Effects of chlorpromazine on lateralization, cued reaction time, and dichotic listening

In a double-blind cross-over design sixteen subjects took 50 mg of chlorpromazine or placebo in tablet form 2 hours prior to completing a dichotic listening and simple reaction time task with and without warnings. In the simple reaction time task, blocks of 80 stimuli were presented to each ear with and without warning cue under drug and placebo conditions. On the dichotic listening task the expected right ear advantage for reporting digits was obtained. While the drug had no main effect on the number of errors, there were more trials on which an ear advantage was present than in the placebo condition. In the reaction time task there were main effects of drug, warning cue and foreperiod: warnings facilitated reaction; chlorpromazine retarded reaction; and reaction times were most facilitated by warning foreperiods in excess of 1200ms. Several findings were of interest: On uncued trials, with placebo, right ear responses were faster than those for stimuli presented to the left ear. Drug also interacted with foreperiod duration. These results were interpreted in the light of Tucker and Williamson’s (1984) review of the role of Pribram and McGuinness’s Arousal and Activation sytems in lateralized behavior.     

On the relation between auditory spatial attention and auditory perceptual asymmetries.

Laterality investigators have typically interpreted any perceptual asymmetry as a direct expression of the functional organization of the brain. However, many other confounding factors, including the asymmetric distribution of attention, may also contribute to either the magnitude or the direction of any of these advantages. In two experiments, attention was manipulated in a dichotic listening paradigm by presenting a preexposural tone cue to the ear from which the subject was required to report. The time available to orient attention was manipulated by varying the time period between the onset of the cue and the onset of the trial (stimulus onset asynchrony, or SOA). Results indicated that a right ear advantage for the identification of verbal material obtained at a 150-msec SOA was almost completely eliminated at an SOA of 450 msec. In addition, the direction of the ear advantage for emotion identification was found to depend on task difficulty. A left ear advantage, apparent when task difficulty was minimal, was reversed to a right ear advantage when difficulty was increased. These data are taken as evidence that, when subjects are faced with a difficult dichotic task, there is a general tendency for right-handed subjects to bias their attention toward the right ear. Such a tendency is shown not only to have likely seriously compromised the results of past investigations of functional perceptual asymmetries but also to be inconsistent with previously proposed theories of dichotic listening performance.     

On the relation between auditory spatial attention and auditory perceptual asymmetries

Laterality investigators have typically interpreted any perceptual asymmetry as a direct expression of the functional organization of the brain. However, many other confounding factors, including the asymmetric distribution of attention, may also contribute to either the magnitude or the direction of any of these advantages. In two experiments, attention was manipulated in a dichotic listening paradigm by presenting a preexposural tone cue to the ear from which the subject was required to report. The time available to orient attention was manipulated by varying the time period between the onset of the cue and the onset of the trial (stimulus onset asynchrony, or SOA).Results indicated that a right ear advantage for the identification of verbal material obtained at a 150-msec SOA was almost completely eliminated at an SOA of 450 msec. In addition, the direction of the ear advantage for emotion identification was found to depend on task difficulty. A left ear advantage, apparent when task difficulty was minimal, was reversed to a right ear advantage when difficulty was increased. These data are taken as evidence that, when subjects are faced with a difficult dichotic task, there is a general tendency for right-handed subjects to bias their attention toward the right ear. Such a tendency is shown not only to have likely seriously compromised the results of past investigations of functional perceptual asymmetries but also to be inconsistent with previously proposed theories of dichotic listening performance.     

Pharmacological effects on lateralized behavior

Sixteen student volunteers were administered a placebo and 50 mg. of chlorpromazine in tablet form, on separate occasions, two hours before testing. The three tests measured dichotic listening performance, lateral eye movements while answering questions about spatial location and verbal meaning, and lateralized facial expression while relating pleasant and unpleasant life incidents. Results showed that chlorpromazine increased the number of trials showing an ear advantage in dichotic listening. Chlorpromazine reduced lateral and increased vertical eye movements in response to the questions about spatial location and verbal meaning. Under the placebo both negative and positive emotions were expressed more in the left face. Although chlorpromazine did not affect this lateralization of negative emotions, the expression of positive emotions occurred equally often on the two sides of the face under chlorpromazine. Results may be related to an effect of chlorpromazine on the asymmetrical dopamine pathways of the brain. It is suggested that the findings may be related to a left hemisphere deficit in schizophrenia.     

