Getting the Right Idea: Semantic Activation in the Right HemisphereMay Help Solve Insight Problems

Two experiments examined hemispheric differences in information processing that may contribute to solving insight problems. We propose that right-hemisphere (RH) coarse semantic coding is more likely than left-hemisphere (LH) fine semantic coding to activate distantly related information or unusual interpretations of words, and thus more likely to activate solution-relevant information for insight problems. In Experiment 1, after trying to solve insight problems, participants read aloud solution or unrelated target words presented to the left visual field (lvf) or right visual field (rvf). Participants showed greater lvf-RH than rvf-LH priming for solutions for solved problems and priming only in the lvf-RH for unsolved problems. In Experiment 2, participants showed an lvf-RH advantage for recognizing solutions to unsolved problems. These results demonstrate that in a problem-solving context, there was greater activation of solution-relevant information in the RH than in the LH. This activation is useful for recognizing, and perhaps producing, solutions to insight problems.     

The right hemisphere maintains solution-related activation for yet-to-be-solved problems

In five experiments, we examined the time course of hemispheric differences in solution activation for insight-like problems. We propose that solving insight problems requires retrieval of unusual interpretations of problem elements, and that right-hemisphere (RH) coarse semantic coding is more likely than left-hemisphere (LH) fine semantic coding to maintain semantic activation of such interpretations. In four experiments, participants attempted word problems for 7 sec (Experiments 1A and 1B) or 2 sec (Experiments 2A and 2B), and 750 msec later responded to lateralized target words. After 7 sec of solving effort, Experiment 1A participants showed greater solution-related priming (i.e., they named solutions faster than unrelated words) for left visual field-RH (lvf-RH) targets than for right visual field-LH (rvf-LH) targets, and Experiment 1B participants made faster solution decisions on target words presented to the RH, as previously demonstrated following 15 sec of effort. After 2 sec of solving effort in Experiment 2A, women showed symmetric solution-related priming, although men showed a slight lvf-RH advantage in priming; and in Experiment 2B participants made equally quick solution decisions for targets presented to the LH and to the RH. In Experiment 3, participants viewed the problems for 1,250 msec then named lateralized target words; they showed symmetric solution-related priming. These experiments demonstrate solution activation initially in both hemispheres, but maintained solution activation only in the RH.     

Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the right hemisphere

In one experiment, we tested for an association between semantic activation in the right hemisphere (RH) and left hemisphere (LH) and the Aha! experience when people recognize solutions to insight-like problems. The compound remote associate problems used in this experiment sometimes evoke an Aha! experience and sometimes do not. On each trial, participants (N = 44) attempted to solve these problems and, after 7 sec, named a target word, made a solution decision, and rated their insight experience of recognizing the solution. As in prior studies, the participants demonstrated more solution priming for solutions presented to the left visual field-RH (lvf-RH) than for solutions presented to the right visual field-LH (rvf-LH). As was predicted, following unsolved problems the participants showed greater priming for solutions that they rated as evoking an insight experience on the subsequent solution decision than for solutions that did not evoke an insight experience. This association was stronger for solutions presented to the lvf-RH than for those presented to the rvf-LH. These results tie the subjective experience of insight to an objective measure-semantic priming-and suggest that people have an Aha! experience in part because they already had semantic activation that could lead them to recognize the solution quickly. We believe semantic activation in both hemispheres cooperatively contributes to problem solving, but weak solution activation that contributes to the Aha! experience is more likely to occur in the RH than in the LH.     

Repetition priming reveals hemispheric differences in compound word processing

The left (LH) and right (RH) hemispheres are thought to implement different mechanisms for visual word recognition; the LH’s parallel encoding strategy is more efficient than the RH’s serial, letter-by-letter analysis. Here we examine differences in hemispheric language processing strategy by investigating repetition priming of compound words (e.g. buttercup) and their constituents (e.g. butter, cup). Eighty-eight right-handed participants (29 M, 59 F) completed a lexical decision experiment in which centrally-presented compounds primed related (whole compound, first constituent, second constituent) and unrelated targets presented laterally to the left or right visual field; participants made button-press word/nonword decisions. Consistent with the LH parallel/RH serial distinction, repetition priming prompted an RH advantage for first constituents, whereas the LH performed equally efficiently in response to both first and second constituents. These data thus highlight differences in the hemispheres’ language processing strategies, offering new evidence supporting a relative parallel/serial distinction in LH/RH visual word recognition.     

