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.     

Left hemisphere superiority for pronounceable nonwords,but not for unpronounceable letter strings

Right-handed adults were asked to identify bilaterally presented linguistic stimuli under three experimental conditions. In Condition A, stimuli were three-letter pronounceable nonwords (such as TUP), and subjects were asked to report them by naming them. In Condition B, stimuli were three-letter pronounceable nonwords, and subjects were asked to report them as strings of letters. In Condition C, stimuli were more or less unpronounceable letter strings (such as UTP) created by rearranging the letters of pronounceable nonwords, and subjects reported them as strings of letters. Pronounceable nonwords were found to be better identified from the right visual hemifield irrespective of the way in which they were reported. Unpronounceable letter strings did not produce any visual hemifield difference. Nonwords are of interest because they can be seen as potential words that lack both specific semantic properties and entries in the subject's internal lexicon. The results of the experiment are consistent with the view that both the left and right cerebral hemispheres are able to identify letters but the left hemisphere is more sensitive to the pronounceability of the nonwords. This may happen either because the left hemisphere can make better use of resemblances to real words or because it has access to spelling to sound correspondence rules.     

Modes of word recognition in the left and right cerebral hemispheres

Four experiments are reported examining the effects of word length on recognition performance in the left and right visual hemifields (LVF, RVF). In Experiments 1 and 2 length affected lexical decision latencies to words presented in the LVF but not to words presented in the RVF. This result was found for both concrete and abstract nouns. Changing from a normal horizontal format to the use of unconventionally "stepped" words, however, produced length effects for words in both visual hemifields (Experiment 3). The Length x VHF interaction was found once again in Experiment 4 where subjects classified words as either concrete or abstract. A model proposing two modes of visual processing of letter strings is presented to account for these findings. Mode A operates independent of string length and is seen only in left hemisphere analysis of familiar words. Mode B is length dependent: it is the only mode possessed by the right hemisphere but is displayed by the left hemisphere to nonwords and to words in abnormal formats.     

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.     

Cerebral Asymmetries in Processing Strategies for Letter and Symbol Trigrams

Several studies have shown that laterally presented consonant–vowel–consonant (CVC) strings produce both superior performance, and a more wholistic processing strategy in the right visual field/left hemisphere (RVF/LHEM), and a more sequential strategy in the inferior left visual field (LVF). To determine whether these strategies are applied to other types of trigrams subjects (n= 30) were asked to identify consonant and symbol trigrams briefly projected unilaterally to the LVF or RVF, or bilaterally (the same trigram in both fields—BVF). A second group of subjects (n= 30) first practiced pronouncing consonant trigrams and then viewed them tachistoscopically. Both tasks yield RVF advantages. Symbols are processed more wholistically in the LVF, more sequentially in the RVF and in an intermediate pattern when presented bilaterally. In contrast, subjects seem to chunk letters as bigrams, and do so equally well in all fields, and visual field differences in strategies emerge for consonants only when they are pronounced. Pronounceability of consonant trigrams, assessed with ratings and vocal reaction times, was predicted by orthographic regularity. Since the RHEM has limited phonetic skills, but it, like the LHEM, is privy to information on orthographic regularity, the error pattern on consonant strings indicates non-phonetic processing, whereas the RVF wholistic strategy for consonant–vowel–consonant strings appears to reflect phonetic processing.     

Different methods of lexical access for words presented in the left and right visual hemifields

Right-handed adults were asked to identify by name bilaterally presented words and pronounceable nonwords. For words in the normal horizontal format, word length (number of letters) affected left visual hemifield (LVF) but not right visual hemifield (RVF) performance in Experiments 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. This finding was made for words of high and low frequency (Experiment 6) and imageability (Experiment 5). It also held across markedly different levels of overall performance (Experiments 1 and 2), and across different relative positionings of short and long words in the LVF and RVF (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 demonstrated that the variable affecting LVF performance is the number of letters in a word, not its phonological length. For pronounceable nonwords (Experiment 7) and words in unusual formats (Experiment 8), however, length affected both LVF and RVF performance. The characteristics identified for RVF performance in these experiments also hold for the normal reading system. In this (normal) system the absence of length effects for horizontally formatted words is generally taken to reflect the processes involved in lexical access. Length effects in the normal reading system are thought to arise when lexical access for unusually formatted words and for the pronunciation of nonwords requires the short-term storage of information at a graphemic level of analysis. The characteristics of LVF performance indicate that horizontally formatted words presented to the right cerebral hemisphere can only achieve lexical access by a method that requires the short-term storage of graphemic information. This qualitative difference in methods of lexical access applies regardless of whether the right hemisphere is seen as accessing words in the left hemisphere's lexicon or words in a lexicon of its own.     