Verbal and affective laterality effects in P-dyslexic, L-dyslexic and normal children.

Lateralization of verbal and affective processes was investigated in P-dyslexic, L-dyslexic and normal children with the aid of a dichotic listening task. The children were asked to detect either the presence of a specific target word or of words spoken in a specific emotional tone of voice. The number of correct responses and reaction time were recorded. For monitoring words, an overall right ear advantage was obtained. However, further tests showed no significant ear advantage for P-types, and a right ear advantage for L-types and controls. For emotions, an overall left ear advantage was obtained that was less robust than the word-effect. The results of the word task are in support of previous findings concerning differences between P- and L-dyslexics in verbal processing according to the balance model of dyslexia. However, dyslexic children do not differ from controls on processing of emotional prosody although certain task variables may have affected this result.     

Verbal and Affective Laterality Effects in P-Dyslexic,L-Dyslexic and Normal Children

Lateralization of verbal and affective processes was investigated in P-dyslexic, L-dyslexic and normal children with the aid of a dichotic listening task. The children were asked to detect either the presence of a specific target word or of words spoken in a specific emotional tone of voice. The number of correct responses and reaction time were recorded. For monitoring words, an overall right ear advantage was obtained. However, further tests showed no significant ear advantage for P-types, and a right ear advantage for L-types and controls. For emotions, an overall left ear advantage was obtained that was less robust than the word-effect. The results of the word task are in support of previous findings concerning differences between P- and L-dyslexics in verbal processing according to the balance model of dyslexia. However, dyslexic children do not differ from controls on processing of emotional prosody although certain task variables may have affected this result.     

汉语普通话声调加工的右耳优势及其机理：一项双耳分听的研究

采用双耳分听的任务探讨了汉语普通话声调加工的右耳优势问题,并引进反应手的因素,探讨了汉语声调加工的右耳优势的机制。结果表明,汉语母语被试对普通话声调的加工存在右耳、左脑优势,但这种优势是相对的,右脑也具备加工声调信息的能力,结果支持了直接通达模型。     

The development of handedness and dichotic ear listening asymmetries in relation to school achievement: A longitudinal study

To assess the development of dichotic ear asymmetries and handedness, 208 male school children were evaluated in kindergarten and at Grades 2 and 5 (ages 66, 92, and 130 months of age, respectively) with a dichotic listening task and a hand preference test. The Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT) also was administered at each of the three grade levels. There was significant variability in handedness scores over time only for those subjects whose scores at initial testing, that is, in kindergarten, identified them as non-right-handers. Both right and left handers had a significant increase in dichotic listening scores over time; however, only right handers had a significant right ear advantage at each evaluation. Regression analyses showed that combined hand preference scores and ear recall scores at each probe when combined accounted for almost 44% of the variance in WRAT achievement scores at Grade 5. Ear asymmetry scores, however, were not predictive of school achievement.     

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.     

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

It has previously been shown that the right ear advantage in dichotic listening to consonant-vowel syllables is affected if a background noise is presented at the same time as the dichotic stimuli. What is not known is, however, if there is also an effect of varying the intensity level of the background noise. We therefore presented conversation or traffic noise background noise simultaneously with the dichotic syllable stimuli to healthy adult subjects. The intensity of the background noises varied between 50-65 dB in steps of 5 dB. The results showed that the right ear correct reports decreased, while left ear correct reports increased as a consequence of increasing background noise intensity. The effects were also stronger for the right ear, and for the traffic background noise condition, particularly at the two highest intensity levels. The results are discussed in terms of alertness and attentional mechanisms.     

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.     

