being due to callosal transmission time as well as other factors. The finding of no right-ear advantage is discussed in relation to other studies which did report a right-ear advantage.     

Listening to speech while retaining music: What happens to the right-ear advantage?

On each trial, subjects were played a dichotic pair of syllables differing in the consonant (/ba/, /da/, /ga/) or in the vowel (/ba/, /b?/, /bi/). The pair of syllables was preceded by a melody, or a sentence, and followed by the same or a different melody, or sentence. Subjects either had to retain the first piece of additional material or were free to ignore it. The different combinations of phonemic contrast, additional material, and instruction concerning the additional material were used in different sessions. In each case, the main task of the subjects was to respond to the presence or the absence of the target /ba/ on the ear previously indicated. There was no effect of context on relative ear accuracy, but the right-ear advantage observed for consonants in response latency when subjects retained a sentence gave way to a small nonsignificant left-ear advantage when subjects retained a melody. Right-ear advantage in response latencies was also observed for vowels in the verbal context, but the contextual effect, although in the same direction as for consonants, was very slight. The implications of contextual effects for a theory of the determinants of the auditory laterality effects are discussed.     

Some properties of auditory memory for rapid formant transitions

In the three experiments reported here, subjects indicate whether two sequentially presented syllables, differing in the place of articulation of an initial stop consonant, are phonernically the same or not. The first experiment finds faster |ldsame” responses to acoustically identical pairs than to pairs that are phonemically identical but acoustically distinct. provided that the second syllable is presented within 400 msec of the first. This is interpreted as indicating the persistence of a memory which preserves auditory information about within-category distinctions. The third experiment shows that this advantage remains when a tone is interposed between the two syllables, but is removed when a brief vowel is similarly interposed. The second experiment presents the second syllable of each pair dichotically with a noise burst, and shows that the size of the right-ear advantage for this reaction time task is reduced when the result of comparisons based on this auditory memory is compatible with the required phonemic decision, but that the right-ear advantage is increased when auditory comparisons would contradict the phonemic relationship.     

Ear asymmetry in a dichotic detection task

Pairs of consonant-vowel (CV) syllables were presented dichotically to Ss who were instructed to monitor for the presence of a target CV which could occur in either ear. Ss responded by depressing a response button ; reaction time (RT) was also recorded. Right ear targets were detected 6.2% more frequently, on the average, than left ear targets and had an average RT 50 msec quicker than their left ear counterparts. These results demonstrate the existence of a right ear superiority in dichotic listening when a nonverbal motor response measure is used, supporting the contention that the ear asymmetry phenomenon is truly perceptual in nature and not merely due to the lateralization of verbal output. Two alternative explanations of the RT difference between left and right ear targets are offered. One attributes this difference to the time necessary for intercortical transfer of right hemisphere information, while the second holds that it is due to the longer times needed by the right hemisphere to process information projected to it.     

Left hemisphere selectivity for processing duration in normal subjects

The role of the left cerebral hemisphere for the discrimination of duration was examined in a group of normal subjects. Two tasks were presented: the first required a reaction-time response to the offset of monaural pulse sequences varying in interpulse duration, and the second required the discrimination of small differences in durations, within a delayed-comparison paradigm. In each task a right-ear advantage was obtained when the durations were 50 msec or less. No ear advantage was obtained for the larger durations of 67 to 120 msec. Since the perceptual distinctiveness of phonemes may be provided by durations approximating 50 msec, the nature of the relationship between the left hemisphere's role in temporal processing and speech processing may be elaborated.     

Processing the intensity of dichotic syllables

Subjects were required to match the intensity levels of the left- and right-ear members of dichotically presented nonsense syllables. When subjects matched the overall average intensities of a sequence of differing dichotic pairs no ear differences were observed. When repetitions of single dichotic pairs were matched right-ear syllables were judged louder than left-ear syllables. The results support a model predicting left-hemisphere superiority in a task permitting higher-level encoding of speech input.     