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.     

Length, formats, neighbours, hemispheres, and the processing of words presented laterally or at fixation

It has long been known that the number of letters in a word has more of an effect on recognition speed and accuracy in the left visual field (LVF) than in the right visual field (RVF) provided that the word is presented in a standard, horizontal format. After considering the basis of the length by visual field interaction two further differences between the visual fields/hemispheres are discussed: (a) the greater impact of format distortion (including case alternation) in the RVF than in the LVF and (b) the greater facilitation of lexical decision by orthographic neighbourhood size (N) in the LVF than in the RVF. In the context of split fovea accounts of word recognition, evidence is summarised which indicates that the processing of words presented at fixation is affected by the number of letters to the left of fixation but not by the number of letters to the right and by the number of orthographic neighbours activated by letters to the left of fixation but not by the number of orthographic neighbours activated by letters to the right of fixation. A model of word recognition is presented which incorporates the notion that the left hemisphere has sole access to a mode of word recognition that involves parallel access from letter forms to the visual input lexicon, is disrupted by format distortion, and does not employ top-down support of the letter level by the word level.     

Lateral word recognition: Effects of unilateral and bilateral presentation, asynchrony of bilateral presentation, and forced order of report

This experiment enquired: (1) whether right visual field (RVF) recognition superiority was greater in bilateral than in unilateral word presentation; (2) whether left field-favouring attentional or recall sets could be induced by presenting left visual field (LVF) words 20 msec prior to RVF words or by instructions to report LVF words prior to RVF words. Results showed: (1) all conditions studied yielded significant RVF superiority; (2) RVF superiority magnitude was significantly greater in bilateral than in unilateral presentation, suggesting the tenability of hypotheses that different mechanisms operate in these conditions; (3) neither earlier delivery nor earlier report of LVF words altered the pattern of RVF superiority in bilateral presentation, the later result demonstrating that differential receptive organization rather than differential recall of the two stimuli is responsible for RVF superiority in bilateral presentation.     

Word and letter string processing networks in schizophrenia: evidence for anomalies and compensation

Imaging studies show that in normal language correlated activity between anterior and posterior brain regions increases as the linguistic and semantic content (i.e., from false fonts, letter strings, pseudo words, to words) of stimuli increase. In schizophrenia however, disrupted functional connectivity between frontal and posterior brain regions has been frequently reported and these disruptions may change the nature of language organization. We characterized basic linguistic operations in word and letter string processing in a region-of-interest network using structural equation modeling (SEM). Healthy volunteers and volunteers with schizophrenia performed an fMRI one-back matching task with real words and consonant letter strings. We hypothesized that left hemisphere network dysfunction in schizophrenia would be present during processes dealing with linguistic/semantic content. The modeling results suggest aberrant left hemisphere function in schizophrenia, even in tasks requiring minimal access to language. Alternative mechanisms included increases in right hemisphere involvement and increased top-down influence from frontal to posterior regions.     

The role of familiar units in perception of words and nonwords

This paper investigates the effects of familiarity with whole-word units and letter-cluster units in perceptual encoding of letter strings. Subjects viewed brief, masked presentations of words and pronounceable pseudowords differing in letter cluster frequency. Identification of both display types was compared to control single letters. Perceptual accuracy was indexed by probe forced-choice responses and full verbal reports of the displays. Evidence that familiarity of whole-word units facilitated encoding was mixed but, on balance, favorable. Evidence that familiarity of letter-cluster units facilitated encoding was completely absent. This negative finding is surprising in view of the fact that we did obtain a large advantage of letters in pseudo-words as well as words over single letters. The discussion section considers an alternative to the view that perceivers use detectors for familiar letter-cluster units in the process of forming representations of pronounceable, orthographically regular letter strings.     

