Are variations among right-handed individuals in perceptual asymmetries caused by characteristic arousal differences between hemispheres?

We propose that much of the variance among right-handed subjects in perceptual asymmetries on standard behavioral measures of laterality arises from individual differences in characteristic patterns of asymmetric hemispheric arousal. Dextrals with large right-visual-field (RVF) advantages on a tachistoscopic syllable-identification task (assumed to reflect characteristically higher left-hemisphere than right-hemisphere arousal) outperformed those having weak or no visual-field asymmetries (assumed to reflect characteristically higher right-hemisphere than left-hemisphere arousal). The two groups were equal, however, in asymmetries of error patterns that are thought to indicate linguistic or nonlinguistic encoding strategies. For both groups, relations between visual fields in the ability to discriminate the accuracy of performance followed the pattern of syllable identification itself, suggesting that linguistic and metalinguistic processes are based on the same laterally specialized functions. Subjects with strong RVF advantages had a pessimistic bias for rating performance, and those with weak or no asymmetries had an optimistic bias, particularly for the left visual field (LVF). This is concordant with evidence that the arousal level of the right hemisphere is closely related to affective mood. Finally, consistent with the arousal model, leftward asymmetries on a free-vision face-processing task became larger as RVF advantages on the syllable task diminished and as optimistic biases for the LVF, relative to the RVF, increased.     

Perceptual asymmetries in left- and right-handers for cartoon and real faces

We examined 40 left-handers and 40 right-handers on two free-vision tests of face processing. A chimeric face composed of a smiling half-face joined to either a neutral half-face (real faces) or a sad half-face (cartoon faces) and its mirror image were presented on each trial. Subjects judged which chimeric face looked happier, the one with the smile to the left or the one with the smile to the right. Right-handers, but not left-handers, had a highly significant leftward attentional bias, since chimeras with the smile to the left were judged happier than those with the smile to the right. The cartoon- and real-face tasks did not differ in the mean perceptual asymmetries they elicited. However, correlations between attentional-asymmetry scores for the two tasks, although high for both left- and right-handers, were significantly smaller than task reliabilities. Thus, the cartoon- and real-face tasks overlap to a major extent in the lateralized processes they measure, but to a lesser extent, they also index different lateralized processes.     

The lateralization of lip-read sounds: a first look

Two tachistoscopic studies on the lateralization of lip-read still photographs in normal right handers are reported. In the first, subjects matched a still lip photograph with a heard speech sound. A clear right hemisphere (LVF) advantage emerged, despite the phonological requirements of this task. This pattern of laterality failed to interact with the type of response (same/different) or with the status of the heard phoneme; both consonant and vowel matching showed the same pattern of LVF advantage, despite the significantly greater difficulty of consonant than vowel matching in this particular task. In the second study subjects were required to speak the sound they saw being spoken by a centrally displayed face photograph. The displayed face was chimeric; that is, one side of the face was seen saying one sound, one side another. Here, a rather complex pattern of results ensued. For the speakers seen a clear expressor asymmetry emerged; speech sounds were judged more accurately when they issued from the right side of the speaker's face. However, in the LVF, and only the LFV, accuracy in reporting chimeric face sounds correlated with speed in learning to lip-read, suggesting that the LVF is systematically involved even when task demands (speaking the response, phonological analysis, small, more central displays) do not, at first sight, suggest that they should. Taken together, these studies suggest that the right hemisphere could support some aspects of the processing of seen speech in normally hearing, normally lateralized individuals.     