Reliability and magnitude of auditory laterality effects: the influence of attention

Three experiments investigated the effect of attention on the reliability and magnitude of laterality effects in a dichotic listening task. In Experiment 1, 40 undergraduate students were randomly assigned to either a free-recall or focused-attention condition. In Experiment 2, 40 undergraduate students completed a dichotic listening task with exogenous cueing. They were randomly assigned to either a 150-ms stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) or a 450-ms SOA condition. In Experiment 3, 20 participants completed a task where the SOA for the exogenous cue was randomized on a trial to trial basis. Results indicated that focused attention increased the magnitude of the laterality effect. Contrary to predictions, this finding was not due to reduced variability in the focused-attention task compared to the free-recall task. In addition, a cueing tone was only effective at directing attention in Experiment 3. Specifically, a significant right ear advantage observed at the 150-ms SOA was reduced at the 450-ms SOA. It appears that, in Experiment 3, the tone was effective at controlling attention because it reduced the systematic bias that has been suggested to account for the laterality effects observed in dichotic tasks.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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 performance to CVs between versus within groups

The present study is concerned with comparing group mean data between groups with individual performance within groups in dichotic listening (DL). It is argued that only comparing mean ear performance in dichotic listening between groups may obscure important individual differences within groups in DL performance. In the present study we compared between group vs. within group performance in four groups of subjects (male and female, right- and left-handers). The stimuli were 66 trials of consonant-vowel combinations with the six stop-consonants and the vowels a and u. The results showed a group mean right ear advantage for consonants in the two right-handed groups, and a left-ear advantage in the two let-handed groups. The analysis of the individual distributions within each group, however, showed clear differences between the male and female groups. Generally, though, only the male right-handed group revealed enough homogeneity within the group to warrant the conclusion that the group mean REA reflects a left hemisphere specialization for speech perception.     

An intrahemispheric integration deficit in dyslexia

In order to investigate the hypothesis that dyslexia may result from a failure of intrahemispheric integration between auditory-verbal and visual-verbal processing, a dichotic listening task and a parallel divided visual field task were administered to a group of dyslexic boys between the ages of 8 and 11 years, and a group of normal control subjects individually matched for age and WISC intelligence. The dyslexics were on average over two years retarded in reading and spelling. Dyslexics exhibited a normal right ear advantage on dichotic listening for digits although lesser right ear advantage was related to reading retardation. In the divided visual field task, the normal controls showed a left visual field advantage for digits which it is argued resulted from a failure in fixation linked to reading habits. Within the dyslexic group greater reading deficiency was associated with relative bilateralization for visual verbal processing. The results therefore support the hypothesis.     

Lateral asymmetry in subgroups of dyslexic children

It has been proposed that in examining hemispheric dominance in dyslexics, investigators must make a distinction between subtypes of the disorder. Using the Denver Reading and Spelling Test, 72 dyslexics were divided into three groups: dysphonetics, dyseidetics, and nonspecifics. Three measures of hemispheric dominance were administered: a dichotic listening test, a hemiretinal test with linguistic stimuli, and a hemiretinal test with spatial stimuli. Results indicated that the three subgroups of dyslexics did not differ from one another on measures of hemispheric dominance. Dyslexics, taken as a group, tended to show an exaggerated right ear advantage on the dichotic listening test, in comparison with that of controls. It was proposed that the dichotic listening test may be confounded by attentional deficits in the dyslexics.     

Reliability and magnitude of laterality effects in dichotic listening with exogenous cueing

The purpose of the present study was to replicate and extend to word recognition previous findings of reduced magnitude and reliability of laterality effects when exogenous cueing was used in a dichotic listening task with syllable pairs. Twenty right-handed undergraduate students with normal hearing (10 females, 10 males) completed a dichotic listening task in which the words bower, dower, power, and tower were presented in a sad, angry, happy, or neutral tone. Each stimulus pair (one to each ear) was preceded by a lateralized tone cue. Participants were required to identify the word presented to the ear where the cue was heard. When correct responses were analyzed, results replicated the pattern of reduced magnitude and reliability of laterality effects observed in previous studies. However, the percentage of intrusions (identification of the stimulus presented to the uncued ear) increased with the time between the onset of the cue and the target, suggesting that the cue was not fully effective. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for the use of exogenous cueing to control attention. It seems that, in the present task, an effective means of attention control has yet to be identified.