Monaural recall and the right-ear advantage

Lists of eight nonsense syllables were monaurally presented to right-handed men and women for free recall, half to each ear on each trial. Results showed a right-ear advantage (REA) in the recall of recency items, but not primacy items and for males only. Among males only that subgroup without familial sinistrality demonstrated the REA. Results offer support for the following: (A) the language mechanisms involved in short-term “echoic” memory are particularly well-lateralized; (B) mechanisms underlying monaural REAs may be similar to those responsible for the asymmetries found in other paradigms; (C) processing demands and strategies inherent to the monaural technique may account in part for its limited reliability in yielding REA and for the present absence of REA among females.     

Differences in cognitive control in children and adolescents with combined and inattentive subtypes of ADHD

The aim of the present study was to investigate the ability of children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder-combined subtype (ADHD-C) and predominantly inattentive subtype (ADHD-PI) to direct their attention and to exert cognitive control in a forced attention dichotic listening (DL) task. Twenty-nine, medication-naive participants with ADHD-C, 42 with ADHD-PI, and 40 matched healthy controls (HC) between 9 and 16 years were assessed. In the DL task, two different auditory stimuli (syllables) are presented simultaneously, one in each ear. The participants are asked to report the syllable they hear on each trial with no instruction on focus of attention or to explicitly focus attention and to report either the right- or left-ear syllable. The DL procedure is presumed to reflect different cognitive processes: perception (nonforced condition/NF), attention (forced-right condition/FR), and cognitive control (forced-left condition/FL). As expected, all three groups had normal perception and attention. The children and adolescents with ADHD-PI showed a significant right-ear advantage also during the FL condition, while the children and adolescents in the ADHD-C group showed a no-ear advantage and the HC showed a significant left-ear advantage in the FL condition. This suggests that the ADHD subtypes differ in degree of cognitive control impairment. Our results may have implications for further conceptualization, diagnostics, and treatment of ADHD subtypes.     

Monaural ear differences for same-different reaction times to speech with prior knowledge of ear stimulated.

Morais and Darwin's (1974) finding of a right-ear advantage for speech on a "same-different" reaction-time task under monaural stimulation was replicated with 8 Ss who knew before each block of trials which ear would be stimulated. The effect cannot be accounted for in terms of a lateral bias in voluntary attention.     

Ear asymmetry in reaction time to musical sounds

Dichotic pairs of musical sounds were presented to 16 right-handed subjects, who were instructed to depress a reaction-time (RT) button when a target sound occurred in either ear. Four blocks of 36 trials were presented. During the first block, RTs to left-ear targets were significantly faster than those to right-ear targets. There were no significant ear differences during the second, third, or fourth blocks. Possible explanations for the limited duration of the left-ear advantage, and its implications for models proposed to explain the basis of RT asymmetries, are discussed.     

The investigation of ear asymmetry by simple and disjunctive reaction-time tasks

In a disjunctive reaction-time task in which Ss responded to clicks presented to one ear while white noise was presented to the other, RT was significantly faster to stimuli presented to the left ear than to the right ear. In a simple reaction-time task, using the same stimuli. there was no difference in R T to stimuli presented to right or left ear. The results were discussed in relation to functional asymmetry of the cerebral hemispheres. and were taken to support a perceptual interpretation of the ear asymmetry effect.     

Ear asymmetry in recognition of unfamiliar voices

Female right-handed subjects were presented with a memory set consisting of five unfamiliar female voices. They were then tested with a recognition procedure in which samples of voice, memory set or novel, 2 or 4 sec in duration, were heard in one ear and a competing noise stimulus was heard in the other ear. There was an overall left-ear advantage in accuracy of recognition. This advantage held particularly for identifications of memory-set voices in the second half of trials. Internal analyses indicated that the left-ear advantage could not be attributed to greater retroactive interference during right-ear presentation. Congruent with studies of recognition of unfamiliar faces, the findings suggested right-hemisphere superiority in the recognition of unfamiliar voices.     