Hemispheric differences in specificity effects in talker identification

In the visual domain, Marsolek and colleagues (1999, 2008) have found support for two dissociable and parallel neural subsystems underlying object and shape recognition: an abstract-category subsystem that operates more effectively in the left cerebral hemisphere (LH), and a specific-exemplar subsystem that operates more effectively in the right cerebral hemisphere (RH). Evidence of this asymmetry has been observed in priming specificity for linguistic (words, pseudoword forms) and nonlinguistic (objects) stimuli. In the auditory domain, the authors previously found hemispheric asymmetries in priming effects for linguistic (spoken words) and nonlinguistic (environmental sounds) stimuli. In the present study, the same asymmetrical pattern was observed in talker identification by means of two long-term repetition-priming experiments. Both experiments consisted of a familiarization phase and a final talker identification test phase, using sentences as stimuli. The results showed that specificity effects (an advantage for same-sentence priming, relative to different-sentence priming) emerged when the target stimuli were presented to the left ear (RH), but not when the target stimuli were presented to the right ear (LH). Taken together, this consistent asymmetrical pattern of data from both domains-visual and auditory-may be indicative of a more general property of the human perceptual processing system. Theoretical implications are discussed.     

Understanding metaphoric sentences in the two cerebral hemispheres

Previous studies indicate that the right hemisphere (RH) has a unique role in maintaining activation of metaphoric single word meanings. The present study investigated hemispheric asymmetries in comprehending metaphoric word meanings within a sentence context. Participants were presented with incomplete priming sentences followed by (literally) true, false, or metaphoric lateralized target words and were asked to decide whether each sentence is literally true or false. Results showed that responses to metaphoric sentences were slower and less accurate than to false sentences when target words were presented to the right visual field (RVF)-LH as well as to the left visual field (LVF)-RH. This suggests that the understanding of lexical metaphors within a sentence context involves LH as well as RH processing mechanisms and that the role of each hemisphere in processing nonliteral language is flexible and may depend on the linguistic task at hand.     

Priming nouns and verbs: differential influences of semantic and grammatical cues in the two cerebral hemispheres

The current experiment investigated how sentential form-class expectancies influenced lexical-semantic priming within each hemisphere. Sentences were presented that led readers to expect a noun or a verb and the sentence-final target word was presented to one visual field/hemisphere for a lexical decision response. Noun and verb targets in the semantically related condition were compared to an unrelated prime condition, which also predicted part of speech but did not contain any lexical-semantic associates of the target word. The semantic priming effect was strongly modulated by form-class expectancy for RVF/LH targets, for both nouns and verbs. In the LVF/RH, semantic priming was obtained in all conditions, regardless of whether the form-class expectancy was violated. However, the nouns that were preceded by a noun-predicting sentence showed an extremely high priming value in the LVF/RH, suggesting that the RH may have some sensitivity to grammatical predictions for nouns. Comparisons of LVF/RH priming to calculations derived from the LSA model of language representation, which does not utilize word order, suggested that the RH might derive message-level meaning primarily from lexical-semantic relatedness.     

Hemispheric processing of inferences: The effects of textual constraint and working memory capacity

In this study, we investigated hemispheric differences in the generation of bridging and predictive inferences. Participants read texts that provided either strong or weak causal constraints for a particular bridging (Experiment 1) or predictive (Experiment 2) inference and performed a lexical decision task to inference-related targets presented to the left or the right hemisphere. Facilitation for strongly constrained bridging and predictive inferences was found in both hemispheres. In contrast, facilitation for weakly constrained inferences was stronger in the right than in the left hemisphere for both bridging and predictive inferences, although for the latter there was some facilitation in the left hemisphere as well. We also considered whether these effects differ as a function of the working memory capacity of the reader. High working memory capacity readers showed greater facilitation for strongly constrained inferences than for weakly constrained inferences in both hemispheres, whereas low working memory capacity readers showed this same pattern in the left hemisphere but showed equal facilitation for strongly and weakly constrained inferences in the right hemisphere. These results suggest that hemispheric processing, textual constraint, and working memory capacity interact to affect how readers generate causal inferences.     

