Effects of visual-field and matching instruction on event-related potentials and reaction time

Vertical letter pairs were presented randomly in the left and right visual hemifields in a physical identity match and name identity match condition. The reaction times showed a right visual field superiority for name matches, and a left visual field superiority for physical matches. Event-related potentials to letter pairs showed a sequence of three waves: a negative wave (N2, around 270 msec), a positive wave (P3, around 500 msec), and a broad positive slow wave (SW, around 600-700 msec), respectively. P3 and SW amplitudes were consistently larger at the left hemisphere than at the right hemisphere, regardless of the field of stimulation. At both hemispheres, N2 waves were always larger to stimuli presented in the visual field contralateral to a hemisphere than stimuli presented in the visual field ipsilateral to a hemisphere. The positive waves (P3, SW) showed the opposite pattern: smaller amplitudes to stimuli that were presented contralaterally than stimuli that were presented ipsilaterally to a given hemisphere. These results were attributed to a shift in sustained negativity on the directly stimulated hemisphere, relative to the indirectly stimulated hemisphere, reflecting either sensory at attentional processes in the posterior cerebral hemispheres.     

Hemisphere-specific processes in letter matching

Three experiments were designed to investigate outstanding questions concerning the effect of memory load variations on efficiency and coding processes in the left and right cerebral hemispheres. In Experiment 1 subjects were presented with one, two, or three target letters in uppercase or lowercase in central vision, followed by simultaneous bilateral probes requiring a name match response. Twenty young right-handed adults, 10 males and 10 females, acted as subjects. Two main features of the results were as follows: (a) The slope of the linear function relating mean reaction time (RT) and set size was 30% greater for right visual field (RVF)-left-hemisphere probe stimuli under both physical and name identity conditions, and (b) RT for RVF-left-hemisphere probes was greater when the probe was drawn from preterminal serial position in the target list. Experiments 2 and 3 examined the proposition that the results of Experiment 1 reflected asymmetric interference during list acquisition. The results showed that, first, the LVF-right-hemisphere advantage was eliminated or reversed under unilateral probe presentation conditions, and second, the LVF-right-hemisphere advantage for a single, preterminal serial position was insensitive to variations in the interitem interval. The results are thought to be inconsistent with the interference hypothesis. The general implications of the results for existing theories of hemisphere function are discussed.     

Stimulus probability and same-different classification

Three experiments investigated the effect of stimulus probability on same-different classification time. In Experiments I and II, subjects made same responses on the basis of name matches of simultaneously presented letters. Half of the same trials involved letters that were also physically identical. Experiment I showed that the presentation probability of specific letters affected name matches and different responses, but not physical matches. Experiment II varied stimulus contrast as well as probability. Contrast had a main effect but did not interact with probability at any level of processing. In Experiment III, subjects were switched to the physical level of processing. Stimuli that now had the same name but differed in case were called different. In this condition, the probability effects obs(irved in Experiment II disappeared. These results are interpreted as demonstrating that stimulus probability has its effect during the process that derives the name of the stimulus from the visual representation. This process takes place before the name comparison is made, and the name comparison process precedes the determination of the different response.     

Individual differences in the verbal coding of familiar visual stimuli

Two experiments were performed both of which involved the same-different comparison of pairs of alphabet letters. "Same" reaction times were obtained for both physical matches (e.g., AA) and name matches (e.g., aA). The results of both experiments supported the hypothesis that individual subjects would differ with respect to whether or not they based their physical matches on a comparison of verbal codes. In Experiment I, subjects differed in the size of their reaction time difference between physical and name matches, and in Experiment II, individuals differed with respect to whether or not the frequency of usage of the letters affected their reaction time for physical matches. In both experiments, the individual differences in verbally coding physical matches were related to Hock's (1973) individual differences distinction between subjects emphasizing analytic processes and subjects emphasizing structural processes.     

Processing of visually presented vowels in the cerebral hemispheres

The respective efficiency of the cerebral hemispheres in processing visually presented vowels is discussed and examined in a tachistoscopic experiment with normal subjects. It is suggested that results from dichotic listening experiments cannot be used to predict performance on the same material in the visual modality. The physical characteristics of the stimulus, in both modalities, contribute to the pattern of hemispheric advantage and cannot be ignored in the interpretation of results from dichotic listening and tachistoscopic experiments.     