Dual payoff band control of reaction time

The location of a S’s simple reaction time (RT) distribution can be controlled by differential reinforcement of RTs that fall within specified temporal limits called a payoff band. Both humans and monkeys can gradually shift the location of a single RT distribution over hundreds of milliseconds in accord with changing payoff band requirements. This study establishes that trained human Ss can also accurately shift theft response latencies back and forth between two different RT distributions when the payoff band is changed from trial to trial. On each trial, the color of the warning stimulus indicated which of two payoff bands would be in effect when the S reacted to a light flashed 1,500 msec later. The RT distributions produced under the condition of random trial-to-trial switching between two payoff bands were the same as the low-variability RT distributions produced when only one payoff band was in effect over a long series of trials.     

Effect of locus of warning tone on auditory choice reaction time

Forty Ss pressed a left- or right-hand key depending on the ear in which they heard a 500-Hz stimulus tone. Half of the Ss were instructed to press the key on the same side as the ear stimulated (corresponding condition), while the other half pressed the key on the opposite side (noncorresponding condition). A 200-Hz warning tone preceded the stimulus tone by either 200 or 400 msec. The warning tone was presented to the left ear, the right ear, or to both ears in a predetermined random sequence. The locus of the warning tone affected RT on noncorresponding trials but not on corresponding trials. The effect consisted of a significant slowing of information processing on trials where the warning tone was contralateral to the response. Results were explained in terms of an initial tendency to respond toward the source of the warning tone.     

The relationship between active hand and ear advantage in the native and foreign language

In an experimental design involving two auditorily presented competing commands (one to each ear), 144 right-handed subjects (72 male and 72 female) were asked to provide motor responses. Half of each group of subjects was responding with their right hand and the other half with the left. The test was applied in the subjects' native language (Croatian) and in English, which they had learned as a foreign language. Ear advantage was determined by calculating laterality indices from the order of responding to the commands. On average, right-ear advantage was found in all conditions. Analysis of results revealed the effect of the active hand in Croatian (with significant decrease in the right-ear advantage when using the left hand). The same trend failed to reach significance in English. In responses to English stimuli, there was a significant effect of gender (with men exhibiting a lower right-ear advantage than women). The same trend was not significant for Croatian stimuli. The consistently lower right-ear advantage found in male subjects is contrary to the traditional assumptions that men are more lateralized than women and warrants further investigation.     

Language asymmetry and auditory attention in young adulthood after being born small-for-gestational age or with cardio-pulmonary resuscitation at birth.

A dichotic listening test with consonant-vowel syllables was used to assess language asymmetry and shift of attention in 42 young adults who had been in need of cardio-pulmonary resuscitation at birth, with a mild or moderate clinical course during the neonatal period (n = 31), or were born small-for-gestational age (SGA; n = 11) and compared with healthy controls (n = 17). All the participants were followed up prospectively and displayed no neurological or developmental deficits at 18 months of age. All the groups had an expected right-ear advantage during a baseline condition with no instructions to shift attention. The SGA group and the moderate resuscitated group displayed clear signs of an attenuation of the right-ear advantage and they were also less able to modify the ear preference in forced-attention conditions, compared with the control group. The main finding was that the groups with the most severe pre- and perinatal complications were also most affected on the dichotic listening test at adult age.     

A constant error in the perception of brief temporal intervals

Ss were presented two stimuli of equal duration separated in time. The parrs of stimuli were vibrotactile, auditory, or visual. The Ss adjusted the time between the two stimuli to be equal to the duration of the first stimulus. The results show that for stimulus durations ranging from 100 to 1,200 msec, Ss set the tune between the two stimuli too long and by a constant amount. For vibrotactfle stimuli, the constant was 596 msec; for auditory stimuli, 657 msec; and for visual stimuli, 436 msec. Changing the intensity of the vibrotactile stimuli did not change the size of the constant error. When Ss were presented two tones with a burst of white noise between the tones and adjusted the duration of the white noise to be equal to the duration of the first tone, the white noise was not adjusted too long by a constant amount. The results suggest that there is a constant error in the perception of unfilled relative to filled temporal intervals.