Cognitive Arithmetic: Evidence for Right Hemispheric Mediation in an Elementary Component Stage

1980 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert N. Katz
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Order ◽  
Elementary Component ◽  
Cognitive Arithmetic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Field Errors

Earlier studies involving the lateralization of arithmetic abilities have provided evidence for both right and left hemisphere superiorities. It is argued here that part of this inconsistency could be due to the complexity of the arithmetic computations which have been examined. The present studies examined a subprocess shown to be involved in more complex tasks, such as subtraction. The subprocess is the identification of which of two numbers is greater, and was tested by the flashing of a pair of digits to either the left or right visual field. Errors, reaction-times to make a decision, and examination of hand × visual field interactions all indicated that this subprocess is mediated by the right hemisphere. Correlational analysis was used to identify the operations underlying the observed lateralization of this ability. This analysis indicated that an operation indexed by the spatial order in which the digits were presented was effective in the right hemisphere but not the left hemisphere. Speculations on the nature of these operations were presented.

Vocal Reaction Times to Tachistoscopically Presented High- and Low-Frequency Verbs: Some Evidence for Selective Minor Hemisphere Linguistic Analysis

1988 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 803-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Rastatter ◽  
Catherine Loren
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Intact Brain ◽  
The Right

The current study investigated the capacity of the right hemisphere to process verbs using a paradigm proven reliable for predicting differential, minor hemisphere lexical analysis in the normal, intact brain. Vocal reaction times of normal subjects were measured to unilaterally presented verbs of high and of low frequency. A significant interaction was noted between the stimulus items and visual fields. Post hoc tests showed that vocal reaction times to verbs of high frequency were significantly faster following right visual-field presentations (right hemisphere). No significant differences in vocal reaction time occurred between the two visual fields for the verbs of low frequency. Also, significant differences were observed between the two types of verbs following left visual-field presentation but not the right. These results were interpreted to suggest that right-hemispheric analysis was restricted to the verbs of high frequency in the presence of a dominant left hemisphere.

Right Hemisphere Memory Bias Does Not Extend to Involuntary Memories for Negative Scenes

Perception ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-38
Author(s):  
Ella K. Moeck ◽  
Nicole A. Thomas ◽  
Melanie K. T. Takarangi
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Memory Bias ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Differences ◽  
Involuntary Memory ◽  
Involuntary Memories ◽  
The Right

Attention is unequally distributed across the visual field. Due to greater right than left hemisphere activation for visuospatial attention, people attend slightly more to the left than the right side. As a result, people voluntarily remember visual stimuli better when it first appears in the left than the right visual field. But does this effect—termed a right hemisphere memory bias—also enhance involuntary memory? We manipulated the presentation location of 100 highly negative images (chosen to increase the likelihood that participants would experience any involuntary memories) in three conditions: predominantly leftward (right hemisphere bias), predominantly rightward (left hemisphere bias), or equally in both visual fields (bilateral). We measured subsequent involuntary memories immediately and for 3 days after encoding. Contrary to predictions, biased hemispheric processing did not affect short- or long-term involuntary memory frequency or duration. Future research should measure hemispheric differences at retrieval, rather than just encoding.

Functional Hemispheric Asymmetry and Belief in ESP: Towards a “Neuropsychology of Belief”

1993 ◽  
Vol 77 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1299-1308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Brugger ◽  
Alex Gamma ◽  
René Muri ◽  
Markus Schafer ◽  
Kirsten I. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Lexical Decision ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Hemispheric Asymmetry ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Verbal Tasks ◽  
Hemisphere Dominance ◽  
The Right

30 right-handed subjects were given a lateralized tachistoscopic lexical-decision task. Subjects' belief in extrasensory perception (ESP) was assessed with a single six-point scale; 16 subjects were designated as believers in ESP and 14 subjects as nonbelievers. Believers in ESP did not exhibit a hemispheric asymmetry for the task while nonbelievers exhibited the expected right visual-field/left-hemisphere dominance documented in the literature. Believers' lack of asymmetry was not caused by an impaired left-hemisphere performance but rather by a significantly enhanced lexical-decision accuracy in the left visual field/right hemisphere compared to nonbelievers. These results are compatible with previous studies indicating a correlation between belief in ESP and a bias for right-hemisphere processing. Moreover, the results are relevant for a discussion of an association between paranormal beliefs and schizotypy: highly schizotypal individuals are not only particularly prone to believe in ESP but are also known to show an attenuation of hemispheric asymmetries in lateralized verbal tasks due to an enhanced contribution of the right hemisphere. We suggest that the neurological basis of delusion-like beliefs may involve a release of right-hemisphere function from left-hemisphere control and sketch the focus of research for a future “neuropsychology of belief.”