Conflicting strategies and hemispheric suppression in a lexical decision task

The research tests the prediction of the inhibitory-interaction hypothesis that experience with a task accentuates the functional imbalance between the hemispheres. Right-handed males who were experienced readers were presented a letter string to the centre visual field for lexical decision. The string was or was not accompanied by a blinking light to the left or right visual field. It was predicted that asymmetry would be greatest for strings that spelled words, less for strings that were orthographically correct (pseudowords) and least for strings that were orthographically incorrect (nonwords) because efficient adult readers have more experience with letter strings that do than do not spell a word, and have more experience with orthographically correct than incorrect letter strings. The analysis of response times supported the prediction. Moreover, in the nonword and in early trials of the pseudoword conditions, response times were faster when one or other hemisphere was distracted than when both were engaged suggesting the hemispheres use strategies that conflict when suppression has not been accentuated by practice. As well, as the trials progressed in the pseudoword condition, asymmetry reversed before increasing suggesting that the hemispheres reduce conflict by competing for and then strengthening suppression.     

Right hemisphere language processing: Lateral difference with imageable and nonimageable ambiguous words

Influence of imageability on hemispheric processing difference is studied in a lexical decision task with semantic priming. Homographs and ambiguous words were biased according to the prime toward their low or high imageable meanings and unilaterally presented in the visual field. A right visual field (RVF) superiority was observed; it was nonsignificant for the high imageable (HI) meaning but significant for the low imageable (LI) meaning of the ambiguous words. Thus the results seem to favor a bilateral hemispheric representation of HI words and a unilateral left representation of LI words. Theoretical implications of the results are discussed to the various models of ambiguous word access processing.     

Isolating visual units in the perception of words and nonwords

In three experiments, reaction times for same-different judgments were obtained for pairs of words, pronounceable nonwords (pseudowords), and unpronounceable nonwords. The stimulus strings were printed either in a single letter case or in one of several mixtures of upper- and lowercase letters. In Experiment 1, the stimuli were common one- and two-syllable words; in Experiment 2, the stimuli included both words and pseudowords; and in Experiment 3, words, pseudowords, and nonwords were used. The functional visual units for each string type were inferred from the effects that the number and placement of letter case transitions had onsame reaction time judgments. The evidence indicated a preference to encode strings in terms of multiletter perceptual units if they are present in the string. The data .also suggested that whole words can be used as functional visual units, although the extent of their use depends on contextual parameters such as knowledge that a word will be presented.     

Hemispheric Differences in the Processing of Words Learned Early Versus Later in Childhood

The research investigated whether there are hemispheric differences in processing for words acquired early in childhood (early AoA) and words acquired later in childhood (late AoA). We hypothesized that because of recent evidence suggesting that there is a right hemisphere dominance in early childhood, early AoA words would be represented in the right hemisphere, and late AoA words would be represented in the left hemisphere. This hypothesis differs from an early view that late AoA words would be represented in the left hemisphere, and early AoA words would be represented in both hemispheres (Gazzaniga, 1974). We report two experiments using the divided visual field (DVF) technique. The results showed that there was a right visual field (RVF)/left hemisphere (LH) advantage only for late AoA words. For early AoA words, there was a left visual field (LVF)/right hemisphere advantage (RH). Implications for theories of hemispheric differences in word processing are discussed.     

Hemispheric differences in processing handwritten cursive

Hemispheric asymmetry was examined for native English speakers identifying consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) non-words presented in standard printed form, in standard handwritten cursive form or in handwritten cursive with the letters separated by small gaps. For all three conditions, fewer errors occurred when stimuli were presented to the right visual field/left hemisphere (RVF/LH) than to the left visual field/right hemisphere (LVF/RH) and qualitative error patterns indicated that the last letter was missed more often than the first letter on LVF/RH trials but not on RVF/LH trials. Despite this overall similarity, the RVF/LH advantage was smaller for both types of cursive stimuli than for printed stimuli. In addition, the difference between first-letter and last-letter errors was smaller for handwritten cursive than for printed text, especially on LVF/RH trials. These results suggest a greater contribution of the right hemisphere to the identification of handwritten cursive, which is likely related visual complexity and to qualitative differences in the processing of cursive versus print.     