Multitask investigation of individual differences in hemispheric asymmetry

Right-handed subjects (N = 120) participated in four different laterality tasks designed to measure aspects of cerebral hemisphere asymmetry: identification of dichotically presented consonant-vowel syllables (CVs), examination of the effects of concurrent repetition of CVs and concurrent anagram solution on finger-tapping by the right and left hands, lateralized identification of CVs presented tachistoscopically to the left and right visual fields, and left/right biases on a free-vision face task involving judgments of emotion. Ear differences in the dichotic listening task were related to the pattern of lateralized interference in the dual-task finger-tapping paradigm. There were no other significant relations between pairs of tasks, but when the present results are considered in the light of other recent experiments, there appears to be a relation between lateral bias on the free-vision face task and visual field differences in tachistoscopic identification. The pattern of results has implications for hypothesized individual differences among right-handers in cerebral dominance for verbal processes, input pathway dominance, and asymmetric arousal of the two cerebral hemispheres.     

A Web-based study of cerebral asymmetry for perception of emotion

Many studies have examined cerebral asymmetry via lateralized presentation of stimuli using specialized software. Because these studies typically require extensive control over variables such as stimulus exposure duration, size, location, and so forth, they are not easily transferred to the World Wide Web. The present study replicated a free-vision, chimeric faces task via the Internet, using HTML and JavaScript. Previous results had shown that right-handed participants tend to perceive a chimeric face with a smile to their (the viewers’) left as happier than its mirror image. That result was replicated in the Web-based study, and the leftward bias was actually significantly greater than that found using the traditional pencil-and-paper version of the task. Possible reasons for this difference are discussed.     

Visual field asymmetries for rhyme and semantic tasks in fluent and nonfluent bilinguals.

A tachistoscopic study investigated hemispheric specialization among fluent and nonfluent bilinguals for rhyme and semantic tasks in both their languages. Fluent bilinguals gave faster responses and made fewer errors in their responses to the words presented in the RVF(LH) while the opposite happened for nonfluent, which indicates greater RH participation in the first stages of a second language. Fluent bilinguals performed better not only in the second but also in their native language, suggesting superior language skills on the part of fluent bilinguals. A LVF(RH) superiority was obtained for semantic tasks, indicating RH participation in semantic judgments. Another finding was a high ratio of first-born children among fluent bilinguals, potentially explained in terms of parental attitudes toward first- versus later born children.     

Development of differences in response latencies to right and left visual fields

Robust lateralization developed in right-handed adults who were asked to judge letter pairs as "same" or "different" during 4608 trials. By the end of the first two blocks (768 trials) "same" responses were favored when presented in the RVF (transmitted directly to the left hemisphere) and "different" responses were favored when presented in the LVF (transmitted direction to the right hemisphere). This gradually reversed over sessions with "same" responses becoming faster for letters presented in the LVF, and "different" responses becoming faster for stimuli presented in the RVF. The laterality acquired under these conditions was cumulative and reproducible, appeared in all 16 subjects, and was preserved between sessions a week apart. The data suggest that laterality is a flexible and reversible characteristic of the human brain even when stimulus and task remain constant.     

The independence of face identity and facial expression recognition mechanisms: relationship to sex and cognitive style

Two tasks, one mapping the recognition of unfamiliar face identity and the other the identification of six facial expressions were unilaterally presented to field dependent and field independent individuals of both genders. Regardless of sex, field independent subjects showed faster-response times (RTs) in the left visual field (LVF) for face identity and for the identification of disgust and fear and faster RTs in the RVF for the identification of anger. A trend toward LVF superiority was found over the whole sample for the facial expression task; this effect was still present when the face identity task was partialled out, indicating the independence of the underlying mechanisms.     

Lateralization in the visual perception of Chinese characters and words

It has been reported that tachistoscopic perception of single Chinese characters is better with a left-visual-field (LVF) than with a right-visual-field (RVF) presentation and that of Chinese words consisting of characters is better with a RVF presentation (O. J. L. Tzeng, D. L. Hung, B. Cotton, & S.-Y. Wang, 1979, Nature (London), 382, 499-501). In this study, the nature of this character-word difference in lateralization was explored in a task in which stimuli were presented unilaterally to a visual field for recognition test. Four types of stimuli were used: Single character, single pseudo- or noncharacter, two-character word, and two-character pseudoword. Results show (a) no visual-field advantage for illegal characters and words, (b) a LVF-advantage effect for characters associated with a more prominent LVF than RVF character-superiority effect, (c) a RVF-advantage effect for words associated with a more prominent RVF than LVF word-superiority effect, and (d) these two visual-field effects for characters and words being not absolute, they occur only with a low rather than with a high recognition for their respective illegal counterparts. These results suggest that the character-word difference is due to a more efficient lexical interpretation of character stimuli in the right than in the left hemisphere and a more efficient lexical interpretation of word stimuli in the left than in the right hemisphere.     

