Hemispheric differences in processing emotions and faces.

Visual field differences for the recognition of emotional expression were investigated using a tachistoscopic procedure. Cartoon line drawings of five adult male characters, each with five emotional expressions ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative, were used as stimuli. Single stimuli were presented unilaterally for 85 msec. Subjects (N = 20) were asked to compare this target face to a subsequent centrally presented face and to decide whether the emotional expressions of the two faces, or the character represented by the two faces, were the same or different. Significant left visual field (LVF) superiorities for both character and emotional expression recognition were found. Subsequent analyses demonstrated the independence of these effects. The LVF superiority for emotional judgments was related to the degree of affective expression, but that for character recognition was not. The results of this experiment are consistent with experimental and clinical literature which has indicated a right hemispheric superiority for face recognition and for processing emotional stimuli. The asymmetry for emotion recognition is interpreted as being an expression of the right hemisphere's synthetic and integrative characteristics, its holistic nature, and its use of imagic associations.     

Asymmetry in reception and retention of colors.

In Experiment 1 a same-different comparison task involving simultaneous discrimination of colors differing by 2.5 steps in hue and presented 2° in the left or right visual field was given to 24 male and 24 female familial righthanders. A significant left visual field superiority was obtained. In a color naming task, the higher the number of color pairs for which both members were given the same name, the larger the left visual field superiority. In Experiment 2 the tasks were replicated with a 10-sec memory interval inserted between the stimuli in each color pair. No significant effects were obtained.     

A dissociation of right and left hemispheric effects for recognizing emotional tone and verbal content

Emotionally intoned sentences (happy, sad, angry, and neutral voices) were dichotically paired with monotone sentences. A left ear advantage was found for recognizing emotional intonation, while a simultaneous right ear advantage was found for recognizing the verbal content of the sentences. The results indicate a right hemispheric superiority in recognizing emotional stimuli. These findings are most reasonably attributed to differential lateralization of emotional functions, rather than to subject strategy effects. No evidence was found to support a hypothesis that each hemisphere is involved in processing different types of emotion.     

Hemisphere differences for components of mental rotation

The hemispheric functional lateralization of components of mental rotation performance was investigated. Twenty right-handed males were presented with rotated alphanumerics and unfamiliar characters in the left or right visual field. Subjects decided if the laterally presented stimulus was identical to or a mirror image of a center standard stimulus. Reaction time and errors were measured. Previous mental rotation findings were replicated and the visual field variable produced significant effects for both dependent measures. An overall right visual field advantage was observed in the latency data, suggesting a left hemisphere superiority for at least one component process of the task. A significant interaction in the error data showed that alphanumerics produced less errors in the right visual field than in the left visual field, consistent with a left hemisphere superiority for processing verbal symbolic material. No such hemispheric difference in accuracy was found for unfamiliar characters.     

Task relevant effects on the assessment of cerebral specialization for facial emotion

Hemispheric specialization for processing different types of rapidly exposed stimuli was examined in a forced choice reaction time task. Four conditions of recognition were included: tacial emotion, neutral faces, emotional words, and neutral words. Only the facial emotion condition produced a significant visual field advantage (in favor of the left visual field), but this condition did not differ significantly from the neutral face condition's left visual field superiority. The verbal conditions produced significantly decreased latencies with RVF presentation, while the LVF presentation was associated with decreased latencies on the facial conditions. These results suggested that facial recognition and affective processing cannot be separated as independent factors generating right hemisphere superiority for facial emotion perception, and that task parameters (verbal vs. nonverbal) are important influences upon effects in studies of cerebral specialization.     

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.     

The effects of display and report order asymmetries on lateralized word recognition

Word recognition typically is better or faster in the right visual field than in the left visual field, an effect that often interacts with the handedness of subjects or the phonetic characteristics of the language employed. While these findings suggest a hemispheric locus, it is possible that the field difference is confounded with display or report order asymmetries. Here two experiments manipulate word orientation (horizontal vs. vertical), letter symmetry, and report order variables, and they demonstrate a generalized right field superiority that fails to interact with other factors. Since the superiority appears even when all apparent artifactual asymmetries are eliminated, the findings support a hemispheric interpretation.     

Developmental aspects of visual hemifield differences in perception of verbal material

The effect of acquisition of reading on visual field asymmetries for verbal material was investigated in school-age children. Contrary to the expectation that acquisition of differential scanning tendencies will operate on perceptual asymmetries, it was found that right visual field superiority which was independent of scanning direction appeared at the fifth grade. This, and the presence of slight left field superiority at the age when reading is initially acquired, suggests that hemispheric dominance and its attributes, parallel and sequential pattern recognition processes, is the major factor which determines the field preference for verbal material.     

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.     

Real or imagined incomplete lateralization of function in females?

Visual field effects for 30 normal familial right-handed females were investigated with 4-point random forms known to be recognized more accurately in the right visual field by normal familial right-handed males, and the relationship between spatial ability and various performance patterns was examined. The forms were presented 2 deg in the left or right visual field. After a 10-sec delay, the subject decided whether or not a form exposed in central vision was the same as the stimulus. Incomplete lateralization of function appeared to be supported by the finding of no field differences. An alternative explanation was discussed since visual field superiority was significantly correlated with WAIS Block Design scores scaled for age, females with relatively low scores showing a right visual field superiority and females with relatively high scores showing a left visual field superiority. The experiment was repeated with 30 familial right-handed males. A significant right visual field superiority was obtained, but visual field superiorities were not correlated with measures of visuo-spatial or verbal ability.     

Asynchrony of lateral onset as a factor in difference in visual field.

