Hemispheric specialization for processing of visually presented verbal and spatial stimuli

Two “same-different” reaction time experiments, analogous in task demands made on the S, were designed to test laterality differences in. perception. Ten normal right-handed Ss performed a verbal task in which they decided whether or not two three-letter words belonged to the same conceptual class. Ten different Ss performed a spatial task in which they decided whether two 16-cell matrices with 3 blackened cells were identical. Reaction times were found to be sensitive to laterality differences in perception. Verbal stimuli were processed faster when presented in the right visual field, and thus projected directly to the left cerebral hemisphere; spatial stimuli were processed faster when presented in the left visual field, and thus projected directly to the right cerebral hemisphere. These results were analyzed in terms of implications regarding hemispheric asymmetries for processing of verbal and spatial material and the nature of interhemispheric transfer of information.     

Cognitive consequences of asymmetrical visual distraction

The authors explored whether manipulating the location of distraction in the participants' visual field influences the degree of competition between visual and other cognitive processes. If a cognitive task is lateralized to a particular hemisphere, visual distraction directed toward that same hemisphere should impair performance on that task more than should visual distraction directed toward the other hemisphere. Consistent with this hypothesis, the authors found in Experiments 1 and 2 that participants better recalled words of high imageability in a verbal memory task when the examiner was in the participant's left visual field (right hemisphere) than when the examiner was in the participant's right visual field (left hemisphere). In Experiment 3, the authors found that this effect reversed for performance on a right-hemisphere spatial task.     

Picture-name priming in the cerebral hemispheres: evidence for phonological access in the right hemisphere

This study investigated right hemisphere involvement in access to phonology, using a picture-naming priming paradigm where pictures and names of common objects printed in Japanese Kana were presented in succession to the same visual field or different visual fields with a stimulus onset asynchrony of 250 msec. A naming task was used for this purpose. The result showed that, when primes and targets were presented to the same visual field, facilitation for related pairs was observed in each hemisphere, with overall naming latencies being slower in the right hemisphere than in the left hemisphere. This result indicates that the prior access to phonology for a picture in the right hemisphere facilitates phonological activation of a word that names the picture in this hemisphere, suggesting that the right hemisphere is involved in access to phonology. On the other hand, when primes and targets were presented to different visual fields, there was no facilitation for related pairs with inhibition for unrelated pairs, irrespective of prime and target visual fields. It is suggested that this inhibition-dominant pattern of priming may occur due to homotopic inhibition processes proposed by N. D. Cook.     

Hemisphere specialization of Go experts in visuospatial processing

To investigate hemisphere function of experts, Go experts and novices were given two Salthouse-type visuospatial tasks. In Experiment 1, stimuli of 4 digits in 6 cells were projected to the left (LVF) or right visual field (RVF). There was no prominent group difference in identification of digits and locations. In Experiment 2, stimuli of 4 digits in 16 cells were projected to the LVF or RVF. Go experts showed more accurate performance than novices. Both groups showed the same laterality, an RVF advantage, in the number identification. However, in the location identification, Go experts showed no visual field difference, whereas novices showed an RVF advantage. Based on these findings, the relationship between task demand and hemisphere function of experts is discussed.     

Neural Recruitment and CognitiveAging: Two Hemispheres Are Better Than One, Especially as You Age

Several neuroimaging studies have reported that older adults show weaker activations in some brain areas together with stronger activations in other areas, compared with younger adults performing the same task. This pattern may reflect neural recruitment that compensates for age-related neural declines. The recruitment hypothesis was tested in a visual laterality study that investigated age differences in the efficiency of bihemispheric processing. Letter-matching tasks of varying complexity were performed under two conditions: (a) matching letters projected to the same visual field (hemisphere) and (b) matching letters projected to opposite visual fields (hemispheres). As predicted by the recruitment hypothesis, older adults generally performed better in the bilateral than unilateral condition, whereas younger adults showed this pattern onlyfor the most complex task. We discuss the relation between these results and neuroimaging evidence for recruitment, and the relevance of the present bihemispheric advantage to other evidence for age-related changes in interhemispheric transfer.     

Temporal discrimination in the split brain

Divided visual field studies of neurologically normal adults indicate that the left hemisphere is superior to the right in making temporal judgments. Some neuroimaging and neuropsychological studies, however, have suggested a role for the right hemisphere in temporal processing. We tested the divided hemispheres of a split-brain patient in two tasks requiring temporal judgments about visually presented stimuli. In one task, the patient judged whether two circles presented to one visual field appeared for the same or different durations. In the second task, the patient judged whether the temporal gaps in two circles occurred simultaneously or sequentially. In both tasks, the performance of the right hemisphere was superior to that of the left. This suggests that the right hemisphere plays an important role in making temporal judgments about visually presented stimuli.     