Word matching and Lexical Decisions: A Visual Half-Field study

In unilateral Visual Half-Field tasks visuospatial and linguistic processing were compared. In a Word Matching task subjects judged the physical identity of simultaneously presented pairs of three-letter words or legal nonwords. No mainfield effects were found, but word pairs were recognized better and faster as "same" than nonword pairs. Latencies and errors in "different" pairs increased monotonically with position of letter change in the left but not in the right visual field (RVF), suggesting a serial, letter-by-letter way of processing for the right hemisphere and a whole word approach for the left. At this perceptual level the ability to store lexical information from the icon is stressed as a hemisphere-specific factor. In a Lexical Decision task the same subjects judged the same items on the word/nonword dimension. A RVF advantage associated with words as compared to nonwords occurred, as expected. Additional analysis suggests that order and difficulty of tasks may influence females' laterality, as compared to that of males.     

Words, hemispheres, and dissociable subsystems: the effects of exposure duration, case alternation, priming, and continuity of form on word recognition in the left and right visual fields

Three experiments explore aspects of the dissociable neural subsystems theory of hemispheric specialisation proposed by Marsolek and colleagues, and in particular a study by [Deason, R. G., & Marsolek, C. J. (2005). A critical boundary to the left-hemisphere advantage in word processing. Brain and Language, 92, 251–261]. Experiment 1A showed that shorter exposure durations for lower-case words (13 ms) are associated with reduced right visual field (RVF) advantages compared with longer exposure durations (144 ms). Experiment 1B compared report accuracy for lower case and mixed case words at the same exposure duration (144 ms). The RVF advantage was reduced for mixed case words due to case alternation having more of an adverse effect in the RVF than in the LVF. Experiment 2 tested a different prediction of dissociable neural subsystems theory. Four-letter words were presented in mixed case in the LVF or RVF for 100 ms. They were preceded at the same location by a prime which could be in the same word in the same alternation pattern (e.g., FlAg–FlAg), the same word in the opposite alternation pattern (e.g., fLaG–FlAg), or an unrelated letter string in the same or opposite case alternation pattern (WoPk–FlAg or wOpK–FlAg). Relative to performance in the letter string prime conditions, which did not differ significantly between the two visual fields, there was more of an effect of word primes in the RVF than in the LVF. Importantly, the benefit of a word prime was the same whether the prime was in the same alternation pattern or was in the opposition alternation pattern. We argue that these results run contrary to the predictions of dissociable neural subsystems theory and are more compatible with theories which propose that a left hemisphere word recognition system is responsible for identifying written words, whether they are presented in the LVF or the RVF, and that letters are processed to an abstract graphemic level of representation before being identified by that system.     

Does Global Context Modulate Cerebral Asymmetries? A Review and New Evidence on Word Imageability Effects

In this article we examine whether the distribution of function across the right and left cerebral hemispheres for lexical processing is influenced by the global context within which words are presented. A review of previously published studies indicates that the ubiquitous right visual field (RVF)/left hemisphere advantage for word recognition may be reduced or eliminated for nouns, content words, or high image words, but only when such items are presented along with verbs, function words, or low image words. However, paradoxically, when the former items are presented in more homogeneous contexts, the RVF advantage is uniformly observed. We propose that the processing efficiency of a hemisphere for a given stimulus depends on that item's relation to the other stimuli provided, that is, the global context. This was examined in a visual half-field experiment that varied whether high and low image nouns were presented in homogeneous (blocked lists) or heterogeneous (mixed lists) contexts. An unvarying RVF advantage was observed for high image words in homogeneous contexts, but this advantage was eliminated when the same items were presented in heterogeneous contexts. We suggest that stimulus heterogeneity maximizes reliance on differing, but complementary, computational biases across hemispheres. Hence, the extent to which the left and right hemispheres are recruited for the recognition of individual word types can vary dynamically with variation in the stimulus environment.     

Effects of Output Order on Hemispheric Asymmetry for Processing Letter Trigrams

Observers identified consonant–vowel–consonant trigrams with the letters arranged vertically by pronouncing the stimulus (treating the bottom letter as the first letter) and spelling it from bottom to top. On each trial, the trigram was presented to the left visual field/right hemisphere (LVF/RH), to the right visual field/left hemisphere (RVF/LH), or to both visual fields simultaneously (BILATERAL trials). Quantitative and qualitative visual field differences were identical to those found when observers used a more natural response output order, treating the top letter of the trigram as the first letter. The results suggest that, regardless of output order, attention is distributed across the three letters in a relatively slow, top-to-bottom fashion on LVF/RH and BILATERAL trials, whereas attention is distributed more rapidly and evenly across the three letters on RVF/LH trials.