Mixing metaphors in the cerebral hemispheres: what happens when careers collide?

Are processes of figurative comparison and figurative categorization different? An experiment combining alternative-sense and matched-sense metaphor priming with a divided visual field assessment technique sought to isolate processes of comparison and categorization in the 2 cerebral hemispheres. For target metaphors presented in the right visual field/left cerebral hemisphere (RVF/LH), only matched-sense primes were facilitative. Literal primes and alternative-sense primes had no effect on comprehension time compared to the unprimed baseline. The effects of matched-sense primes were additive with the rated conventionality of the targets. For target metaphors presented to the left visual field/right cerebral hemisphere (LVF/RH), matched-sense primes were again additively facilitative. However, alternative-sense primes, though facilitative overall, seemed to eliminate the preexisting advantages of conventional target metaphor senses in the LVF/RH in favor of metaphoric senses similar to those of the primes. These findings are consistent with tightly controlled categorical coding in the LH and coarse, flexible, context-dependent coding in the RH.     

Modes of word recognition in the left and right cerebral hemispheres

Four experiments are reported examining the effects of word length on recognition performance in the left and right visual hemifields (LVF, RVF). In Experiments 1 and 2 length affected lexical decision latencies to words presented in the LVF but not to words presented in the RVF. This result was found for both concrete and abstract nouns. Changing from a normal horizontal format to the use of unconventionally "stepped" words, however, produced length effects for words in both visual hemifields (Experiment 3). The Length x VHF interaction was found once again in Experiment 4 where subjects classified words as either concrete or abstract. A model proposing two modes of visual processing of letter strings is presented to account for these findings. Mode A operates independent of string length and is seen only in left hemisphere analysis of familiar words. Mode B is length dependent: it is the only mode possessed by the right hemisphere but is displayed by the left hemisphere to nonwords and to words in abnormal formats.     

Is Happy Facial Expression Identified by the Left or Right Hemisphere？

1IntroductionCorrectly identifying other people′s facial ex-pressions of emotions is important to human socialinteraction in all societies.Many studies suggestthat the identification of facial expressions in par-ticular and perceptual processing of emotional infor-mation is carried out mainly by the right hemi-sphere of the brain[1￣7].Damage to the righthemisphere generally produces more significant im-pairment in recognition of all facial expressions ofemotion than damage to the left hemisp…     

Psychopathy and cerebral asymmetry in semantic processing

A divided visual field (DVF) procedure was used to investigate the cerebral organization of language processes in psychopaths. The subjects consisted of four groups of 13 right-handed males: noncriminals (NC), and criminals with high (H), medium (M), and low (L) scores on the Psychopathy Checklist (Hare, 1980). The subject had to decide if a concrete noun, tachistoscopically presented in either the left (LVF) or the right visual hemifield (RVF), matched a pretrial work (SR task), or was an exemplar of a specific category (SC task) or an abstract category (AC task). There were no group differences in reaction time. As predicted, group differences in errors were confined to the AC task; Groups L and NC made fewer RVF than LVF errors (thus showing the sort of RVF advantage expected with semantic categorization), whereas the opposite was true of Group H. The results, along with those obtained in a recent dichotic listening study, lead us to speculate that psychopathy may be associated with weak or unusual lateralization of language function, and that psychopaths may have fewer left hemisphere resources for processing language than do normal individuals.     

Facilitative orthographic neighborhood effects: the SERIOL model account

A large orthographic neighborhood (N) facilitates lexical decision for central and left visual field/right hemisphere (LVF/RH) presentation, but not for right visual field/left hemisphere (RVF/LH) presentation. Based on the SERIOL model of letter-position encoding, this asymmetric N effect is explained by differential activation patterns at the orthographic level. This analysis implies that it should be possible to negate the LVF/RH N effect and create an RVF/LH N effect by manipulating contrast levels in specific ways. In Experiment 1, these predictions were confirmed. In Experiment 2, we eliminated the N effect for both LVF/RH and central presentation. These results indicate that the letter level is the primary locus of the N effect under lexical decision, and that the hemispheric specificity of the N effect does not reflect differential processing at the lexical level.     

