Writing induces a right hemisphere linguistic advantage in dysphonetic dyslexic children: implications for attention and capacity models of laterality

An experiment demonstrated a complete hemispheric processing reversal in 10 male, dysphonetic dyslexic children that occurred during a dichotic listening test of their verbal working memory. Requiring a written response to dichotic digits produced a right hemisphere/left ear superiority in the dysphonetic dyslexics whereas normal subjects and other dyslexics maintained a left hemisphere/right ear advantage. This reversal was unaffected by changes in task difficulty. A second experiment assessed the influence on producing the reversal of concurrent manual interference with left hemisphere verbal processing (responding orally vs. manually) and selective right hemisphere priming (Forward Writing vs. Backward Writing). The dysphonetic children reverted to a strong left hemisphere superiority when recalling the dichotic digits orally. Backward writing produced no ear advantage in either direction. The findings suggest that dysphonetic dyslexia may be related to (1) left hemisphere processing demands that exceed capacity, (2) easily activated right hemisphere processing strategies and (3) failure to coordinate linguistic processing interhemispherically. The results supported a novel hybrid conceptualization of dyslexia consisting of a synthesis of selective activation, and dual processor-limited capacity, theories.     

Unilateral forced nostril breathing affects dichotic listening for emotional tones

Unilateral forced nostril breathing (UFNB) through the left nostril is associated with enhanced spatial abilities, whereas UFNB through the right nostril is associated with enhanced verbal abilities. However, the effects of UFNB on standard tasks of laterality (e.g., dichotic listening) are unknown. This study employed dichotic listening for word targets, which typically exhibits a right ear advantage (REA), and dichotic listening for emotional targets, which typically exhibits a left ear advantage (LEA). Participants were asked to breathe either through their dominant nostril (congruent UFNB) or to breathe through their non-dominant nostril (incongruent UFNB) for the entire testing session. There was a significant three-way interaction between the type of dichotic listening task, nostril dominance, and nostril assignment, with the expected REA for word targets and the expected LEA for emotional targets-with one exception. Right nostril dominant participants assigned to the congruent condition exhibited an LEA for emotional targets (p < .05). The other three groups exhibited the expected LEA/right hemisphere advantage for the detection of emotional targets and all groups exhibited the expected REA/left hemisphere advantage for detection of word targets. As such, possible bias induced by tactile stimulation of the contralateral face cannot account for these results. Thus, our data are consistent with a selective enhancement of right hemispheric lateralized functions by right nostril UFNB.     

Dichotic listening with forced attention in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy: significance of left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction

Fifty right-handed patients with focal temporal lobe epilepsy were administered a dichotic listening test with consonant-vowel syllables under non-forced, forced right and forced left attention conditions, and a neuropsychological test battery. Dichotic listening performance was compared in subgroups with and without left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction, measured by the test battery, and in subgroups with left and right temporal epileptic focus. Left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction led to more correct responses to left ear stimuli in all three attention conditions, and fewer correct responses to right ear stimuli in the non-forced attention condition. This was probably caused by basic left hemisphere perceptual dysfunction. Dichotic listening was less affected by a left-sided epileptic focus than by left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction. General cognitive functioning influenced dichotic listening performance stronger in forced than in non-forced attention conditions. Larger cerebral networks were probably involved in the forced attention conditions due to the emphasis on conscious effort.     

Preattentive control of serial auditory processing in dichotic listening

Dichotic listening performance was examined in an auditory selective attention task where subjects responded to occasional consonant-vowel (CV) or shaped broadband noise-burst (NB) targets in rapid serial auditory presentation (RASP). Trial types were randomized and included monaural CVs and NBs as well as dichotic CV-CV and CV-NB pairings. CVs were spoken by two different voices (male and female), and the two NB stimuli differed in their filter slopes at higher frequencies. The target was designated by stimulus category (/ba/, /da/, /ga/, or NB) and voice (e.g., "female /ba/"). Performance was compared for targets in the left and right ears on monaural and dichotic trials using accuracy and reaction time (RT) measures. Right ear advantages (REAs) were present for CV targets with either CV or NB distractors, but not for monaural CVs. The REA found for monaural NB targets was eliminated by CV distractors, yielding a left ear advantage (LEA) for the distractor effect of CVs on NB targets. The pattern of results suggests initial preprocessing of speech stimuli through phonetic feature analysis, followed by serial attentional processing of the objects in the auditory field. REAs are attributed to a rightward asymmetry in the preattentive control of auditory attention similar to that found in visual search.     