Familiarity decisions for faces presented to the left and right cerebral hemispheres

Right-handed subjects were asked to decide whether or not faces presented briefly in the RVF or in the LVF were familiar (familiar faces were those of famous people). This task avoids the need for extensive semantic processing or temporary storage involved in conventional naming or identification tasks, and thus eliminates the contribution of such factors to any observed asymmetry. The resulting finding of faster reaction times to LVF faces, with no overall visual hemifield difference in error rates, is taken to indicate a right-hemisphere superiority either in the processes used to construct facial representations or in the accessing of face recognition units, or both.     

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.     

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.     

Are variations among subjects in lateral asymmetry real individual differences or random error in measurement? Putting variability in its place

The current research investigates sources of variability in subjects' asymmetry scores on commonly used laterality tasks. In particular, subjects' asymmetry scores on four bilateral tachistoscopic tasks and one free-vision task were entered into a principal component analysis (PCA) in order to investigate components that explain the maximum variance of the sample. The results indicate that about half of the variation (45.2%) in asymmetry scores on both tachistoscopic and free-vision tasks is attributable to individual differences in characteristic perceptual asymmetry. The amount of variance explained by this characteristic perceptual asymmetry component is similar in a sample of dextrals and a sample of sinistrals. No significant relation was revealed between individual differences in characteristic perceptual asymmetry and performance on various verbal and spatial cognitive tasks.     

Hemispheric asymmetries and cognitive flexibility: an ERP and sLORETA study

Although functional cerebral asymmetries (FCAs) affect all cognitive domains, their modulation of the efficacy of specific executive functions is largely unexplored. In the present study, we used a lateralized version of the task switching paradigm to investigate the relevance of hemispheric asymmetries for cognitive control processes. Words were tachistoscopically presented in the left (LVF) and right visual half field (RVF). Participants had to categorise the words either based on their initial letters, or according to their word type. On half of the trials the task changed (switch trials) whereas on the other half it stayed the same (repeat trials). ERPs were recorded and the neural sources of the ERPs were reconstructed using standardised low resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA). In the word type task, participants were faster on repeat trials when stimuli were presented in the RVF. In contrast, in the initial letter task participants were faster on repeat trials and in general more accurate after stimulus presentation in the LVF. In both tasks, no hemispheric asymmetries in reaction times were observed on switch trials. On the electrophysiological level, we observed a left lateralization of the N1 that was mediated by activation in the left extrastriate cortex as well as a greater positivity of the P3b after stimulus presentation in the RVF compared to the LVF that was mediated by activation in the superior parietal cortex. These results show that FCAs affect the neurophysiological correlates of executive functions related to task switching. The relation of neurophysiological and behavioural asymmetries is mediated by task complexity, with more complex tasks leading to more interhemispheric interaction and smaller left-right differences in behavioural measures. These findings reveal that FCAs are an important modulator of executive functions related to cognitive flexibility.     

Perceived reachability in hemispace

A common observation in studies of perceived (imagined) compared to actual movement in a reaching paradigm is the tendency to overestimate. Of the studies noted, reaching tasks have been presented in the general midline range. In the present study, strong right-handers were asked to judge the reachability of visual targets projected onto a table surface at midline, right- (RVF), and left-visual fields (LVF). Midline results support those of previous studies, showing an overestimation bias. In contrast, participants revealed the tendency to underestimate their reachability in RVF and LVF. These findings are discussed from the perspective of actor 'confidence' (a cognitive state) possibly associated with visual information, perceived ability, and perceived task demands.     