scholarly journals Neuroticism, recall bias and attention bias for valenced probes: a twin study

2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. V. Rijsdijk ◽  
H. Riese ◽  
M. Tops ◽  
H. Snieder ◽  
W. H. Brouwer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Environmental Effects ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Dot Probe ◽  
Biologically Relevant ◽  
Probe Task ◽  
The Right

BackgroundPrior research on the nature of the vulnerability of neuroticism to psychopathology suggests biases in information processing towards emotional rather than neutral information. It is unclear to what extent this relationship can be explained by genetic or environmental factors.MethodThe genetic relationship between a neuroticism composite score and free recall of pleasant and unpleasant words and the reaction time on negative probes (dot-probe task) was investigated in 125 female twin pairs. Interaction effects were modelled to test whether the correlation between neuroticism and cognitive measures depended on the level of the neuroticism score.ResultsThe only significant correlation was between neuroticism and the proportion of recalled unpleasant words (heritability is 30%), and was only detectable at the higher end of the neuroticism distribution. This interaction effect seems to be due to environmental effects that make people in the same family more similar (e.g. parental discipline style), rather than genetic factors. An interesting sub-finding was that faster reaction times for left versus right visual field probes in the dot-probe task suggest that cognitive processing in the right hemisphere is more sensitive to subliminal (biologically relevant) cues and that this characteristic is under substantial genetic control (49%). Individual differences in reaction times on right visual field probes were due to environmental effects only.ConclusionsThere is no evidence that the predisposition of individuals to focus on negative (emotional) stimuli is a possible underlying genetic mechanism of neuroticism.

Hemispheric Asymmetries for Temporal Resolution: A Signal Detection Analysis of Threshold and Bias

1994 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael E. R. Nicholls
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Signal Detection ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Asymmetries ◽  
Detection Analysis ◽  
Signal Detection Analysis ◽  
Temporal Events ◽  
The Right

Divided visual field techniques were used to investigate hemispheric asymmetries for (a) the threshold of fusion of two flashes of light and (b) the detection of simultaneous versus successive events for a group of normal, right-handed adults. A signal detection analysis revealed a higher level of accuracy for the right visual field-left hemisphere (RVF-LH) relative to the left visual field-right hemisphere (LVF-RH) for both tasks. These results were interpreted in terms of a general left-hemisphere advantage for the discrimination of fine temporal events. The implications of these results for models of temporary asymmetry that describe the left hemisphere's advantage in terms of an exclusive specialization or relative superiority are then discussed.

Differential Visual Field-Interhemispheric Transfer: Can it Explain Sex and Handedness Differences in Lateralization?

1987 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 423-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Haude ◽  
Mary Morrow-Tlucak ◽  
Diane M. Fox ◽  
Kevin B. Pickard
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Information ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Localization Task ◽  
Left Handed ◽  
Functional Lateralization ◽  
The Right

104 men and women were tested for visual field-hemispheric transfer of spatial information on a dot-localization task. Right-handed subjects showed significant improvement when stimuli were presented to the left visual field of the right hemisphere (LVF-RH) after practice on the same task presented to the right visual field of the left hemisphere (RVF-LH) first. No improvement was found when the task was presented in the reverse order (LVF-RH first followed by RVF-LH). It was concluded that, for right-handers, transfer of spatial information to the right hemisphere is facilitated while transfer to the left hemisphere is inhibited. Left-handed subjects demonstrated no significant improvement in either condition, suggesting inhibition or lack of transfer of spatial information in either direction. No sex differences were found in either right-handed or left-handed subjects. The findings suggest that there may be different mechanisms underlying the similarities in functional lateralization of women and left-handers.

scholarly journals Lateralization of attention in adults with ADHD: Evidence of pseudoneglect

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Helfer ◽  
Stefanos Maltezos ◽  
Elizabeth Liddle ◽  
Jonna Kuntsi ◽  
Philip Asherson
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Study Participant ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Incentive Condition ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
The Right