Dichotic listening performance and writing posture in right- and left-handers

Right-handers and left-handers with the inverted (IN) and noninverted (NI) writing posture were tested on a dichotic consonant-vowel listening task and on two motor tasks (hand strength and speed of tapping). The results failed to show the differences between IN and NI right-handers reported by S. M. Tapley and M. P. Bryden (1983, Neuropsychologia, 21, 129-138) and there were no significant handedness x writing posture x ear interactions. A significant interaction between dichotic listening performance and writing posture was found; NI right-handers and IN left-handers had more correct responses and fewer intrusions than IN right-handers and NI left-handers. Left-handers and right-handers were found to have a right ear advantage (REA) in the dichotic listening task but left-handers had relatively smaller left/right differences in all of the performance measures. Sample characteristics suggest that there are more IN male right-handers than IN female right-handers.     

Cerebral specialization and verbal-motor integration in adults with and without Down syndrome

Persons with Down syndrome (DS) tend to exhibit an atypical left ear-right hemisphere advantage (LEA) for the perception of speech sounds. In the present study, a recent adaptation of the dichotic listening procedure was employed to examine interhemispheric integration during the performance of a lateralized verbal-motor task. Although adults with DS (n = 13) demonstrated a right ear-left hemisphere advantage in the dichotic-motor task similar to their peers with (n = 14) and without undifferentiated developmental disabilities (n = 14), they showed an LEA in a free recall dichotic listening task. Based on a comparison of the laterality indices obtained from both dichotic listening procedures, it appears that the manifestation of lateral ear advantages in persons DS may dependent on the response requirements of the task.     

A dichotic listening study of attention control in older adults

The influence of age on attentional control of bottom-up processing was investigated with a dichotic-listening paradigm. The typical right-ear-advantage (REA) without specific attentional instructions was used as a measure of bottom-up processing (non-forced condition). Top-down attentional control was evaluated by instructing subjects to report only the right or left ear stimulus of the dichotic pair (forced-right, forced-left conditions). Both young and old participants showed a REA in the non-forced condition and an increased REA in the forced-right condition. The old group failed, however, to use attention to modulate the REA to the same degree as the younger participants in the forced-left condition. Only the young group showed a significant left ear advantage (LEA). The results are discussed in relation to cognitive decline in normal aging and in early stages of dementia.     

The effects of head and eye turns on the right ear advantage in dichotic listening

The aim of the present experiment was to investigate the effects of head and eye turns on the ear advantage in dichotic listening (DL) to CV-syllables. Since head and eye turns also mean focusing attention to either the left or right side in space, a second aim was to evaluate recent arguments that ear advantages seen in DL are caused by the perceived position in space of the sound source. Forty right-handed females had 36 trials of CV-syllables under four different instructions. One group (n = 20) was instructed to turn their head (but not their eyes) to the right, the left, or straight ahead during stimulus presentations. The fourth condition was a standard (no instruction) condition. A second group (n = 20) had the same instructions but were told to turn their eyes instead of their heads. Conditions were pseudo-counterbalanced across subjects. Consistent with other studies, results showed a right ear advantage (REA) in both groups during all conditions. However, the REA was largest for the standard condition. Also, more subjects showed a REA during the standard condition, and especially compared to the turn-right condition. It is concluded that dichotic performance is not caused by selective attention to either side in space, and that lateral turns of the head and the eyes contralateral to the left hemisphere have an inhibitory (if anything) effect on the REA.     

Manipulations of subjects'' level of arousal in dichotic listening

The effects of manipulation of the subject's level of arousal on the right ear advantage (REA) in dichotic listening to CV-syllables were investigated. There were three different arousal manipulations under high and low incentive levels. Negative manipulations involved threat of electric shock (high incentive) or noise (low incentive) for incorrect answers. Positive manipulations involved the possibility to earn a substantial (high incentive) or small (low incentive) sum of money for correct answers. A third, neutral, condition involved no specific instructions about consequences for correct or incorrect answers. Thirty-six females participated in the study. Heart rate was recorded as an independent measure of change in level of arousal as a function of the experimental instructions. The results showed that the high negative condition abolished the REA effect, with a non-significant difference between ears. This was caused by both an increase in correct left ear reports and a decrease in correct right ear reports. The other arousal conditions had no effect on the REA. The results are discussed in terms of right hemisphere dominance for aversive emotional processing in dichotic listening.     

The effects of background noise on dichotic listening to consonant-vowel syllables

Lateralization of verbal processing is frequently studied with the dichotic listening technique, yielding a so called right ear advantage (REA) to consonant-vowel (CV) syllables. However, little is known about how background noise affects the REA. To address this issue, we presented CV-syllables either in silence or with traffic background noise vs. 'babble'. Both 'babble' and traffic noise resulted in a smaller REA compared to the silent condition. The traffic noise, moreover, had a significantly greater negative effect on the REA than the 'babble', caused both by a decreased right ear response as well as an increased left ear response. The results are discussed in terms of alertness and attentional factors.     