Categorization of disoriented faces in the cerebral hemispheres of normal and commissurotomized subjects

We examined the capacity of the cerebral hemispheres to process faces that deviate from canonical perspective. In Experiment 1, normal Ss performed a gender categorization of faces presented at varying angular orientations in the left visual field (LVF) or right visual field (RVF). Orientation affected processing speed, more so in the RVF than in the LVF. The function relating reaction times to disorientation of the faces was approximately monotonic and reflected the increased difficulty in extracting relevant configurational information as the faces were rotated from canonical perspective. In Experiment 2, 3 commissurotomized Ss performed the same task. They responded above chance in the 2 visual fields, and the pattern of their results was similar to that obtained with the normal Ss, but the effect of disorientation was considerably more pronounced. It is suggested that the right hemisphere contribution becomes more critical the further the visual pattern departs from conventional view. Issues regarding the specification of processes correcting for disorientation and comparison of normal and commissurotomized Ss are discussed.     

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.     

Sequential processing in hemispheric word recognition: the impact of initial letter discriminability on the OUP naming effect

The cerebral hemispheres have been proposed to engage different word recognition strategies: the left hemisphere implementing a parallel, and the right hemisphere, a sequential, analysis. To investigate this notion, we asked participants to name words with an early or late orthographic uniqueness point (OUP), presented horizontally to their left (LVF), right (RVF), or both fields of vision (BVF). Consistent with past foveal research, Experiment 1 produced a robust facilitatory effect of early OUP for RVF/BVF presentations, indicating the presence of sequential processes in lexical retrieval. The effect was absent for LVF trials, which we argue results from the disadvantaged position of initial letters of words presented in the LVF. To test this proposition, Experiment 2 assessed the discriminability of various letter positions in the visual fields using a bar-probe task. The obtained error functions highlighted the poor discriminability of initial letters in the LVF and latter letters in the RVF. To confirm that this asymmetry in initial letter acuity was responsible for the absent OUP effect for LVF presentations, Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 1 using vertical stimulus presentations. Results indicated a marked facilitatory effect of early OUP across visual fields, supporting our contention that the lack of OUP effect for LVF presentations in Experiment 1 resulted from poor discriminability of the initial letters. These findings confirm the presence of sequential processes in both left and right hemisphere word recognition, casting doubt on parallel models of word processing.     

Automatic semantic priming in the left and right hemispheres

We investigated hemispheric differences and inter-hemispheric transfer of facilitation in automatic semantic priming, using prime-target pairs composed of words of the same category but not associated (e.g. skirt-glove), and a blank-target baseline condition. Reaction time and accuracy were measured at short (300 ms) intervals between prime and target onsets, using a go/no-go task to discriminate between word or non-word targets. Reaction times were facilitated more for target words presented in the right visual field (RVF) compared to the left visual field (LVF), and targets presented in RVF were primed in both visual fields, whereas targets presented in LVF were primed by primes in the LVF only. These results suggest that both hemispheres are capable of automatic priming at very short stimulus onset asymmetries (SOA), but cross-hemisphere priming occurs only in the left hemisphere.     

The neural basis of the right visual field advantage in reading: an MEG analysis using virtual electrodes

Right-handed participants respond more quickly and more accurately to written words presented in the right visual field (RVF) than in the left visual field (LVF). Previous attempts to identify the neural basis of the RVF advantage have had limited success. Experiment 1 was a behavioral study of lateralized word naming which established that the words later used in Experiment 2 showed a reliable RVF advantage which persisted over multiple repetitions. In Experiment 2, the same words were interleaved with scrambled words and presented in the LVF and RVF to right-handed participants seated in an MEG scanner. Participants read the real words silently and responded "pattern" covertly to the scrambled words. A beamformer analysis created statistical maps of changes in oscillatory power within the brain. Those whole-brain maps revealed activation of the reading network by both LVF and RVF words. Virtual electrode analyses used the same beamforming method to reconstruct the responses to real and scrambled words in three regions of interest in both hemispheres. The middle occipital gyri showed faster and stronger responses to contralateral than to ipsilateral stimuli, with evidence of asymmetric channeling of information into the left hemisphere. The left mid fusiform gyrus at the site of the 'visual word form area' responded more strongly to RVF than to LVF words. Activity in speech-motor cortex was lateralized to the left hemisphere, and stronger to RVF than LVF words, which is interpreted as representing the proximal cause of the RVF advantage for naming written words.     