Differential visual field-interhemispheric transfer: can it explain sex and handedness differences in lateralization?

104 men and women were tested for visual field-hemispheric transfer of spatial information on a dot-localization task. Right-handed subjects showed significant improvement when stimuli were presented to the left visual field of the right hemisphere (LVF-RH) after practice on the same task presented to the right visual field of the left hemisphere (RVF-LH) first. No improvement was found when the task was presented in the reverse order (LVF-RH first followed by RVF-LH). It was concluded that, for right-handers, transfer of spatial information to the right hemisphere is facilitated while transfer to the left hemisphere is inhibited. Left-handed subjects demonstrated no significant improvement in either condition, suggesting inhibition or lack of transfer of spatial information in either direction. No sex differences were found in either right-handed or left-handed subjects. The findings suggest that there may be different mechanisms underlying the similarities in functional lateralization of women and left-handers.     

Did you see that? Dissociating advanced visual information and ball flight constrains perception and action processes during one-handed catching

The integration of separate, yet complimentary, cortical pathways appears to play a role in visual perception and action when intercepting objects. The ventral system is responsible for object recognition and identification, while the dorsal system facilitates continuous regulation of action. This dual-system model implies that empirically manipulating different visual information sources during performance of an interceptive action might lead to the emergence of distinct gaze and movement pattern profiles. To test this idea, we recorded hand kinematics and eye movements of participants as they attempted to catch balls projected from a novel apparatus that synchronised or de-synchronised accompanying video images of a throwing action and ball trajectory. Results revealed that ball catching performance was less successful when patterns of hand movements and gaze behaviours were constrained by the absence of advanced perceptual information from the thrower's actions. Under these task constraints, participants began tracking the ball later, followed less of its trajectory, and adapted their actions by initiating movements later and moving the hand faster. There were no performance differences when the throwing action image and ball speed were synchronised or de-synchronised since hand movements were closely linked to information from ball trajectory. Results are interpreted relative to the two-visual system hypothesis, demonstrating that accurate interception requires integration of advanced visual information from kinematics of the throwing action and from ball flight trajectory.     

Absence of exposure time influence on lateralized face recognition and object naming latency tasks

J. Sergent (1982, Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 451-461; 1983, Psychological Bulletin, 93, 481-512) postulates that the left cerebral hemisphere preferentially extracts higher spatial frequency information, while the right hemisphere preferentially extracts lower frequency spatial information, from the visual scene. According to this view, shorter exposure times favor better right than left hemisphere performance, while longer exposure times favor better left than right hemisphere performance on tachistoscopic laterality tasks. We studied the effects of a threefold variation (40 msec versus 120 msec) in exposure duration, with constant 3-mL luminance, on face recognition and on object naming latency task performances. These are the same stimulus parameters employed by J. Sergent (1983, Psychological Bulletin, 93, 481-512) to demonstrate exposure duration effects in a task requiring the judgment of the sex of models from face photographs. We found the expected LVF superiority on the face recognition task and RVF superiority on the object naming task. There was, however, no influence of exposure duration on the performances. It is concluded that these tasks, which tap established lateralized processing asymmetries, are quite robust in their resistance to exposure time influence.     

Manual localization of lateralized visual targets

The effects of visual field, responding limb and extrapersonal space on the ability to localize visual targets using slow positioning movements of the arm were examined. Special contact lenses were used to lateralize visual information and to make comparisons with localization under monocular control conditions. Subjects made slow positioning movements to place a cursor directly beneath target lights. They saw target lights but not the moving limb during the trial. For directional error, results indicated that subjects were more accurate localizing targets lateralized to the right hemisphere than targets lateralized to the left hemisphere, indicating right hemisphere superiority for localization of visual targets in grasping space. Localization performance was significantly better with the right hand than the left hand. the left hand demonstrated a directional bias to the right of the targets. Responding hand and visual field did not interact. Finally, contrary to subjects' awareness and verbal reports, target localization was not less accurate in lens than in monocular control conditions. This was true for both amplitude and directional error. This is consistent with other studies where visual information about limb position is not available.     