Dichotic listening during forced-attention in a patient with left hemispherectomy

A young left-handed girl with an extensive posttraumatic lesion in the left hemisphere was tested with dichotic listening (DL) under three different attentional instructions. The major aim of the study was to evaluate a structural vs attentional explanation for dichotic listening. As both her expressive and receptive language functions were intact after the lesion, it was assumed that the right hemisphere was the language-dominant one. In the free-report condition, she was free to divert attention to and to report from both ear inputs. In the forced-right condition, she was instructed to attend to and report only from the right ear input. In the forced-left condition, she was instructed to attend to and to report only from the left-ear input. Her performance was compared with data from a previously collected sample of normal left-handed females. Analysis showed that the patient, in contrast to the normal sample, revealed a complete right-ear extinction phenomenon, irrespective of attentional instruction. Furthermore, she showed superior correct reports from the left ear, compared with those of the normal sample, also irrespective of attentional instruction. It is concluded that these results support a structural, rather than attentional explanation for the right-ear advantage (REA) typically observed in dichotic listening. The utility of validating the dichotic listening technique on patients with brain lesions is discussed.     

Information processing and speech lateralization in learning-disabled children

The relationship between information processing and speech lateralization was investigated in learning-disabled children. The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC) assessed simultaneous and successive processing while a dichotic listening paradigm with free recall and directed attention conditions assessed speech lateralization. A three-factor ANOVA design conducted on the dichotic data revealed that normal children demonstrated stronger right ear advantage (REA); whereas learning-disabled showed weaker right ear advantage. Further, lambda analyses conducted on individual subjects revealed that the learning-disabled did not demonstrate the REA, were not biased attenders, and did not get more right ear than left ear items when attention was directed to one ear. Multiple-regression analysis was used to predict sequential processing from the dichotic data for both groups. Learning-disabled children demonstrated a substantial deficit in sequential processing as compared to normal children. These results indicate that learning-disabled children may not have adequate cerebral lateralization of receptive speech processes, shift their attention more readily, and are more inadequate in sequential processing that presumably subserves language functioning. Perhaps learning-disabled children have deficiencies of processor capacity of salient areas of the left (language) hemisphere.     

Attentional set in pure- versus mixed-lists in a dichotic listening paradigm

An experiment was designed to assess the contribution of attentional set to performance on a forced choice recognition task in dichotic listening. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: speech sounds composed of stop consonants, emotional nonspeech sounds, or a random combination of both. In the groups exposed to a single class of stimuli (pure-list), a REA (right ear advantage) emerged for the speech sounds, and a LE (left ear advantage) for the nonspeech sounds. Under mixed conditions using both classes of stimuli, no significant ear advantage was apparent, either globally or individually for the speech and nonspeech sounds. However, performance was more accurate for the left ear on nonspeech sounds and for the right ear for speech sounds, regardless of pure versus mixed placement. The results suggest that under divided attention conditions, attentional set influences the direction of the laterality effect.     

The effect of stimulus type and directed attention on dichotic listening with children

This research investigated the effect of stimulus type and directed attention on dichotic listening performance with children. A sample of 12 (5 male, 7 female; mean age 10.5 years) high academically performing children were administered four types of dichotic stimuli (words, digits, CV syllables, and melodies) in three experimental conditions (free recall, directed left, and directed right) to examine perceptual asymmetry as reflected by the right-ear advantage (REA). While the expected REA for words and CV syllables and the expected LEA for melodies were found under free recall, the directed conditions produced varied results depending on the nature of the stimuli. Directed condition had no effect on recall of CV syllables but had a dramatic effect on recall of digits. Word stimuli and directed condition interacted to produce inconsistent perceptual asymmetry while directed condition reduced overall recall for melodies. The findings lend support to the hypothesis that perceptual asymmetries can be strongly influenced by the type of stimulus material used and the effect of attentional strategy employed.     

Hemispheric laterality and dissociative tendencies: differences in emotional processing in a dichotic listening task

The present work investigates whether the hemispheric processing of both verbal and emotional stimuli, studied by means of a dichotic listening task, differs between normal high and low dissociators as assessed by the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES; Bernstein & Putnam (1986). Development, reliability and validity of a dissociation scale. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 174(2), 727-735). Two groups of subjects (50 high and 50 low dissociators), participated in the experiment. The task consisted in identifying both verbal and emotional stimulus-targets, respectively, on successive sessions. Reaction time and response accuracy were registered and analysed using ANOVA (Analysis of Variance). The interaction between stimuli (verbal, emotional), channel (right ear, left ear), and dissociation level (high, low) reached statistical significance in terms of accuracy measures (d': F(1,98)=4.75; p<.05). Both high and low dissociators exhibited the expected right ear advantage (REA effect) on verbal targets. On the other hand, whereas low dissociators exhibited the expected left ear advantage (LEA effect) on emotional targets, high dissociators failed to follow this typical pattern of hemispheric asymmetry: both hemispheres exhibited similar performances. These results confirm the hypothesis that dissociation is related to changes in hemispheric processing, specifically of emotional information.     