An experiment in matching judgments was designed to examine a role of perceptual process in apparent asymmetry. Recognition of Hirakana letters (Japanese letters) was required. The experimental condition in which stimuli were presented to the left visual field first and to the right visual field second produced more errors for all stimulus intervals (0 to 60 msec.) than experimental conditions where stimuli were presented to the right visual field first and to the left one second. Especially, superiority of the latter condition was marked with the longest stimulus interval employed. These results indicate superiority of the left hemisphere function for recognizing Hirakana letters and suggest that not only memory but also perceptual process contributes to this laterality effect.     

Visual field differences in verbal tasks: Effects of task familiarity and sex of subject

Four experiments using normal subjects investigated differences in magnitude of the right visual field (RVF) superiority as a function of word material (frequency and concreteness/imageability status), nonword letter strings (some of which were homophonic with nonpresented real words), and type of task (overt naming or lexical decision with discriminatory manual responses) as well as sex of the subject and the subject's familiarity with the material. Both latency and error measures showed that RVF superiority was more consistent when overt naming was required and with male subjects. For female subjects engaged in lexical decisions, a left visual field (LVF) superiority was often apparent, especially in the first half of an experimental sequence; when actually naming the items aloud, they showed field asymmetries similar to males. Except from an analysis of errors, there was little evidence to support differential right hemisphere mediation of high frequency concrete/imageable materials. It is suggested that in females, right hemisphere space normally reserved for visuospatial processing may have been invaded by secondary speech mechanisms. These mechanisms appear to operate at an essentially lexical level and may act in a supportive or auxiliary capacity for difficult or unfamiliar material; they seem to be equally concerned with both phonological and graphological processing and may account for the well-known female superiority in verbal tasks and inferiority in visuospatial tasks. Other findings are discussed such as the degree of consistency of the field differences, both for the same subjects and for the same stimulus materials under different task requirements and experimental conditions.     

Motivation, affect, and hemispheric asymmetry: power versus affiliation

In 4 experiments, the authors examined to what extent information related to different social needs (i.e., power vs. affiliation) is associated with hemispheric laterality. Response latencies to a lateralized dot-probe task following lateralized pictures or verbal labels that were associated with positive or negative episodes related to power, affiliation, or achievement revealed clear-cut laterality effects. These effects were a function of need content rather than of valence: Power-related stimuli were associated with right visual field (left hemisphere) superiority, whereas affiliation-related stimuli were associated with left visual field (right hemisphere) superiority. Additional results demonstrated that in contrast to power, affiliation primes were associated with better discrimination between coherent word triads (e.g., goat, pass, and green, all related to mountain) and noncoherent triads, a remote associate task known to activate areas of the right hemisphere.     

Laterality differences for word identification in bilinguals

Twenty-three Spanish-English bilinguals were tachistoscopically presented with four-letter common nouns. They viewed 20 word pairs, first in their native language, then in the other, for 40 msec under simultaneous bilateral exposure. This paradigm has previously shown a strong right visual field and therefore left hemisphere superiority for words in a single language. The results show a word identification advantage in the right visual field. This indicates a left hemisphere advantage for processing of both languages, regardless of which was learned first. There are nevertheless wide individual differences in the number of bilinguals showing the expected asymmetry, as compared with monolinguals. There may be a trend, therefore, for less unilaterality of language function in bilinguals, although both languages are seen as being equally lateralized.     

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.     

Lateral differences in tachistoscopic recognition of bilaterally presented verbal material.

When subjects have to report verbal material presented tachistoscopically simultaneously on both sides of a fixation point, right visual field superiority has been obtained in several experiments using a central task technique, i.e. where a stimulus presented at the fixation point had to be identified before reporting the rest of the material. Without a central task, left visual field superiority has generally been obtained. It has been suggested to attribute the difference to control of eye fixation by the central task. An alternative interpretation, that the central task modifies the order of attentional scanning was put to the test in Experiment I. With two normally printed words, right visual field superiority was obtained with a central task and left visual field superiority without it. It was predicted that with mirrored words, the opposite pattern would be obtained, yet here right visual field superiority was obtained both without and with a central task. Experiment II shows that the latter result is nevertheless dependent on scanning order, for it can be completely inverted through recall order instructions. It is concluded that lateral differences observed with bilateral presentation cannot be explained without taking account of optional processing priorities, but that the factors on which the latter depend are not yet fully understood.     

Mirror-reading in right- and left-handers

In mirror-reading, words are read from right to left and letters are read in a reverse right-to-left orientation. In one experiment we compared the ability of normal right- and left-handed subjects to mirror-read and found that the left-handers made fewer errors and could read mirror print more rapidly. In a second experiment we attempted to learn whether there is a hemifield superiority for reading mirror words and whether there are any differences between left- and right-handers in a hemifield. We found that although both right- and left-handers more rapidly detected mirror words projected to the left visual half-field, there were no differences between groups. However, in the right visual half-field, the performance of left-handers was superior to that of the right-handers. The results of the hemifield study suggest that left-handers may be superior at reading mirror words because they can more easily reverse their scanning pattern.     

Response bias and hemispheric differences in dot localization

A series of studies investigated the accuracy of dot localization in left and right visual fields. The left visual field superiority previously reported for this task was found to be small and statistically inconsistent. It was unaffected by the presence of a frame of reference, the location of the response card, or the sex of the subject. It was observed, however, that the majority of subjects showed a response bias favoring the report of items in the left visual field. This suggests that the right hemisphere is less critical than the left in its assessment of incoming information, and may provide a basis for understanding previous reports of right hemispheric superiority on dot localization. It is concluded that dot localization does not provide a reliable measure of right hemisphere performance.