LEVEL OF PROCESSING EFFECTS ON HEMISPHERIC ASYMMETRIES WITH KANA (JAPANESE PHONETIC SYMBOLS) WORDS

Two experiments were conducted to examine the role of levels and types of higher-order processing to which the stimulus was subjected. In the experiment 1, two different physical identity matches with Kana (Japanese phonetic symbols) words, one involving two operations while the other involves one operation, were required, and no visual field difference was found though two operations task yielded longer RTs than in one operation task. Experiment 2, where two different name identity matches, one involving linguistic and spatial operations while the other involves linguistic operation, revealed that (1) a significant right visual field advantage is found in the linguistic operation task; however, this tendency disappears in the two operation task, (2) the two operation task yields longer RTs than the one operation task does. These results suggest that the levels of information processing and types of higher-order processing (spatial operation in this study) are important factors in determining hemispheric asymmetry effects.     

Hemispheric processing of anaphoric inferences: the activation of multiple antecedents

This research investigates the hemispheric processing of anaphors when readers activate multiple antecedents. Participants read texts promoting an anaphoric inference and performed a lexical decision task to inference-related target words that were consistent (Experiment 1) or inconsistent (Experiment 2) with the text. These targets were preceded by constrained or less constraining text and were presented to participants' right visual field-left hemisphere or to their left visual field-right hemisphere. In Experiment 1, both hemispheres showed facilitation for consistent antecedents and the right hemisphere showed an advantage over the left hemisphere in processing antecedents when preceded by less constrained text. In Experiment 2, the left hemisphere only showed negative facilitation for inconsistent antecedents. When readers comprehend text with multiple antecedents: both hemispheres process consistent information, the left hemisphere inhibits inconsistent information, and the right hemisphere processes less constrained information.     

Hemisphere differences in conscious and unconscious word reading

Hemisphere differences in word reading were examined using explicit and implicit processing measures. In an inclusion task, which indexes both conscious (explicit) and unconscious (implicit) word reading processes, participants were briefly presented with a word in either the right or the left visual field and were asked to use this word to complete a three-letter word stem. In an exclusion task, which estimates unconscious word reading, participants completed the word stem with any word other than the prime word. Experiment 1 showed that words presented to either visual field were processed in very similar ways in both tasks, with the exception that words in the right visual field (left hemisphere) were more readily accessible for conscious report. Experiment 2 indicated that unconsciously processed words are shared between the hemispheres, as similar results were obtained when either the same or the opposite visual field received the word stem. Experiment 3 demonstrated that this sharing between hemispheres is cortically mediated by testing a split-brain patient. These results suggest that the left hemisphere advantage for word reading holds only for explicit measures; unconscious word reading is much more balanced between the hemispheres.     

Using visual codes for comparisons of pictures

In two experiments, Ss indicated for a series of trials whether or not two pictures of common objects had the same name (a positive or negative response, respectively). The pictures were separated by one of three interstimulus intervals (ISis), and reaction time (RT) was recorded. In Experiment I, positive trials involved pictures that were identical (identity match), mirror images (mirror match), or physically different but had the same name (name match). The stimuli came from either an S set, in which name-match pairs were physically similar, or a D set, in which name-match pairs were physically dissimilar. The mean RTs for mirror and identity matches were virtually the same but faster than name-match RTs, an advantage that decreased with increasing ISI. It was expected that name-match RT for the S set would be less than for the D set, indicating a facilitative effect of physical similarity; however, the identity-match RTs showed the expected difference. These results were extended in Experiment II, which involved only the identity and name matches, in pure sessions (which included positive trials of just one type) or mixed sessions (which included both types of positive trials). For mixed sessions, name- as well as identity-match RTs differed between the S and D sets. These results provide evidence for the use of visual codes in comparing nonidentical pictures, codes that apparently vary with experimental context and task demands.     