Semantic representations of word meanings by the cerebral hemispheres

Two priming experiments investigated kind and strength of semantic knowledge underlying known, frontier, and unknown low frequency words. Results from Experiment 1 suggest that known words reflect categorical knowledge, but frontier and unknown words reflect thematic knowledge. Thematic knowledge for frontier words appears to be stronger than that for unknown words. Experiment 2 entailed visual half-field presentation of targets. All facilitory effects were restricted to the lvf/RH, and inhibitory effects to the rvf/LH. Experiment 1 findings were mirrored by the RH. Thematic knowledge appears to precede categorical knowledge for the RH, but the opposite may be true of the LH. Results are also discussed in terms of the RH role in meaning acquisition and metacontrol.     

Mixing metaphors in the cerebral hemispheres: what happens when careers collide?

Are processes of figurative comparison and figurative categorization different? An experiment combining alternative-sense and matched-sense metaphor priming with a divided visual field assessment technique sought to isolate processes of comparison and categorization in the 2 cerebral hemispheres. For target metaphors presented in the right visual field/left cerebral hemisphere (RVF/LH), only matched-sense primes were facilitative. Literal primes and alternative-sense primes had no effect on comprehension time compared to the unprimed baseline. The effects of matched-sense primes were additive with the rated conventionality of the targets. For target metaphors presented to the left visual field/right cerebral hemisphere (LVF/RH), matched-sense primes were again additively facilitative. However, alternative-sense primes, though facilitative overall, seemed to eliminate the preexisting advantages of conventional target metaphor senses in the LVF/RH in favor of metaphoric senses similar to those of the primes. These findings are consistent with tightly controlled categorical coding in the LH and coarse, flexible, context-dependent coding in the RH.     

Evaluating a split processing model of visual word recognition: effects of orthographic neighborhood size

The split fovea theory proposes that visual word recognition of centrally presented words is mediated by the splitting of the foveal image, with letters to the left of fixation being projected to the right hemisphere (RH) and letters to the right of fixation being projected to the left hemisphere (LH). Two lexical decision experiments aimed to elucidate word recognition processes under the split fovea theory are described. The first experiment showed that when words were presented centrally, such that the initial letters were in the left visual field (LVF/RH), there were effects of orthographic neighborhood, i.e., there were faster responses to words with high rather than low orthographic neighborhoods for the initial letters ('lead neighbors'). This effect was limited to lead-neighbors but not end-neighbors (orthographic neighbors sharing the same final letters). When the same words were fully presented in the LVF/RH or right visual field (RVF/LH, Experiment 2), there was no effect of orthographic neighborhood size. We argue that the lack of an effect in Experiment 2 was due to exposure to all of the letters of the words, the words being matched for overall orthographic neighborhood count and the sub-parts no longer having a unique effect. We concluded that the orthographic activation found in Experiment 1 occurred because the initial letters of centrally presented words were projected to the RH. The results support the split fovea theory, where the RH has primacy in representing lead neighbors of a written word.     

Sensitivity to local sentence context information in lexical ambiguity resolution: evidence from left- and right-hemisphere-damaged individuals