Dichotic listening in children: age-related changes in direction and magnitude of ear advantage

Children between the ages of 5 and 12 years were tested with dichotic listening tests utilizing single syllable words and random presentations of digits. They produced a higher prevalence of left ear dominance than expected, especially among right-handed children when tested with words. Whether more children demonstrate the LEA because of right hemisphere dominance for language or because there is less stability in ear advantage direction at younger ages cannot be fully resolved by this study. When ear advantages were measured by subtracting each child's lower score from the higher score without regard to right or left direction, an age-related trend toward lower measures of ear advantage was evident. This trend was greater for dichotic words than for dichotic digits. Structural factors that may be related to these results and possible influences of attention and verbal workload on the two kinds of dichotic stimuli are discussed.     

Toward a model of dichotic listening performance

Dichotic listening performance for different classes of speech sounds was examined under conditions of controlled attention. Consideration of the complex of target item and competing item demonstrated that, in general, targets were more accurately identified when the competing item shared no relevant features with it and less accurately identified when the competing item shared place, voice, or manner with the target item. Nasals as well as stops demonstrated a significant right-ear advantage (REA). False alarm rates were very similar for left and right attentional conditions, whereas intrusions from the right ear while attending to the left were far more common than intrusions from the left while attending to the right. Attention is viewed as serving to select the stimuli that will be reported, but at a late stage, and only after the right ear perceptual advantage has had its effect. A model of dichotic listening performance is proposed in which both the ease of localizing the item and the strength of evidence for the presence of the item are relevant factors.     

The fate of ear asymmetries in short-term memory

Recognition memory for word lists presented to left or right ears was tested after filled retention intervals of 0-to 60-sec duration. Experiment 1 showed that the right-ear advantage (REA) for immediate recognition in dichotic listening does not occur after 10 sec delay. In Experiment 2, monaural presentation produced a nonsignificant REA which did not appear to be affected by delay. These data suggest that the REA for immediate report usually observed in the dichotic listening situation is a transient phenomenon which is based on phonetic encoding. The left hemisphere seems to be specialized for the initial reception of verbal information, but not for the storage or retention of such information over time.     

Auditory neglect after right frontal lobe and right pulvinar thalamic lesions

Auditory unilateral neglect or extinction to simultaneous stimulation is reported in a right-handed male with a lesion in the right frontal lobe and in the right thalamic pulvinar area. The patient was submitted to stereotactic thalamotomy for a post-traumatic intentional ataxia in the left extremities. He was subjected to repeated tests with dichotic listening to consonant-vowel syllables under three different attentional instructions. He was also tested monaurally with the same stimulus materials as used in the dichotic test. The results showed almost complete extinction of the left ear input during dichotic presentations, despite normal hearing when tested with audiometer screening. The left ear extinction effect was independent of instructions to attend to the left or right ear input. However, during monaural presentation, correct left ear reports increased to about 85%. The results are interpreted as showing an auditory attentional neglect caused by the right frontal and pulvinar lesions.     

Right hemisphere comprehension of verbs in patients with complete forebrain commissurotomy: Use of the dichotic method and manual performance

The paradigm of dichotic listening was used to investigate verbal comprehension in the right, so-called “nonverbal,” hemisphere. Verbal commands were presented to the right and left ears in the simultaneous (dichotic) paradigm. There were striking instances, especially when the left hemisphere was occupied with some extraneous task, in which the right hemisphere understood the verbal command and executed the appropriate motor responses. In those instances the left hemisphere gave no overt response. Although the left hemisphere was usually dominant, it can be nevertheless concluded that not only can the right hemisphere understand verbal commands but can also express itself manually by executing actions more complex than object retrieval or pointing. As has been known for some time, the blockage of the ipsilateral pathway seems so complete during dichotic listening in the commissurotomy patient that there is no report of the words in the left ear—only of those presented to the right. At the same time there is normal report when words are presented to the left ear alone. It was found in the present study, however, that this model is too simple and only applies to the verbal response paradigm of dichotic listening. Under circumstances of dichotic presentation where the stimulus in the left ear (ipsilateral pathway) is necessary or important to the left hemisphere for completing a task, words from both pathways are reported. One may conclude that there exists a gating mechanism in each hemisphere that controls the monitoring of each auditory pathway and the degree of ipsilateral suppression.