Recognition of letters traced in the right and left palms: Evidence for a process-oriented tactile asymmetry

Three experiments were conducted to examine the relative ability of the cerebral hemispheres to identify capital letters traced in the palms of the hands. In Experiment 1, letters were presented either right side up or upside down, and the subject's task was to name the letter aloud or point to an identical letter using the stimulated hand. Analysis of the accuracy data revealed that the left palm/right hemisphere (LP/RH) performed this task significantly better than did the right palm/left hemisphere (RP/LH), particularly when the stimuli were presented in the upside-down orientation. In Experiments 2 and 3, subjects performed the same letter identification task; however, on half the trials, they were required to maintain either a spatial or verbal concurrent memory load (i.e., a 24-point Vanderplas & Garvin form or six low-imagery nouns, respectively). In the no-load condition of Experiment 2 (spatial forms), the previously observed LP/RH advantage was replicated. However, in the load condition, this LP/RH superiority was no longer in evidence. In Experiment 3 (low-imagery nouns), the presence of a concurrent verbal task had minimal impact on the previously observed performance asymmetry as the LP/RH advantage was obtained in both the no-load and load conditions. The results of the three studies taken in composite suggest that (1) the operations utilized to identify letters traced in the palms of the hands are primarily spatial in nature and (2) that the observed performance asymmetry may be attributed to a right hemisphere superiority for the analysis and codification of information along a spatial dimension. These findings are discussed in terms of a "process-oriented" model of hemispheric asymmetry.     

Reaction times and evoked potentials as indicators of hemispheric differences for laterally presented name and physical matches

Letter pairs, which could be name matches, physical matches, or mismatches, were presented at fixation or 2.5 degrees left or right of fixation. During different experimental sessions, the locations and the types of matches were fixed (and therefore known in advance by the subject) or were randomized. Right visual field superiority in reaction time occurred for name matches only when location was randomized, and then the extent of the superiority depended on whether the types of match called for were predictable. Evoked potentials to the letter pairs during this task revealed hemispheric and neural pathway differences that were independent of expectancy condition. Right hemisphere responses were larger than left. For some components, amplitudes were smaller and latencies were shorter for direct than for indirect projection of stimuli to each cerebral hemisphere. Indirect-direct differences in P300 amplitude varied for each cerebral hemisphere according to whether a physical or name match occurred. The P130 and N170 components manifested hemispheric differences that depended on whether the two letters of a pair were in the same or different cases.     

Hemispheric differences in object identification

Although the right hemisphere is thought to be preferentially involved in visuospatial processing, the specialization of the two hemispheres with respect to object identification is unclear. The present study investigated the effects of hemifield presentation on object and word identification by presenting objects (Experiment 1) and words (Experiment 2) in a rapid visual stream of distracters. In Experiment 1, object images presented in the left visual field (i.e., to the right hemisphere) were identified with shorter display times. In addition, the left visual field advantage was greater for inverted objects. In Experiment 2, words presented in the right visual field (i.e., to the left hemisphere) under similar conditions were identified with shorter display times. These results support the idea that the right hemisphere is specialized with regard to object identification.     

大脑两半球与整体和局部性质的选择性加工

研究大脑两半球在加工整体和局部性质中的优势以及两半球能否同时分别选择两个复合刺激的整体和局部性质。实验中把一个复合字母随机呈现在左视野或右视野,或者把两个复合字母同时分别呈现在左视野和右视野。实验一发现,在单侧呈现条件下,被试检测左右视野的整体或局部靶目标的反应时没有显著差别,但在双侧同时呈现条件下,检测右视野局部靶目标比检测左视野局部靶目标时的反应时短。实验二要求被试检测同时呈现在左右视野的整体或局部靶目标,发现当两个视野的靶目标处于同一水平时(整体或局部)反应时较短,两个视野的靶目标处于不同水平时(一侧处于整体水平而另一侧处于局部水平)反应时较长。这些结果提示,当两个复合刺激同时呈现在左右视野时,大脑左半球在选择性加工局部性质时具有优势;左右两半球更容易选择两个复合刺激同一个水平的性质,分别选择两个复合刺激不同水平的性质比较困难。     

Ear differences in the recall of fricatives and vowels

Two experiments on the free recall of dichotically presented synthetic speech sounds are reported. The first shows that the right ear advantage for initial fricative consonants is not simply a function of the recognition response class, but that it is also a function of the particular acoustic cues used to achieve that response. This is true both for the whole response, and for the constituent phonetic features. The second experiment shows that when both the response class and the particular stimuli presented on certain trials are held constant, the right ear advantage for the constant stimuli can be influenced by the range of other stimuli occurring in the experiment. Vowels show a right ear advantage when, within the experiment, there is uncertainty as to vocal tract size, but they show no ear advantage when all the vowels in the experiment are from the same vocal tract. These results are interpreted as demonstrating that there are differences between the ears, and probably between the hemispheres, at some stage between the acoustic analysis of the signal and its identification as a phonetic category.     

