Laterality effects, levels of processing, and stimulus properties

Two hypotheses of hemispheric specialization are discussed. The first stresses the importance of the kind of processing to which the stimulus is subjected, and the second stresses the importance of the nature of the stimulus. To test these hypotheses, four experiments were carried out. In Experiment 1 verbal material was employed in a same-different classification task, and an overall right visual field superiority was found. Experiment 2, in which verbal stimuli were subjected to visuospatial transformations (i.e. mental rotations), yielded no laterality effect. In Experiment 3 geometrical figures were employed in a classification task similar to that of Experiment 1, and an overall left visual field superiority was found. In Experiment 4 both verbal and geometric stimuli were employed. The results showed a significant interaction between field of presentation and nature of the stimulus and no interaction between field of presentation and level of processing.     

Tacit Integration and Referential Structure in the Language Comprehension of Aphasics and Normals

Aphasics, brain-damaged patients with no language deficit, neurologically intact elderly subjects, and university undergraduates matched pictures to sentences having compelling tacit implications (e.g., the sentence The fox grabs the hen strongly invites one to assume that the fox will eat the hen). All groups made, for the same sentences, qualitatively similar referential errors consisting in choosing a tacit implication picture. Two auxiliary experiments using the same target sentences in other interpretive situations permitted ruling out the possibility that these errors were due to the putative intrinsic semantic properties of the sentences, showing that the sentences which were most liable to elicit integrative error varied from task to task. These results are interpreted within the conceptual framework which posits that reliable directions for interpretation are couched by the speaker in the very structure of his utterances (the utterance's referential structure) providing the hearer with means to restructure the relevant personal knowledge integrated into the interpretive process in accordance with the speaker's communicative intent. The determination of the referential structure (RSD) of utterances thus seems critical to their correct or, more precisely, conventional interpretation, and, along with the tacit integration of relevant sources of personal knowledge, constitutes the principal cognitive device enabling us to understand each other. But this device appears to be easily corruptible. It is suggested that many errors made by aphasics in language interpretation are due to a failure to follow all referential instructions, but that qualitatively similar failures also occur in normal subjects, though to a lesser degree. Language interpretation is a fallible process and aphasic errors provide remarkable clues for the understanding of its subtle referential mechanisms.     

Impairment in processing meaningless verbal material in several modalities: The relationship between short-term memory and phonological skills

Phonological processing abilities were studied in a patient who, following focal brain damage, showed selective impairment in non-word reading, writing, and repetition and also a severe short-term memory (STM) deficit specific for auditorily presented verbal material. The patient could execute tasks involving phonemic manipulation and awareness perfectly. Our data, in contrast with earlier observations in a case of developmental phonological dyslexia, show that acquired impairment in non-word reading, writing, repetition, and immediate memory may occur despite good phonological processing abilities. The role of STM in processing meaningless verbal material is discussed.     

Unimanual tapping during concurrent articulation: examining the role of cortical structures in the execution of programmed movement sequences

Three experiments were conducted to examine effects of speech on concurrent unimanual tapping. Experiments 1 and 2 involved the manual tapping of a short burst of preprogrammed responses with or without concurrent articulation. Results of these experiments showed no effects of speech articulation on the concurrent execution of programmed manual movement sequences. In Experiment 3, subjects continuously tapped for 15 sec, again, with or without concurrent speech articulation. The results showed that articulation affected the speed of concurrent manual responses with larger interference for right hand tapping than for left hand tapping. Additional analysis of the tapping variability revealed equivalent effects of concurrent articulation on the timing of repetitive right and left hand tapping. Kinsbourne's Functional Cerebral Distance Principle was used to interpret these results. Within this framework, the present findings indicate that functionally distinct processes control speech articulation and the execution of programmed manual movement sequences.