The relationship between active hand and ear advantage in the native and foreign language

In an experimental design involving two auditorily presented competing commands (one to each ear), 144 right-handed subjects (72 male and 72 female) were asked to provide motor responses. Half of each group of subjects was responding with their right hand and the other half with the left. The test was applied in the subjects' native language (Croatian) and in English, which they had learned as a foreign language. Ear advantage was determined by calculating laterality indices from the order of responding to the commands. On average, right-ear advantage was found in all conditions. Analysis of results revealed the effect of the active hand in Croatian (with significant decrease in the right-ear advantage when using the left hand). The same trend failed to reach significance in English. In responses to English stimuli, there was a significant effect of gender (with men exhibiting a lower right-ear advantage than women). The same trend was not significant for Croatian stimuli. The consistently lower right-ear advantage found in male subjects is contrary to the traditional assumptions that men are more lateralized than women and warrants further investigation.     

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.     

Effects of eye movements on the recognition and localization of dichotic stimuli

Three experiments examined the effect of gaze shifts on overall performance and ear differences in dichotic listening. In the first two experiments, lights were switched on and off so as to induce rightward, leftward, or upward gaze during dichotic stimulation. The dichotic material consisted of musical passages in Experiment 1 and two kinds of verbal material in Experiment 2. Vertical eye movements enhanced the accuracy of identification of music but not verbal material. The lateral direction of eye movements affected subjects' ability to localize targets in Experiment 1: localization was more accurate in the direction toward which subjects were looking. In the third experiment it was found that optokinetic nystagmus (OKN) influenced the asymmetry of performance on a dichotic consonant-vowel (CV) test. The right-ear advantage was greatest when the OKN drum rotated from left to right and least when it rotated from right to left. The effect was due to corresponding variation in left-ear scores. Possible mechanisms through which shifts of gaze affect auditory identification and localization are proposed.     

Speech and music draw attention to the right ear in stereophonic listening

This study investigated whether right-handed subjects would prefer the right ear for normal speech and the left ear for musical stimuli. Right-handed college students (9 women and 2 men) were presented two stereophonic tape recordings, one of normal speech, the other of nonlyrical, orchestral music. Subjects used an attenuator to match the intensity of signals in the left and right earphones. The subjects consistently favored the right side in both conditions. These findings are inconsistent with those of other researchers, such as Segalowitz and Plantery. However, the findings support the 1980 research of Porac, Coren, and Duncan, offering perceptual evidence of a general right-ear bias in right-handed subjects.     

Is there an effect of handedness on the position of the egocentric reference?

Forty normal subjects (20 left-handed; 20 right-handed) were submitted to a proprioceptive straight ahead pointing task while blindfolded to study the effect of the hand used and of the hand preference on the estimation of the subjective sagittal middle. Results showed that left-handed and right-handed subjects both deviated to the left of the objective sagittal middle and presented an effect of the hand used and of the starting point affecting their straight ahead performance in a similar way. In all subjects whatever their manual preference, using the left hand and starting 30 degrees to left induced a tendency to deviate to the same side, whereas using the right hand and starting 30 degrees to right induced a tendency to place the subjective middle to the right of the objective middle. These results are interpreted with regard to the hypothesis of a cortical control of the position of the egocentric reference.     

Mental rotation under head tilt: Factors influencing the location of the subjective reference frame