Using a cross-modal semantic priming paradigm, the present study investigated the ability of left-hemisphere-damaged (LHD) nonfluent aphasic, right-hemisphere-damaged (RHD) and non-brain-damaged (NBD) control subjects to use local sentence context information to resolve lexically ambiguous words. Critical sentences were manipulated such that they were either unbiased, or biased toward one of two meanings of sentence-final equibiased ambiguous words. Sentence primes were presented auditorily, followed after a short (0 ms) or long (750 ms) interstimulus interval (ISI) by the presentation of a first- or second-meaning related visual target, on which subjects made a lexical decision. At the short ISI, neither patient group appeared to be influenced by context, in sharp contrast to the performance of the NBD control subjects. LHD nonfluent aphasic subjects activated both meanings of ambiguous words regardless of context, whereas RHD subjects activated only the first meaning in unbiased and second-meaning biased contexts. At the long ISI, LHD nonfluent aphasic subjects failed to show evidence of activation of either meaning, while RHD individuals activated first meanings in unbiased contexts and contextually appropriate meanings in second-meaning biased contexts. These findings suggest that both left (LH) and right hemisphere (RH) damage lead to deficits in using local contextual information to complete the process of ambiguity resolution. LH damage seems to spare initial access to word meanings, but initially impairs the ability to use context and results in a faster than normal decay of lexical activation. RH damage appears to initially disrupt access to context, resulting in an over-reliance on frequency in the activation of ambiguous word meanings.     

Form-specific visual priming in the right cerebral hemisphere.

Results of 4 experiments indicate that both within-modality and case-specific visual priming for words are greater when test stimuli are presented initially to the right cerebral hemisphere (RH). In contrast, neither within-modality nor case-specific explicit memory for words is greater when stimuli are presented initially to the RH. Priming is measured using word-stem completion, and explicit memory is measured using word-stem cued recall. In both cases, Ss first rate how much they like words, and then word stems are presented briefly to the RH (in the left visual field) or to the left hemisphere (in the right visual field). Results suggest that at least 2 separate systems encode the visual representations that produce priming. The system that is more effective in the RH is better at representing form-specific information, whereas another system that is not more effective in the RH does not distinguish among distinct instances of word forms.     

Understanding metaphors: Is the right hemisphere uniquely involved?

Two divided visual field priming experiments examined cerebral asymmetries for understanding metaphors varying in sentence constraint. Experiment 1 investigated ambiguous words (e.g., SWEET and BRIGHT) with literal and metaphoric meanings in ambiguous and unambiguous sentence contexts, while Experiment 2 involved standard metaphors (e.g., The drink you gave me was a meteor) with sententially consistent and inconsistent targets (i.e., POTENT vs COMET). Similar literal and metaphor priming effects were found in both visual fields across most experimental conditions. However, RH processes also maintained activation of sententially inconsistent literal meanings following metaphoric expressions. These results do not strongly support the RH as the preferred substrate for metaphor comprehension (e.g., ), and suggest that processes in both hemispheres can support metaphor comprehension, although not via identical mechanisms. The LH may utilize sentence constraint to select and integrate only contextually relevant literal and metaphoric meanings, whereas the RH may be less sensitive to sentence context and can maintain the activation of some alternative interpretations. This may be potentially useful in situations where an initial understanding must be revised.     

Automatic semantic priming in the left and right hemispheres

We investigated hemispheric differences and inter-hemispheric transfer of facilitation in automatic semantic priming, using prime-target pairs composed of words of the same category but not associated (e.g. skirt-glove), and a blank-target baseline condition. Reaction time and accuracy were measured at short (300 ms) intervals between prime and target onsets, using a go/no-go task to discriminate between word or non-word targets. Reaction times were facilitated more for target words presented in the right visual field (RVF) compared to the left visual field (LVF), and targets presented in RVF were primed in both visual fields, whereas targets presented in LVF were primed by primes in the LVF only. These results suggest that both hemispheres are capable of automatic priming at very short stimulus onset asymmetries (SOA), but cross-hemisphere priming occurs only in the left hemisphere.     

What is minimal about predictive inferences?

Pronunciation of a probe word that relates to a highly predictable event is typically facilitated when the probe immediately follows the target sentence, but not when it is delayed until after a second sentence. These findings suggest that inferences about highly predictable events are minimally drawn during reading. Using a similar paradigm, in which the probe was delayed, we found significant priming in a reading condition that encouraged focus on the referential state of affairs (situation level) expressed in the sentences. In contrast, significant priming forpredictive texts was not observed in a reading condition that encouraged focus on the text per se (text level). These results are interpreted within a theoretical model that assumes that predictive inferences are represented at a situational level only, whereas explicitly presented information is represented at several levels (text and situational). It is in this sense that predictive inferences may be said to be minimally represented.     

