Hemispheric differences in processing visual patterns

The dichotomies verbal/visuospatial, serial/parallel and analytic/holistic are reviewed with respect to differences in hemispheric processing. A number of experimental parameters may be varied in such tasks, and together with certain frequently-occurring weaknesses of experimental design may account for the often discrepant results hitherto reported. The above factors are systematically reviewed, and three further experiments are reported which attempt to fill in the missing designs. Further evidence is given in support of the hypothesis that right-hemisphere superiority is most apparent in processes leading to identity matching. It is quantitative rather than qualitative, and may depend upon operations on the entire gestalt, such as holistic matching, mental rotation, reflection, distortion, etc., rather than, e.g., simultaneous (parallel) processing of discretely analysed or isolated features or elements. On the other hand left-hemisphere involvement in visuospatial processing is thought to reflect analysis of the configuration into its separable components; such processing may be either serial or parallel, and may frequently lead to a judgement different.     

Neuropsychological analysis of a typewriting disturbance following cerebral damage

Following a left CVA, a skilled professional typist sustained a disturbance of typing disproportionate to her handwriting disturbance. Typing errors were predominantly of the sequencing type, with spatial errors much less frequent, suggesting that the impairment was based on a relatively early (premotor) stage of processing. Depriving the subject of visual feedback during handwriting greatly increased her error rate. Similarly, interfering with auditory feedback during speech substantially reduced her self-correction of speech errors. These findings suggested that impaired ability to utilize somesthetic information--probably caused by the subject's parietal lobe lesion--may have been the basis of the typing disorder.     

Development of strategic skills in impulsive and reflective children: a longitudinal study of metacognition

This study examined the relationships between metamemory and strategic behavior in impulsive and reflective children. One hundred thirty children from the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades participated. Seventy-seven of these children had been tested 3 years earlier on metamemory and cognitive tempo tasks. At pretraining, children were assessed on metamemory, cognitive tempo, summarization skills, and teacher ratings of impulsive behavior in the classroom. Next, children in three experimental groups received prose summarization instructions, summarization instructions in conjunction with metacognitive training about the importance of a reflective approach to learning, or no instructions. Following training, children were again measured on tempo, summarization skills, and teacher ratings of impulsivity. Analyses of strategy maintenance data indicated superior performance for children who had received both summarization and metacognitive training. Causal modeling analyses showed that early metamemory was an antecedent of later strategy acquisition. The dual role of metacognition as a precursor of later strategy acquisition and controller of lower level strategies was highlighted.     

Between- versus within-family factor analyses of cognitive abilities

Confirmatory factor analyses of the 15 cognitive abilities tests from the Hawaii Family Study of Cognition were conducted on between-family (BF) means and within-family (WF) differences for 370 AEA (Americans of European ancestry) and 116 AJA (Americans of Japanese ancestry) sibling pairs. Difference chi-square significance tests, goodness-of-fit indices, and congruence coefficients for the estimated loadings on four specific cognitive abilities factors and on the second-order general intelligence factor nearly all indicated that the between-family factor structures were not significantly different from the within-family structures for both AEA and AJA siblings (the AEA and AJA structures were also not significantly different). The similarity of the BF and WF structures suggests that the genetic and environmental influences underlying cognitive abilities are “intrinsic” in nature, that is, not just due to between-family differences in culture, status, values, and fortuitous cross-assortative mating.