Whole and part comparisons of words and nonwords

Under conditions of sequential presentation, two words are matched more quickly than are a single letter and the first letter of a word. An exception to this whole-word advantage was reported in 1980 by Umansky and Chambers, who used word pairs as stimuli, and asked subjects to compare the entire words or the words’ first letters. Experiment 1 showed that the stimulus lists used by Umansky and Chambers may not have constrained subjects to process the displays differently for wholistic and component comparisons. In those studies, the two words were identical onsame trials for both wholistic and first-letter comparisons, so that first-letter decisions could have been based on wholistic information. In the present study, lists were constructed so that first-letter decisions could not be determined correctly by wholistic information (e.g., BLAME/BEACH), and the whole-word advantage was replicated. Experiment 2 tested whether wholistic comparisons are generally superior to component comparisons. For consonant strings, first-letter comparisons were made more quickly than were whole-string comparisons. These results are interpreted as support for hierarchical models of visual word processing.     

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.     

Hemispheric Differences in Context Sensitivity During Lexical Ambiguity Resolution

Three experiments were conducted to investigate the influence of contextual constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution in the cerebral hemispheres. A cross-modal priming variant of the divided visual field task was utilized in which subjects heard sentences containing homonyms and made lexical decisions to targets semantically related to dominant and subordinate meanings. Experiment 1 showed priming in both hemispheres of dominant meanings for homonyms embedded in neutral sentence contexts. Experiment 2 showed priming in both hemispheres of dominant and subordinate meanings for homonyms embedded in sentence contexts that biased a central semantic feature of the subordinate meaning. Experiment 3 showed priming of dominant meanings in the left hemisphere (LH), and priming of the subordinate meaning in the right hemisphere (RH) for homonyms embedded in sentences that biased a peripheral semantic feature of the subordinate meaning. These results are consistent with a context-sensitive model of language processing that incorporates differential sensitivity to semantic relationships in the cerebral hemispheres.     

Hemispheric asymmetries for temporal information processing: transient detection versus sustained monitoring

This study investigated functional differences in the processing of visual temporal information between the left and right hemispheres (LH and RH). Participants indicated whether or not a checkerboard pattern contained a temporal gap lasting between 10 and 40 ms. When the stimulus contained a temporal signal (i.e. a gap), responses were more accurate for the right visual field-left hemisphere (RVF-LH) than for the left visual field-right hemisphere (LVF-RH). This RVF-LH advantage was larger for the shorter gap durations (Experiments 1 and 2), suggesting that the LH has finer temporal resolution than the RH, and is efficient for transient detection. In contrast, for noise trials (i.e. trial without temporal signals), there was a LVF-RH advantage. This LVF-RH advantage was observed when the entire stimulus duration was long (240 ms, Experiment 1), but was eliminated when the duration was short (120 ms, Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, where the gap was placed toward the end of the stimulus presentation, a LVF-RH advantage was found for noise trials whereas the RVF-LH advantage was eliminated for signal trials. It is likely that participants needed to monitor the stimulus for a longer period of time when the gap was absent (i.e. noise trials) or was placed toward the end of the presentation. The RH may therefore be more efficient in the sustained monitoring of visual temporal information whereas the LH is more efficient for transient detection.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Hemispheric processing differences revealed by differential conditioning and reaction time performance.

Two different experimental procedures were used to examine (a) information-processing differences between two groups of subjects (Cs versus Vs) identified by the form of their conditioned eyeblinks; (b) information-processing differences between the right and left cerebral hemispheres; and (c) parallels between hypothesized C-V differences and right-left hemisphere differences. In the first experiment, the evocative command words BLINK and DON'T BLINK served as positive and negative conditioned stimuli. It was found that Vs gave more conditioned eyeblinks than Cs and that differential eyelid conditioning of Vs more than Cs was influenced by the semantic content of the stimuli. More importantly, the conditioning performance of Cs was more influenced by the semantic attributes of the stimuli when they were presented directly to the right visual field (left hemisphere) than when they were presented directly to the left visual field (right hemisphere). In contrast, the conditioning performance of Vs was equally influenced by the semantic attributes regardless of which hemisphere received direct stimulation. A second experiment was designed to determine whether such hemisphere-of-presentation differences for Cs versus Vs could also be obtained in a very different task. Subjects classified as Cs or Vs during a differential eyelid conditioning task then performed two same-different reaction time (RT) tasks that required discrimination of complex polygons in one case and the names of letters in another. On each RT trial both stimuli of a pair appeared briefly either in the center, left, or right visual field. For both Cs and Vs RTs to complex polygon pairs averaged 20 msec faster on left visual field trials than on right visual field trials, consistent with current hypotheses about right-hemisphere specialization for visuospatial processing. In contrast, the results for letter pairs generally confirmed the C-V differences found in Experiment 1. That is, the right visual field (left-hemisphere) advantage for these verbal stimuli was once again larger for Cs than for Vs. The present results suggest that the two groups of subjects (Cs versus Vs) differ qualitatively in the modes of information processing that they typically employ. The results also suggest that these different modes of processing are related to aspects of cerebral hemisphere organization and that even right-handed individuals may differ from each other in the extent to which each cerebral hemisphere is mobilized for a given experimental task. Such individual differences must be incorporated into both models of classical eyelid conditioning and models of cerebral hemisphere specialization.     