Laterality effects in visual information processing: Hemispheric specialisation or the orienting of attention?

The notion that visual laterality patterns may be attributable to attentional allocation rather than hemispheric specialisation was examined in three experiments. In Experiment I, high verbal ability subjects were found to be less lateralised on a letter name match task than low verbals. In Experiment II, stimulus probability was shown to affect laterality patterns for name but not for physical matches. Again, low verbals were affected more than highs. Experiment III produced results identical to those of Experiment II although, in the latter experiment, visual fields were defined vertically rather than horizontally from the midline. Together, these results support the following generalisations: (1) visual asymmetries have their locus in a post-perceptual information processing stage; (2) visual asymmetries may be altered by manipulating stimulus probability; (3) verbal ability differences in laterality may not reflect neuroanatomical differences but merely cognitive capacity and (4) it may be unnecessary to invoke differential hemispheric specialisation in order to account for visual lateral asymmetries.     

The cerebral balance of power: confrontation or cooperation?

Two visual search experiments were carried out using as stimuli large letters made of small identical letters presented in right, or left, or central visual fields. Considering the spatial frequency contents of the stimuli as the critical variable, Experiment 1 showed that a left-field superiority could be obtained whenever a decision had to be made on a large (low frequency) letter alone, and a right-field advantage emerged when a small (high frequency) letter had to be processed. Experiment 2 showed that the two levels of structure of the stimulus were not encoded at the same rate and that at very brief exposure, only the large letter could be accurately identified. This was accompanied by a left-field superiority, whether or not the stimulus contained the target. These results are interpreted as revealing a differential sensitivity of the hemispheres to the spatial frequency contents of a visual image, the right hemisphere being more adept at processing early-available low frequencies and the left hemisphere operating more efficiently on later-available low frequencies. From these and other experiments reviewed, it is suggested that (a) cerebral lateralization of cognitive functions results from differences in sensorimotor resolution capacities of the hemispheres; (b) both hemispheres can process verbal and visuospatial information, analytically and holistically; (c) respective hemispheric competence is a function of the level of sensorimotor resolution required for processing the information available.     

Aging and Individual Variation in Interhemispheric Collaboration and Hemispheric Asymmetry

ABSTRACT

Thirty younger (Mean Age = 19.9 years) and 20 older adults (Mean Age = 74.7 years) performed Physical and Name Identity letter-matching tasks (matches were either within or between hemispheres) to study age-related changes in 1) the efficiency with which the two hemispheres interact with each other and 2) hemispheric asymmetry. In order to determine whether age-related effects were associated with differences in cognitive resources, the same individuals completed a set of memory span tasks. Performance on the letter-matching tasks indicated that the costs of interhemispheric collaboration were greater for older than for younger participants. However, within the older group, the advantage of spreading processing across both hemispheres increased as memory span decreased, suggesting that older individuals who are challenged by cognitive complexity are more likely to show increased benefits from between-hemisphere processing than individuals who are not so challenged. There was also an overall left visual field/right hemisphere advantage for the younger but not for the older group, suggesting greater age-related declines in right- than left-hemisphere function.     

Lateralized cognition: asymmetrical and complementary strategies of pigeons during discrimination of the "human concept"

This study was aimed at revealing which cognitive processes are lateralized in visual categorizations of "humans" by pigeons. To this end, pigeons were trained to categorize pictures of humans and then tested binocularly or monocularly (left or right eye) on the learned categorization and for transfer to novel exemplars (Experiment 1). Subsequent tests examined whether they relied on memorized features or on a conceptual strategy, using stimuli composed of new combinations of familiar and novel humans and backgrounds (Experiment 2), whether the hemispheres processed global or local information, using pictures with different levels of scrambling (Experiment 3), and whether they attended to configuration, using distorted human figures (Experiment 4). The results suggest that the left hemisphere employs a category strategy and concentrates on local features, while the right hemisphere uses an exemplar strategy and relies on configuration. These cognitive dichotomies of the cerebral hemispheres are largely shared by humans, suggesting that lateralized cognitive systems already defined the neural architecture of the common ancestor of birds and mammals.     

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.