We report five experiments on the effect of head tilt on the mental rotation of patterns to the “upright.” In Experiment 1, subjects rotated alphanumeric characters, displayed within a circular surround. Experiment 2 was similar except that the character was an unfamiliar letter-like symbol. In Experiment 3, subjects again rotated alphanumeric characters, but they were displayed within a rectangular frame tilted 60° to the right. Experiment 4 was similar, except that the subjects were instructed to rotate the characters to the “upright” defined by the tilted frame. In all four experiments, the subjects performed the task with their heads either upright or tilted 60°. In Experiment 5, subjects had their heads and bodies tilted 90°, and rotated alphanumeric characters displayed within a circular surround. In all except Experiment 4, analysis of response latencies revealed that the subjective vertical lay closer to the gravitational than to the retinal vertical, although it was somewhat displaced in the direction of the head tilt—more so in Experiments 2 and 3 than in Experiment 1, and more so still in Experiment 5. In Experiment 4, instructions to adopt the axes of the frame land thus of the retina) succeeded in bringing the subjective vertical closer to the retinal than to the gravitational vertical, although the subjective vertical was still some 20° on average from the gravitational vertical. The results show that the subjective reference frame is distinct from both gravitational and the retinal frames, and that the gravitational frame exerts the stronger influence. They also argue against the primacy of a “retinal factor” in the perception of orientation.     

Right-ear advantage and delayed recall

Two studies were performed using monaural presentation of verbal material to test for a right-ear advantage (REA) in recall. It was hypothesized that a delayed recall task and examination of the serial position curve would be a more sensitive test for ear asymmetries than those used in previous studies. In Experiment 1, 30 right-handed male subjects were given lists of words to recall, presented to either the left or right ear, with language chatter, baroque music, or no stimulus concurrently presented to the opposite ear. Both immediate and delayed recall were assessed. The results indicated that the strongest REAs appeared in delayed recall. Moreover, the REAs occurred regardless of the stimulus conditions co-occurring in the other ear. Experiment 2 was done to test whether the REAs in the delayed recall were due to rehearsal biases. Twenty-four right-handed male subjects recalled lists of words with standard instructions and instructions to recall in the reverse order of input (limiting rehearsal). The results indicated that the backward instructions limited and controlled rehearsal and, hence, input to long-term storage; the REAs occurred in delayed recall under all instructional conditions.     

Attentional biases and the right-ear effect in dichotic listening

Most dichotic listening experiments permit subjects to deploy attention in any way they choose. We argue that this adds uncontrolled variance to the observed right-ear advantage. In the first experiment, more robust laterality effects were obtained in an identification task with focused than with divided attention. Such differences were not found in the second experiment, when a detection procedure was used. Virtually all the laterality effect observed in the second study could be attributed to subjects who were biased attenders, in the sense that they exhibited more intrusions from the right ear to the left than vice versa. However, rather than indicating that laterality effects are simply attentional bias, this effect can be attributed to an asymmetry of perceptual discrimination.     

Behavioral lateralization during spontaneous smelling tasks

The smelling behavior of 52 right-handed subjects was videotaped during tasks involving identification and recognition of different odors. Analysis showed that men more often used the right nostril than the left whatever the odor. There was no significant difference for the women. These results support a more marked cerebral asymmetry in men than in women and a main involvement of the right cerebral hemisphere in the olfactory processes at least by right-handed men.     

Laterality effects in perceived spatial location of hallucination-like voices

Aydin and colleagues reported a reversal of physiological 'right-ear advantage' in a group of right-handed patients with schizophrenia, using an auditory acuity test. In schizophrenia, auditory hallucinations may appear to be spatially located inside or outside the patient's head. Here we show, using virtual acoustic space techniques, that normal right-handed subjects have a right-ear advantage for correctly locating the 'source' of hallucination-like voices as from either inside or outside the head. We propose a model for understanding lateralised, external hallucinations in schizophrenia based upon reversal of normal cortical asymmetry for auditory spatial processing.     