Abstract Background. We investigated whether adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) show pseudoneglect—preferential allocation of attention to the left visual field (LVF) and a resulting slowing of mean reaction times (MRTs) in the right visual field (RVF), characteristic of neurotypical (NT) individuals —and whether lateralization of attention is modulated by presentation speed and incentives. Method. Fast Task, a four-choice reaction-time task where stimuli were presented in LVF or RVF, was used to investigate differences in MRT and reaction time variability (RTV) in adults with ADHD (n = 43) and NT adults (n = 46) between a slow/no-incentive and fast/incentive condition. In the lateralization analyses, pseudoneglect was assessed based on MRT, which was calculated separately for the LVF and RVF for each condition and each study participant. Results. Adults with ADHD had overall slower MRT and increased RTV relative to NT. MRT and RTV improved under the fast/incentive condition. Both groups showed RVF-slowing with no between-group or between-conditions differences in RVF-slowing. Conclusion. Adults with ADHD exhibited pseudoneglect, a NT pattern of lateralization of attention, which was not attenuated by presentation speed and incentives.

scholarly journals Visuospatial Attention and the Split Brain

Physiology ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 226-231
Author(s):  
G Berlucchi ◽  
GR Mangun ◽  
MS Gazzaniga
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visuospatial Attention ◽  
Attentional Biases ◽  
Split Brain ◽  
Right Hemisphere Damage ◽  
Entire Visual Field ◽  
The Right

In callosotomy patients, the right hemisphere attends to the entire visual field, whereas the left hemisphere attends to the right field only. The occurence of rightward attentional biases, simulating a hemineglect from right hemisphere damage, suggests that in these patients visuospatial attention tends to be controlled by the left hemisphere.

Effect of Visual Complexity in Identification of Tachistoscopic Images

1994 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 971-978 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Geheb ◽  
Keith E. Whitfield ◽  
Linda Brannon
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Complexity ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Right Cerebral Hemisphere ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Times ◽  
The Right ◽  
Mean Reaction Time

The present study of gender differences in hemispheric processing involved identification of tachistoscopically presented images of varying complexity. A computerized tachistoscopic program was administered to 24 men and 34 women. Time to identify contour and detailed pictures presented to the left or right cerebral hemisphere was recorded. Mean reaction time for contour pictures was significantly faster than for detailed pictures, and mean reaction time to the right hemisphere was significantly faster than that to the left hemisphere. The mean reaction time for men to identify pictures exposed to the left hemisphere was significantly slower than that for exposure to the right hemisphere for women. The mean reaction time for both men and women to identify contour pictures exposed to the right hemisphere was significantly faster than the mean time to identify detailed pictures presented to the left hemisphere. The interaction of gender, hemisphere, and complexity was also significant in that mean reaction times for men to identify detailed pictures presented to the left hemisphere were slower than the times for women to identify contour pictures presented to the right hemisphere. The results are discussed in relation to theories about hemispheres, gender, and differences in picture features.

Categorical and Metric Spatial Processes Distinguished by Task Demands and Practice

1999 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie T. Banich ◽  
Kara D. Federmeier
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Receptive Fields ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Spatial Processing ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Metric Distance ◽  
The Right ◽  
Categorical Spatial Relations

In this study we examined Kosslyn's (1987) claim that the right hemisphere exhibits a relative superiority for processing metric spatial relations, whereas the left hemisphere exhibits a relative superiority for processing categorical spatial relations. In particular, we examined whether some failures to observe strong visual field (VF) advantages in previous studies might be due to practice effects that allowed individuals to process tasks in alternative manners (e.g., to process a metric task using a categorical strategy). We used two versions of a task previously employed by Hellige and Michimata (1989) in which individuals judge the metric (distance) or categorical (above/below) spatial relations between a bar and a dot. In one version, the position of the bar was held static. In another, the bar's position varied. This manipulation prevented participants from using the computer screen as a reference frame, forcing them to compute the spatial relationships on the basis of the relevant items only (i.e., the bar and the dot). In the latter, but not the former version of the task we obtained evidence supporting Kosslyn's hypothesis, namely, a significant right visual field (RVF) advantage for categorical spatial processing and a trend toward a left visual field (LVF) advantage for metric spatial processing. Furthermore, the pattern of results for trials on which information was presented centrally (CVF trials) was similar to that observed on RVF trials, whereas the pattern for trials in which identical information was presented in each visual field (BVF trials) was similar to that observed on LVF trials. Such a pattern is consistent with Kosslyn's suggestion that categorical processing is better suited for cells with small receptive fields and metric processing for cells with larger receptive fields.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document