About face: left-hemisphere involvement in processing physiognomies

Three experiments were concluded to investigate the involvement of the two cerebral hemispheres in processing faces. Perceptual discrimination of pairs of faces was equally speedy overall when the stimuli were presented in the right visual field (RVF) or left visual field (LVF). For faces differing in one or two features, however, a qualitatively different pattern of results was obtained for the two visual fields, and an RVF advantage emerged when the difference lay in the upper part of the faces (Experiment 1). An examination of the discriminability of the facial features from which the faces were constructed (Experiment 2) showed that the processes involved in RVF comparisons of faces were not dependent on the saliency of the features but, rather, followed a top-to-bottom serial analysis of the stimuli; the speed of the processing involved in LVF presentations was a function of the degree of similarity of the different comparison faces. Evidence for a serial type of comparison faces were used (Experiment 3). It was concluded that even though comparisons were equally speedy overall in LVF and RVF presentations, qualitatively different processes take place in the two hemispheres, which prove competent at processing faces, each in its own way. Some methodological problems inherent in tachistoscopic studies are discussed, and it is proposed that the quality of the stimulus representation achieved or required for cognitive processing may be determinant in the emergence of functional hemispheric asymmetries.     

Unilateral versus bilateral presentation methods in the reaction time paradigm

The use of bilateral presentation in lateralized tachistoscopic reaction time (RT) tasks has been precluded by problems of how to instruct the subject to respond to the left visual field (LVF) or right visual field (RVF) stimulus and by the necessity of fixation control with bilateral presentation. Schmuller and Goodman, 1979 and Schmuller and Goodman, 1980, Brain and Language, 11, 12–18) offered a method, applied to date only in recognition accuracy studies, which can overcome these problems. They used an “arrowhead pointer” at fixation. This instructs the subject as to which stimulus to report first and also controls fixation. We adapted the method to the RT paradigm by having subjects report only the stimulus indicated and applied it in a bilateral presentation version of the Object Naming Latency Task (W. F. McKeever & T. L. Jackson, 1979, Brain and Language, 7, 175–190). Fifty subjects received the unilateral task and 50 received the bilateral task. The bilateral task yielded right visual field superiority in 98% of the subjects and the magnitude of the superiority was over three times as large as in the unilateral task. Different sex × familial sinistrality × VHF interactions obtained on the tasks. Combining the advantages of reaction time and bilateral presentation methods may substantially increase the resolving power of lateralized tachistoscopic tasks.     

Gender differences in empathy: the role of the right hemisphere

The relationship between activation of the right cerebral hemisphere (RH) and empathy was investigated. Twenty-two men and 73 women participated by completing a chimeric face task and empathy questionnaire. For the face task, participants were asked to pick which of the two chimeric faces looked happier. Both men and women were significantly more likely to say the chimera with the smile to their left was happier, suggesting activation of the RH. As expected, men scored significantly lower than women on the empathy questionnaire, p = .003. A correlation was found between RH activation on the face task and empathy for women only, p = .037, suggesting a possible neural basis for gender differences in empathy.     

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.     

Visual field asymmetries in numerical size comparisons of digits, words, and signs

Visual field asymmetries were examined in American Sign Language-English bilinguals for speeded numerical size judgments of pairs of digits, number words, and number signs. Physical size of the number pairs was either congruent or incongruent with their numerical size. The results revealed a greater left visual field (LVF) interference for numbers represented as digits and a greater right visual field (RVF) interference for numbers represented as words or signs. Subjects' performance on number words and signs was also influenced by their skill in English and ASL: interference was greater in the RVF in the subjects' better language but was greater in the LVF for the less skilled language. These findings suggest that lateralization of numerical size judgments is moderated by the mode of number presentation and by prior language experience.