Right hemisphere contribution to lexical access in an aphasic with deep dyslexia

Three hemifield tachistoscopic studies of a right-handed patient with acquired Broca's aphasia and deep dyslexia, but with intact visual fields, are presented to support the hypothesis of right hemisphere (RH) participation in deep dyslexic reading. A systematic comparison of this deep dyslexic with the disconnected RHs of two patients with complete cerebral commissurotomy disclosed a similar, but not identical, pattern of abilities. The results demonstrate partial reliance on the RH for accessing the meaning of single words, but not for phonological encoding in this patient.     

Effects of right and left hemisphere damage on performance of the "Right Hemisphere Communication Battery"

A Hebrew adaptation of Gardner and Brownell's (1986) "Right Hemisphere Communication Battery" (HRHCB) was administered to 27 right brain-damaged (RBD) patients, 31 left brain-damaged (LBD) patients, and 21 age-matched normal controls. Both patient groups showed deficits relative to controls and overall there was no difference between the two patient groups. A factor analysis of patients' scores on the HRHCB yielded two interpretable factors, a verbal and a nonverbal one. These factors were not lateralized. Performance of patients on the HRHCB correlated significantly and positively with performance on most tests of basic language functions, measured with a Hebrew adaptation of the "Western Aphasia Battery" (HWAB) and with other cognitive functions measured with standardized neuropsychological tests. There were stronger correlations of HRHCB with subtests of the HWAB in LBD patients and with nonlanguage cognitive tests in RBD patients. In the LBD group, HRHCB subtests' scores correlated negatively with lesion extent in frontal and temporal perisylvian regions. Such localization was not observed in RBD patients. The results argue against selective right hemisphere (RH) involvement in the RHCB, alleged to measure pragmatic aspects of language use, and show, instead, bilateral involvement. The results also argue against a modular organization of these functions of language use, especially in the RH.     

The Contemporary Freudian Tradition: Past and Present,edited by Ken Robinson and Joan Schächter,Routledge, Abingdon and New York, 2021, 370 pp

The American Journal of Psychoanalysis -     

Repetition priming within and between the two cerebral hemispheres

Two experiments explored repetition priming benefits in the left and right cerebral hemispheres. In both experiments, a lateralized lexical decision task was employed using repeated target stimuli. In the first experiment, all targets were repeated in the same visual field, and in the second experiment the visual field of presentation was switched following repetition. Both experiments demonstrated hemispheric specialization for the task (a RVF advantage for word identification) and hemispheric interaction for word processing (lexicality priming from contralateral distracters). In the first experiment, words were identified more quickly and accurately following repetition, with repetition facilitating faster but fewer correct responses for non-words. Complex interactions between visual field of first and second presentation in the second experiment indicate asymmetric interhemispheric repetition priming effects. These results provide a broad picture of hemispheric asymmetries in word processing and of complex interaction between the hemispheres during word recognition.     

The relationship between reading ability and lateralized lexical decision

Although lexical decision remains one of the most extensively studied cognitive tasks, very little is known about its relationship to broader linguistic performance such as reading ability. In a correlational study, several aspects of lateralized lexical decision performance were related to vocabulary and reading comprehension measures, as assessed using the Nelson-Denny Reading Test. This lateralized lexical decision task has been previously shown to demonstrate (1) independent contributions from both hemispheres, as well as (2) interhemispheric interactions during word recognition. Lexical decision performance showed strong relationships with both reading measures. Specifically, vocabulary performance correlated significantly with left visual field (LVF) word accuracy and LVF non-word latency, both measures of right hemisphere performance. There were also significant, though somewhat weaker, correlations between reading comprehension and RVF non-word latency. Lexicality priming, a measure of interhemispheric communication during lexical decision, was also correlated with reading comprehension. These results suggest that hemispheric interaction during word recognition is common, and that lexical processing contribution from the right hemisphere, something commonly taken as minor and inconsequential, can lead to significant performance benefits and to individual differences in reading.     