Hemisphere dynamics in lexical access: automatic and controlled priming

Hemisphere differences in lexical processing may be due to asymmetry in the organization of lexical information, in procedures used to access the lexicon, or both. Six lateralized lexical decision experiments employed various types of priming to distinguish among these possibilities. In three controlled (high probability) priming experiments, prime words could be used as lexical access clues. Larger priming was obtained for orthographically similar stimuli (BEAK-BEAR) when presented to the left visual field (LVF). Controlled priming based on phonological relatedness (JUICE-MOOSE) was equally effective in either visual field (VF). Semantic similarity (INCH-YARD) produced larger priming for right visual field (RVF) stimuli. These results suggest that the hemispheres may utilize different information to achieve lexical access. Spread of activation through the lexicon was measured in complementary automatic (low probability) priming experiments. Priming was restricted to LVF stimuli for orthographically similar words, while priming for phonologically related stimuli was only obtained in the RVF. Automatic semantic priming was present bilaterally, but was larger in the LVF. These results imply hemisphere differences in lexical organization, with orthographic and semantic relationships available to the right hemisphere, and phonological and semantic relations available to the left hemisphere. Support was obtained for hemisphere asymmetries in both lexical organization and directed lexical processing.     

Right-hemisphere interactions in picture-word processing

The processing of pictures was investigated in three experiments which eliminated the response effects involved in naming. When a categorization task was used, clear advantages in response latency and accuracy were observed for left visual-field (LVF) presentations. This was in contrast to previous investigations which have used a naming task and which have reported right visual-field (RVF) advantages. When a distracting word was added to the display, the pattern of influence also changed from that reported previously. The use of naming tasks has indicated predominantly left-hemisphere effects, with demonstrations of interactions between pictures and words in the RVF. With a categorization task in Experiment 2, however, the only effective words were those related in meaning to the picture, and only when they were projected to the right hemisphere. The third experiment confirmed the LVF advantage for picture processing with masked displays, but found no reliable asymmetry with unmasked presentations. The pattern of semantic facilitation was also confirmed with the masked displays, but when the mask was removed an inhibition effect replaced the facilitation effect. These effects are interpreted as indicating that picture recognition is localized within the right cerebral hemisphere. It is suggested that the facilitating effect of related words is restricted to the left hemisphere because it is an effect upon recognition processes, whereas the inhibition effect reflects response competition. It is also suggested that previous reports of left-hemisphere interference effects are due to effects of response competition in naming tasks.     

Dividing attention within and between hemispheres: testing a multiple resources approach to limited-capacity information processing

Two experiments tested the limiting case of a multiple resources approach to resource allocation in information processing. In this framework, the left and right hemispheres are assumed to have separate, limited-capacity pools of undifferentiated resources that are not mutually accessible, so that tasks can overlap in their demand for these resources either completely, partially, or not at all. We tested all three degrees of overlap in demand for left hemisphere supplies, using dual-task methodology in which subjects were induced to pay different amounts of attention to each task. Experiment 1 compared complete and partial overlap by combining a verbal memory load with a task in which subjects named nonsense syllables briefly presented to either the left or right visual field (LVF and RVF, respectively). Experiment 2 compared complete versus no overlap by using the same verbal memory load combined with a laterally presented same-different judgment task that did not require a spoken response. Decrements from single-task performance were always more severe when the visual field task stimulus was presented to the RVF. Further, subjects in Experiment 1 were able to trade performance between tasks on both LVF and RVF trials because there was always at least some overlap in left hemisphere demand. In Experiment 2, performance trade-offs were observed on RVF (complete overlap) trials, but not on LVF trials, where no overlap in demand existed. These results contradict a single-capacity model, but they support the idea that the hemispheres' resource supplies are independent and have implications for both cerebral specialization and divided attention issues.     

Visual hemispheric asymmetries depend on which spatial frequencies are task relevant

Observers classified sine-wave and square-wave gratings on the basis of fundamental frequency (Are the bars wide or narrow?) or on the basis of higher harmonic frequencies (Are the bars sharp or fuzzy?). Stimuli were presented in either the left (LVF) or right (RVF) visual field. When the classification was made on the basis of the fundamental frequencies (1 or 3 c/deg), there was a LVF/right hemisphere advantage. However, when the classification was on the basis of a sharp/fuzzy distinction which involved searching for the higher harmonic frequencies, then a RVF/left hemisphere advantage was found.     

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.     

Length, formats, neighbours, hemispheres, and the processing of words presented laterally or at fixation

It has long been known that the number of letters in a word has more of an effect on recognition speed and accuracy in the left visual field (LVF) than in the right visual field (RVF) provided that the word is presented in a standard, horizontal format. After considering the basis of the length by visual field interaction two further differences between the visual fields/hemispheres are discussed: (a) the greater impact of format distortion (including case alternation) in the RVF than in the LVF and (b) the greater facilitation of lexical decision by orthographic neighbourhood size (N) in the LVF than in the RVF. In the context of split fovea accounts of word recognition, evidence is summarised which indicates that the processing of words presented at fixation is affected by the number of letters to the left of fixation but not by the number of letters to the right and by the number of orthographic neighbours activated by letters to the left of fixation but not by the number of orthographic neighbours activated by letters to the right of fixation. A model of word recognition is presented which incorporates the notion that the left hemisphere has sole access to a mode of word recognition that involves parallel access from letter forms to the visual input lexicon, is disrupted by format distortion, and does not employ top-down support of the letter level by the word level.     