Recognition of letters traced in the right and left palms: Evidence for a process-oriented tactile asymmetry

Three experiments were conducted to examine the relative ability of the cerebral hemispheres to identify capital letters traced in the palms of the hands. In Experiment 1, letters were presented either right side up or upside down, and the subject's task was to name the letter aloud or point to an identical letter using the stimulated hand. Analysis of the accuracy data revealed that the left palm/right hemisphere (LP/RH) performed this task significantly better than did the right palm/left hemisphere (RP/LH), particularly when the stimuli were presented in the upside-down orientation. In Experiments 2 and 3, subjects performed the same letter identification task; however, on half the trials, they were required to maintain either a spatial or verbal concurrent memory load (i.e., a 24-point Vanderplas & Garvin form or six low-imagery nouns, respectively). In the no-load condition of Experiment 2 (spatial forms), the previously observed LP/RH advantage was replicated. However, in the load condition, this LP/RH superiority was no longer in evidence. In Experiment 3 (low-imagery nouns), the presence of a concurrent verbal task had minimal impact on the previously observed performance asymmetry as the LP/RH advantage was obtained in both the no-load and load conditions. The results of the three studies taken in composite suggest that (1) the operations utilized to identify letters traced in the palms of the hands are primarily spatial in nature and (2) that the observed performance asymmetry may be attributed to a right hemisphere superiority for the analysis and codification of information along a spatial dimension. These findings are discussed in terms of a "process-oriented" model of hemispheric asymmetry.     

Hemispheric asymmetry effects in children studied by dichotic listening and visual half-field testing

Dichotic listening (DL) and visual half-field (VHF) testing were used to study hemisphere asymmetry in a developmental perspective. Five-, 8-, and 11-year-old children were presented lists of fused words using a DL technique in Experiment 1, and 8- and 11-year-old children were presented pictures of common objects using a VHF technique in Experiment 2. In both experiments, measures of identification, free recall, and recognition of the words/pictures were employed. The results revealed effects of ear input (right-ear advantage) and half-field presentation (right visual half-field advantage) for all age groups, although the magnitude of this lateralization effect differed between the three memory measures. The results are discussed in relation to developmental aspects of language laterality, and in relation to the clinical utility of non-invasive lateralization techniques.     

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.     

Monaural ear differences for reaction times to speech with a many-to-one mapping paradigm

On each trial, subjects were presented monaurally with single synthetic speech syllables. In Experiment I, when /ba/ and /ta/ specified one response, and /da/ and /ka/ another response, a right-ear advantage in reaction time was observed; when/ba/ specified one response and all the other stimuli specified the other response, no ear effect was observed. Unsuccessful attempts to obtain a monaural right-ear advantage for consonants in some reaction-time tasks might be due to some kind of prephonetic matching between a representation of the stimulus attended to and the presented stimulus, the output of this match providing sufficient information for response. In Experiment II, /bi/ and /b ? / specified one response and /b?/ and/bu/ the other response, but no ear effect was observed. It was concluded that the right-ear advantage displayed for consonants in the corresponding condition of Experiment I was not the pure effect of a particular stimulus-response mapping, but depended also on the phonetic properties of consonants.     

Perceptual asymmetry in psychosis-prone college students: evidence for left-hemisphere overactivation.

The hypothesis that psychosis-prone students demonstrate a pattern of exaggerated perceptual asymmetry across both left- and right-hemisphere dichotic-listening tasks (consonant-vowel [CV] and tonal contour discrimination) was investigated. Subjects who scored high on the Perceptual Aberration or Magical Ideation scale or both (n = 20) demonstrated a significantly exaggerated right-ear advantage on a CV task in relation to normal control subjects (n = 27) but showed a reduced left-ear advantage on a tone task. The hypothesis of exaggerated functional lateralization across hemispheres in the psychosis-prone subjects was not supported, but the results are consistent with a hypothesis of left hemisphere overactivation in this sample.     