Hemispheric processing of anaphoric inferences: the activation of multiple antecedents

This research investigates the hemispheric processing of anaphors when readers activate multiple antecedents. Participants read texts promoting an anaphoric inference and performed a lexical decision task to inference-related target words that were consistent (Experiment 1) or inconsistent (Experiment 2) with the text. These targets were preceded by constrained or less constraining text and were presented to participants' right visual field-left hemisphere or to their left visual field-right hemisphere. In Experiment 1, both hemispheres showed facilitation for consistent antecedents and the right hemisphere showed an advantage over the left hemisphere in processing antecedents when preceded by less constrained text. In Experiment 2, the left hemisphere only showed negative facilitation for inconsistent antecedents. When readers comprehend text with multiple antecedents: both hemispheres process consistent information, the left hemisphere inhibits inconsistent information, and the right hemisphere processes less constrained information.     

Hemisphere dynamics in lexical access: automatic and controlled priming

Hemisphere differences in lexical processing may be due to asymmetry in the organization of lexical information, in procedures used to access the lexicon, or both. Six lateralized lexical decision experiments employed various types of priming to distinguish among these possibilities. In three controlled (high probability) priming experiments, prime words could be used as lexical access clues. Larger priming was obtained for orthographically similar stimuli (BEAK-BEAR) when presented to the left visual field (LVF). Controlled priming based on phonological relatedness (JUICE-MOOSE) was equally effective in either visual field (VF). Semantic similarity (INCH-YARD) produced larger priming for right visual field (RVF) stimuli. These results suggest that the hemispheres may utilize different information to achieve lexical access. Spread of activation through the lexicon was measured in complementary automatic (low probability) priming experiments. Priming was restricted to LVF stimuli for orthographically similar words, while priming for phonologically related stimuli was only obtained in the RVF. Automatic semantic priming was present bilaterally, but was larger in the LVF. These results imply hemisphere differences in lexical organization, with orthographic and semantic relationships available to the right hemisphere, and phonological and semantic relations available to the left hemisphere. Support was obtained for hemisphere asymmetries in both lexical organization and directed lexical processing.     

Spatial analysis after perinatal stroke: patterns of neglect and exploration in extra-personal space

This study was conducted to determine whether school-aged children who had experienced a perinatal stroke demonstrate evidence of persistent spatial neglect, and if such neglect was specific to the visual domain or was more generalized. Two studies were carried out. In the first, 38 children with either left hemisphere (LH) or right hemisphere (RH) damage and 50 age-matched controls were given visual cancellation tasks varying in two factors: target stimuli and stimulus array. In the second study, tactile neglect was evaluated in 41 children with LH or RH damage and 72 age-matched controls using a blindfolded manual exploration task. On the visual cancellation task, LH subjects omitted more target stimuli on the right, but also on the left, compared with controls. Children with RH lesions also produced a larger number of omissions on both the left and right sides than controls, but with poorer performance on the left. On the manual exploration task, LH children required significantly longer times to locate the target on both sides of the board than did controls. RH children had significantly prolonged search times on the left side, but not on the right, compared with controls. In both tasks, LH subjects employed unsystematic search strategies more often than both control and RH children. The search strategy of RH children also tended to be erratic when compared to controls, but only in the random arrays of the visual cancellation tasks; structure of the target stimuli improved their organization. These results demonstrate that children with early LH brain damage display bilateral difficulties in visual and tactile modalities; a pattern that is in contrast to that seen in adults with LH damage. This may result from disorganized search strategies or other subtle spatial or attentional deficits. Results of performance of RH children suggests the presence of contralateral neglect in both the visual and tactile modalities; a finding that is similar to the neglect in adult stroke patients with RH lesions. The fact that deficits in spatial attention and organizational strategies are present after very early focal damage to either the LH or the RH broadens our understanding of the differences in functional lateralization between the immature and mature brain. These results also add to evidence for limitations to plasticity in the developing brain. Our findings may have therapeutic and rehabilitative implications for the management of children with early focal brain lesions.