Divided Visual Attention and Left Hemisphere Activation Among Psychopathic and Nonpsychopathic Offenders

Recent divided attention studies suggest the impulsive antisocial behavior of psychopaths may be related to deficient processing of information under conditions that place substantial demands on left-hemisphere-specific processing resources (left hemisphere activation (LHA) hypothesis; D. S. Kosson [1996, 1998]). To examine performance under conditions constraining eye movements and covert shifts of attention, 26 psychopathic and 46 nonpsychopathic inmates completed a divided attention task in which lateralized stimuli appeared briefly and simultaneously in the left visual field (LVF) and right visual field (RVF) of a monitor. Targets were either presented primarily in the RVF to induce LHA or were equiprobable in LVF and RVF to promote equal activation (EA) of left and right hemisphere resources. Psychopaths were less accurate than nonpsychopaths only under LHA conditions; within-group comparisons also revealed a substantial decrement from EA to LHA only in psychopaths. Thus, psychopaths’ performance deficits were specific to conditions priming left hemisphere resources asymmetrically.     

Different methods of lexical access for words presented in the left and right visual hemifields

Right-handed adults were asked to identify by name bilaterally presented words and pronounceable nonwords. For words in the normal horizontal format, word length (number of letters) affected left visual hemifield (LVF) but not right visual hemifield (RVF) performance in Experiments 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. This finding was made for words of high and low frequency (Experiment 6) and imageability (Experiment 5). It also held across markedly different levels of overall performance (Experiments 1 and 2), and across different relative positionings of short and long words in the LVF and RVF (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 demonstrated that the variable affecting LVF performance is the number of letters in a word, not its phonological length. For pronounceable nonwords (Experiment 7) and words in unusual formats (Experiment 8), however, length affected both LVF and RVF performance. The characteristics identified for RVF performance in these experiments also hold for the normal reading system. In this (normal) system the absence of length effects for horizontally formatted words is generally taken to reflect the processes involved in lexical access. Length effects in the normal reading system are thought to arise when lexical access for unusually formatted words and for the pronunciation of nonwords requires the short-term storage of information at a graphemic level of analysis. The characteristics of LVF performance indicate that horizontally formatted words presented to the right cerebral hemisphere can only achieve lexical access by a method that requires the short-term storage of graphemic information. This qualitative difference in methods of lexical access applies regardless of whether the right hemisphere is seen as accessing words in the left hemisphere's lexicon or words in a lexicon of its own.     

Error monitoring in the hemispheres: the effect of lateralized feedback on lexical decision.

Does each hemisphere have its own system for monitoring and responding to errors? Three experiments investigate the effect of presenting lateralized accuracy feedback in a bilateral lexical decision task. We presented feedback after each trial in either the left visual field (LVF) or right visual field (RVF). In Experiment 1 the feedback stimuli were faces smiling or frowning, in Experiment 2 we used colored squares, and Experiment 3 tested the effect of verbal feedback. Negative feedback presented in the LVF tended to improve performance on the following trial, while the same negative feedback in the RVF tended to disrupt performance on the following trial. This result was strongest with the faces as feedback, was less pronounced with colored squares, and disappeared with verbal feedback. The results are interpreted as suggesting a right hemisphere superiority for error monitoring that depends on the mode of feedback.     

Hemispheric effects of canonical views of category members with known typicality levels

Is there a preferred hemispheric canonical view of a concept? We investigated this question in a natural superordinate category membership decision task using a hemifield paradigm. Participants had to decide whether or not an image of an object lateralized in the left (LVF) or right (RVF) visual half-field is a member of a predesignated superordinate category. The objects represented high, medium, or low typicality levels, and each object had six different perspective views (front, front-right, front-left, side, back-left, and back-right). The latency responses revealed a significant interaction of Hemi Field X View X Typicality (there wasno hemifield difference in accuracy). The findings confirm the presence of asymmetry in stored concepts in long-term memory and suggest, in addition, a hemispheric canonical view of these concepts, a view strongly related to typicality level.