How does interhemispheric communication in visual word recognition work? Deciding between early and late integration accounts of the split fovea theory

It has recently been shown that interhemispheric communication is needed for the processing of foveally presented words. In this study, we examine whether the integration of information happens at an early stage, before word recognition proper starts, or whether the integration is part of the recognition process itself. Two lexical decision experiments are reported in which words were presented at different fixation positions. In Experiment 1, a masked form priming task was used with primes that had two adjacent letters transposed. The results showed that although the fixation position had a substantial influence on the transposed letter priming effect, the priming was not smaller when the transposed letters were sent to different hemispheres than when they were projected to the same hemisphere. In Experiment 2, stimuli were presented that either had high frequency hemifield competitors or could be identified unambiguously on the basis of the information in one hemifield. Again, the lexical decision times did not vary as a function of hemifield competitors. These results are consistent with the early integration account, as presented in the SERIOL model of visual word recognition.     

Hemispheric asymmetries in visual pattern processing in infancy

A right hemisphere advantage was observed in a previous study of 4- to 9-month old infants presented with a face discrimination task (de Schonen & Mathivet, 1990). The present study was designed to investigate pattern processing by the two hemispheres and the interhemispheric communication of this processing. Infants aged 4 to 9 months were tested with divided visual field presentations in one or two discrimination tasks. Under both task conditions, the infants had to discriminate between two patterns in which only two local components differed. Under one condition the components of the patterns were arranged so as to produce a face-like pattern. Under the other condition the same components were arranged into arbitrary patterns that were not "good form" patterns. No performance asymmetry was observed with the arbitrary patterns; whereas, a right hemisphere (RH) disadvantage was observed with the face-like patterns compared with both the RH performances on the arbitary patterns and the left hemisphere (LH) performances on the face-like patterns. These results show that the RH advantage for individual face recognition is not due to a general immaturity or inability of the LH in pattern processing at this period of development, nor to a more specific inability in a local mode of pattern processing. On the other hand, the RH does not completely lack local processing capacity, but is at a disadvantage when this local mode of processing has to be used with face-like (or good form) patterns. The interhemispheric communication of visual discrimination learning was tested by measuring learning transfer between the visual fields. Contrary to de Schonen and Bry's study (1987) on faceness recognition, no data in favor of interhemispheric communication were recorded in the present study.     

Attention and hemispheric differences in reaction time during simultaneous audio-visual tasks

The effect of different types of competing auditory tasks on laterality differences in visual perception was investigated. Right-handed subjects were presented with digits which occurred randomly in the left or right visual fields. They responded vocally to previously specified digits in a go, no-go reaction time situation. In the absence of any competing auditory task, digits presented in the right visual field were processed more quickly. This visual field difference in reaction time was in the same direction while subjects performed a secondary musical task. However, when a secondary verbal task had to be performed, digits in the left visual field received faster responses. The results support the view that the right hemisphere is capable of some language functions, and that hemispheric differences in performance have at their basis a quantitative asymmetry, which can be reversed even in normal subjects by overloading their limited capacity.     

Probing hemispheric processes in an on-line reading task

Coney (1998) used a priming procedure to obtain evidence that the left and right hemispheres contributed equally to lexical processing of concrete nouns in a continuous reading task. In that study, however, there was no direct validation of the involvement of the right hemisphere in the task, and the possibility of left hemisphere processing of left visual field target stimuli could not be ruled out. The present study was designed to obtain validating evidence by using abstract and concrete noun primes in a similar reading task on the assumption that if the right hemisphere was contributing to the task there would be demonstrable differences between the visual fields in processing targets primed by abstract nouns. The results supported this expectation. While concrete targets projected to each visual field were primed by concrete nouns, there was significant priming by abstract nouns only in respect of targets presented to the right visual field. It is argued that this finding supports the involvement of the right hemisphere in continuous reading and further delimits the scope of its contribution to this process. Somewhat unexpectedly, the results also revealed that absolute response times were faster to left visual field targets when they were preceded by abstract nouns, even when there was no semantic relationship between the two words. It was suggested that this effect derives from the inability of the right hemisphere to process abstract nouns in that the failure of abstract nouns to engage lexical processing mechanisms leaves the right hemisphere relatively unencumbered when required to process a subsequent target.     

Right hemisphere involvement in the attentional blink: evidence from a split-brain patient

When two masked targets are presented in a rapid sequence, correct identification of the first hinders identification of the second. This attentional blink (AB) is thought to be the result of capacity limitations in visual information processing. Neuropsychological and neuroimaging evidence implicated the right hemisphere as the source of this processing limitation. We investigated this idea by testing a split-brain patient (JW) in a modified AB task. The targets were presented in the same visual field (VF), and thereby to the same hemisphere, or in different VFs. We observed evidence of an AB both when the targets were presented to the same hemisphere and when the targets were presented to different hemispheres. However, the AB was more severe when the second target was presented to the RH. Our results are consistent with the notion that the right hemisphere plays a critical, but not unique, role in limited-capacity visual processing.     