Individual differences in the hemispheric specialization of dual route variables

The dual route model suggests that reading of letter strings can occur through both a lexical and a nonlexical route. Hemispheric specialization of these routes has also been posited, suggesting that the left hemisphere has both lexical and nonlexical routes while the right hemisphere has only a lexical route. However, some recent data conflict with this hemispheric dual route model, suggesting that both hemispheres may have access to both routes. The purpose of the present study was to investigate individual differences in the hemispheric specialization of these routes and to determine whether these group differences in their specialization might explain conflicts in the literature. The effect of four individual difference factors was explored: handedness, biological sex, menstrual stage (i.e., fluctuations in estrogen), and self-rated degree of masculinity (i.e., sexual attribution). We looked at the interaction of these individual differences with the following dual route variables: (i) string length, (ii) word frequency, (iii) regularity of grapheme-phoneme correspondences of words, and (iv) the interaction of frequency and regularity using a bilateral lexical decision task. We observed that sex, menstrual stage, and masculinity each affected hemispheric specialization of the dual route variables, but did so in different ways. We posit that both hemispheres have orthographical (lexical) access as well as phonological (nonlexical) access to words. Further, we suggest that the presence of phonological processing in the right hemisphere depends on available resources and the strategies used, which are subject to individual differences.     

Rhyming and the right hemisphere

Subjects determined whether two successively presented and orthographically different words rhymed with each other. The first word was presented at fixation and the second was presented either to the left or to the right of fixation, either alone (unilateral presentation) or accompanied by a distractor word in the other visual hemifield (bilateral presentation). Subjects were more accurate when the words did not rhyme, when presentation was unilateral, and when the target was flashed to the right visual hemifield. It was predicted that bilateral presentation would produce interference when information from both visual fields was processed by one hemisphere (callosal relay), but not when each of the two hemispheres performed a task independently (direct access). That is, callosal relay tasks should show greater laterality effects with bilateral presentations, whereas direct access tasks should show similar laterality effects with both bilateral and unilateral presentations. Greater laterality effects were observed for bilaterally presented rhyming words, but nonrhyming words showed similar laterality effects for both bilateral and unilateral presentations. These results suggest that judgment of nonrhyming words can be performed by either hemisphere, but that judgment of rhyming words requires callosal relay to the left hemisphere. The absence of a visual field difference with nonrhyming word pairs suggests further that judgment of nonrhyming word pairs may be accomplished by the right hemisphere when presentation is to the left visual field.     

Brain and face: communicating signals of health in the left and right sides of the face

In human communication and mate selection the appearance of health sends signals regarding biological fitness. We compared the appearance of health in the sides of the face to previous results on left-right facial asymmetry in the appearance of beauty (1). The stimuli were created by aligning the left and right sides of the face each with its own mirror image. Here, participants viewed 38 pairs of left-left and right-right faces and judged which member of the pair looked healthier. No significant interaction emerged between decision (health vs attractiveness) and face side. Rather, in women's faces right-right was significantly more healthy and attractive than left-left, while in men's faces there was no significant left-right difference. In biology and evolution, health and beauty are closely linked and the findings here confirm this relationship in human faces.     

Error monitoring in the hemispheres: the effect of lateralized feedback on lexical decision.

Does each hemisphere have its own system for monitoring and responding to errors? Three experiments investigate the effect of presenting lateralized accuracy feedback in a bilateral lexical decision task. We presented feedback after each trial in either the left visual field (LVF) or right visual field (RVF). In Experiment 1 the feedback stimuli were faces smiling or frowning, in Experiment 2 we used colored squares, and Experiment 3 tested the effect of verbal feedback. Negative feedback presented in the LVF tended to improve performance on the following trial, while the same negative feedback in the RVF tended to disrupt performance on the following trial. This result was strongest with the faces as feedback, was less pronounced with colored squares, and disappeared with verbal feedback. The results are interpreted as suggesting a right hemisphere superiority for error monitoring that depends on the mode of feedback.