Intersegmental strategies in frontal plane in moderately-skilled riders analyzed in ridden and un-mounted situations

The symmetry of the rider is highly relevant, and in the equestrian community it is generally thought that a symmetrical rider has a better possibility to influence the horse in an optimal way. The aim of the study was to analyse and compare frontal plane kinematics of the core body segments in ten riders while riding and while rocking a balance chair from side-to-side. It was hypothesized that the riders were asymmetrical in relation to their intersegmental strategies when comparing between left and right directions and that individual riders would display the same postural strategies when riding and when rocking the balance chair. Ten moderately-skilled riders wore a full-body marker set that was tracked by a motion capture system as they rocked a balance chair from side to side. Inertial measurement units attached to the head, trunk and pelvis were used to measure the segmental movements while riding in left and right directions. Roll rotation data for head, trunk and pelvis were averaged over available strides/cycles. Results from mixed models showed that the riders were asymmetric when comparing riding in left vs right directions, for example the trunk was rotated 19° to the right on the right circle and 14° to the left on the left circle, on average. Riders adopted the same asymmetrical posture whether they were riding in the left or right direction on straight lines, circles or leg yielding. A significant relationship was found between postural asymmetries when riding and when rocking the balance chair, one degree of pelvis or head roll asymmetry on the chair predicted 2.4 (SE 0.9) degrees of asymmetry while riding. Future studies may investigate the value of seated, off-horse postural training for improving rider symmetry and thereby equestrian performance.     

Relations among hand preference,craniofacial asymmetry,and ear advantage in young subjects

The relations for hand preference with craniofacial asymmetry and ear advantage, and between craniofacial asymmetry and ear advantage were investigated in young healthy subjects. Ear advantage was recorded as duration of hearing, craniofacial asymmetry by computerized tomography in 44 right-handed and 38 left-handed male and female high school students. Right-handers had a right ear advantage and a larger left craniofacial region, whereas left-handers had a left ear advantage and a larger right craniofacial region. These results are consistent with the speculation that hand preference may be related to craniofacial and consequently aural asymmetries.     

Hemisphere differences in the effects of cuing in visual recognition tasks.

In Experiment 1 uncued recognition of single letters presented in left or right visual fields showed no hemispheric asymmetry, but cuing by alternatives produced a left-hemisphere advantage. Uncued recognition of words was better in the right visual field (left hemisphere), and this advantage was unchanged by cuing by alternatives or cuing by class. In Experiment 2 a mixed series of words, digits, and dots was presented. Uncued trials showed no asymmetry, but when a precue indicated which type or stimulus would appear next, a left-hemisphere advantage for words was evident. Cuing also produced a nonsignificant shift toward a left-hemisphere advantage for digits and a right-hemisphere advantage for dots. The asymmetrical effects of cuing can be explained by Kinsbourne's attentional model of lateralization, which suggests that cuing may selectively activate one hemisphere, and so bias attention toward the contralateral visual field. Repetition effects within and between visual fields were analyzed but no asymmetries were found.     

Consciousness wanted,attention found: Reasons for the advantage of the left visual field in identifying T2 among rapidly presented series

Everyday experience suggests that people are equally aware of events in both hemi-fields. However, when two streams of stimuli are rapidly presented left and right containing two targets, the second target is better identified in the left than in the right visual field.This might be considered evidence for a right-hemisphere advantage in generating conscious percepts. However, this putative asymmetry of conscious perception cannot be measured independently of participants’ access to their conscious percepts, and there is actually evidence from split-brain patients for the reverse, left-hemisphere advantage in having access to conscious percepts. Several other topics were studied in search of the responsible mechanism, among others: Mutual inhibition of hemispheres, cooperation of hemispheres in perceiving midline stimuli, and asymmetries in processing various perceptual inputs. Directing attention by salient cues turned out to be one of the few mechanisms capable of modifying the left visual-field advantage in this paradigm. Thus, this left visual-field advantage is best explained by the notion of a right-hemisphere advantage in directing attention to salient events. Dovetailing with the pathological asymmetries of attention after right-hemisphere lesions and with asymmetries of brain activation when healthy participants shift their attention, the present results extend that body of evidence by demonstrating unusually large and reliable behavioral asymmetries for attention-directing processes in healthy participants.