Form-Specific Visual Priming in the Left and Right Hemispheres

Word fragment completion performance was examined for items that were presented in the same or different letter case at study and test. During the study phase words and nonwords were presented at central fixation, then during the test phase a divided visual field technique was used in which word fragments were presented briefly to the right hemisphere (left visual field) or the left hemisphere (right visual field). Previous research using the word stem completion task indicated that only the right hemisphere was sensitive to case changes in words from study to test. In contrast, the current results indicate that in the fragment completion task the priming effects for the test items presented to either hemisphere were greater when the fragments were in the same compared to different letter case at study and test. These results indicate that both hemispheres are capable of supporting form-specific visual implicit memory.     

Kinematic Analyses of Manual Asymmetries in Visual Aiming Movements

The right hand advantage has been thought to arise from the greater efficiency of the right hand/left hemisphere system in processing visual feedback information. This hypothesis was examined using kinematic analyses of aiming performance, focusing particularly on time after peak velocity which has been shown to be sensitive to visual feedback processing demands. Eight right-handed subjects pointed at two targets with their left and right hands with or without vision available and either as accurately or as fast as possible. Pointing errors and movement time were found to be smaller with the right hand. Analyses of the temporal componenets of movement time revealed that the hands differed only in time after peak velocity (in deceleration), with the right hand spending significantly less time. This advantage for the right hand, however, was apparent whether or not vision was available and only when accuracy was emphasized in performance. These findings suggest that the right hand system may be more efficient at processing feedback information whether this be visual or nonvisual (e.g., proprioceptive).     

Hemispace and information control by the two cerebral hemispheres: which interaction?

Two experiments employing subjects with different experience in tactile discrimination (blind and seeing subjects) were carried out to investigate the effect of the space location of stimuli on the information processing activity of the two cerebral hemispheres. An angle discrimination task that yields a right hemisphere superiority was used. In Experiment 1, seeing subjects showed a general superiority of the left hand (right hemisphere) which was more pronounced in the left hemispace with respect to the central and the right hemispace performance. In Experiment 2, blind subjects showed a significant superiority of the left hand in the central and in the left hemispace and no difference between the two hands in the right hemispace. In both experiments hemispace differences were due only to the modification of the left hand (right hemisphere) performance. These results suggest that the hemispace control by the contralateral hemisphere interacts only with the activity of the hemisphere dominant in the information processing.     

An investigation of bilateral asymmetries in electrodermal activity

Research in cerebral laterality supports the idea that functional differences between the left and right hemispheres exist with respect to cognitive style and perceptual ability. Related research, which has examined autonomic nervous system (ANS) correlates of cerebral laterality, suggests that a component of the ANS, electrodermal activity (EDA), is also lateralized. Some findings in the literature report the occurrence of bilateral asymmetries in phasic and tonic EDA as a function of a left or right hemisphere preference for information processing. This experiment used normal male subjects who were either left or right movers in a test of Conjugate Lateral Eye Movement (CLEM). This selection procedure served to maximize a subject’s preference for either a right or left hemisphere mode of information processing. Bilateral EDA was recorded continuously while subjects performed a visual recognition task using word (left hemisphere) and shape (right hemisphere) stimuli. The data do not support the contention that performance on a procedure chosen to selectively activate a given hemisphere elicits asymmetric tonic and/or phasic EDA. The results show no significant difference in the frequency of elicited skin conductance responses under either of the experimental conditions. Bilateral tonic EDA rose continuously over time and did not vary in either hand as a function of task. The present results fail to offer support for either of the hypotheses which argue for I) increased contralateralexcitation with selective hemispheric activation, or 2) increased contralateralinhibition of the EDR with hemispheric arousal.     

Hemispheric differences in semantic processing: Category matching is not the same as category membership

Two closely related semantic processing tasks were studied under identical procedural conditions in order to examine lateral visual field effects on reaction times. In Experiment 1, reaction times did not differ as a function of visual field when subjects decided whether a lateral word was a member of a foveally presented category word (category membership task). On the other hand, reaction times were faster for right than for left visual field stimulus presentations when subjects decided whether two words, one lateral and one foveal, belonged to the same category (category matching task), although this advantage did not occur immediately. In Experiment 2, the laterality effect in the category matching task was studied as a function of word familiarity. Two groups of subjects performed the matching task for two blocks of trials, one group receiving the same word list in each block and the other receiving different lists. No visual field differences in reaction times were observed for either group during the first block of trials, but a distinct right field advantage appeared for both during the second block. The data from these experiments suggest that category matching strategies rely upon structures or processes localized in the left hemisphere, although their influence is not immediate. Category membership strategies, on the other hand, do not depend upon such localized structures.