Quantitative and Qualitative Hemispheric Asymmetry for Processing Japanese Kana

Native Japanese speakers identified three-letter kana stimuli presented to the left visual field and right hemisphere (LVF/RH), to the right visual field and left hemisphere (RVF/LH), or to both visual fields and hemispheres simultaneously (BILATERAL trials). There were fewer errors on RVF/LH and BILATERAL trials than on LVF/RH trials. Qualitative analysis of error patterns indicated that there were many fewer errors of first-letter identification than of last-letter identification, suggesting top-to-bottom scanning of the kana characters. In contrast to similar studies presenting nonword letter trigrams to native English speakers, qualitative error patterns were identical for the three visual field conditions. Taken together with the results of earlier studies, the results of the present experiment indicate that the ubiquitous RVF/LH advantage reflects a left-hemisphere superiority for phonetic processing that generalizes across specific languages. At the same time, qualitative aspects of hemispheric asymmetry differ from one language to the next and may depend on such things as the way in which individual characters map onto the pronunciation of words and nonwords.     

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.     

Comparison processes on visual mental images

Three experiments were conducted to test whether visual mental images and visual perceptual representations possess equivalent structural properties and undergo functionally equivalent comparison processes. In Experiment 1, subjects were required to perform asame-different letter classification in which the two letters were shown in succession. The first letter in the pair either was actually presented (perceptual condition) or had to be actively generated (imaginal condition). Both conditions showed that (1) response latencies fordifferent decisions decreased as a function of the degree of difference (segment effect), and (2) same decisions were faster than the fastestdifferent ones (fast same effect). In Experiment 2, the imaginal condition only was employed, but no imagery instructions were given and very strict time constraints were assigned. In spite of these restrictions, subjects apparently generated and used visual images, as attested by the fact that the results were comparable to those of the previous experiment. In Experiment 3, three experimental manipulations were introduced to prevent the use of visual images. Such manipulations proved effective, as shown by the disappearance of the segment effect. It was concluded that in the visual modality images and percepts are equivalent in structure and are processed in a very similar way.     

Dual hemispheric processing in a letter matching task

It has been reported that performance on recognition, detection, and matching tasks is enhanced if stimuli are projected to both sides of the visual field rather than to one side alone (Dimond, 1972). The present study investigated the claim that this phenomenon is due to the distribution of the burden of perceptual processing between the hemispheres. Three experiments were carried out using a matching paradigm in which RT and response errors were recorded. In all experiments, subjects were required to match two letters that were displayed separately on either side of a central fixation point (bilateral presentation) or were displayed together on the same side of the visual field (unilateral presentation). It was found that although lateral interference between adjacent stimuli was significantly implicated in the phenomenon, a strong residual effect, which could be tentatively ascribed to hemispheric mechanisms, remained in relation to letter name matches. It is argued that a model based on parallel hemispheric decision processes provides a better account of the data than does one based upon the notion of distributed perceptual processing.     

Attentional holism in visual word processing

Summary Decisions about the identity of an entire word are made more quickly than decisions about the identity of a letter within a word. Explanations of this whole-word advantage based on the time-course of the activation of different levels of unit detectors have given way to explanations based on how attention is allocated to the output of the detectors. Three studies were carried out to examine the role of attention in the whole-word advantage. In Experiment 1, cues as to the level of decision (whole-word vs. first-letter) facilitated component processing, a finding that suggests word level information is normally the focus of attention. In Experiment 2, identification of a probe item to the right of a display was longer when subjects prepared for a first-letter rather than a whole-word decision. That is, the spatial extent of attention is wider for whole-word decisions. In Experiment 3, probe latencies were longer when subjects prepared for a whole-word decision than when they prepared for a signalled probe trial. Preparation for a whole-word decision is not automatic in the sense of being free of capacity demands. The overall pattern of results leads to the conclusion that the whole-word advantage is an instance of attentional holism.     

The effects of bilateral presentations on lateralized lexical decision

We investigated how lateralized lexical decision is affected by the presence of distractors in the visual hemifield contralateral to the target. The study had three goals: first, to determine how the presence of a distractor (either a word or a pseudoword) affects visual field differences in the processing of the target; second, to identify the stage of the process in which the distractor is affecting the decision about the target; and third, to determine whether the interaction between the lexicality of the target and the lexicality of the distractor ("lexical redundancy effect") is due to facilitation or inhibition of lexical processing. Unilateral and bilateral trials were presented in separate blocks. Target stimuli were always underlined. Regarding our first goal, we found that bilateral presentations (a) increased the effect of visual hemifield of presentation (right visual field advantage) for words by slowing down the processing of word targets presented to the left visual field, and (b) produced an interaction between visual hemifield of presentation (VF) and target lexicality (TLex), which implies the use of different strategies by the two hemispheres in lexical processing. For our second goal of determining the processing stage that is affected by the distractor, we introduced a third condition in which targets were always accompanied by "perceptual" distractors consisting of sequences of the letter "x" (e.g., xxxx). Performance on these trials indicated that most of the interaction occurs during lexical access (after basic perceptual analysis but before response programming). Finally, a comparison between performance patterns on the trials containing perceptual and lexical distractors indicated that the lexical redundancy effect is mainly due to inhibition of word processing by pseudoword distractors.     

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。     

Letter familiarity does not aid feature extraction

Summary Familiarity effects in visual letter processing were examined by means of a mutilation detection task. The uppercase E was used as the non-mutilated letter. One or two horizontal bars of the E were delected, to produce an upright or inverted F or L. These four mutilations of the E were assigned to the same response. In Experiment 1, brief exposure of the stimuli was followed by a backward mask. Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1, except that the display duration of the stimulus was increased and the backward mask was omitted. In Experiment 3, the overall luminance of the stimuli (luminance per point times length of the constituent line segments) was held constant. In Experiment 4, the upright and inverted non-E letter occurred in different blocks to encourage a normal (upright) letter processing strategy in the upright letter blocks. Accuracy (Experiment 1) and mean correct response times (all experiments) were not different for the upright and inverted F or for the upright and inverted L. These findings and converging results from other studies indicate that the higher familiarity of the upright letters did not aid feature extraction.