Hemispheric Processing of Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Relations in the Absence of Low Spatial Frequencies

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matia Okubo ◽  
Chikashi Michimata
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Spatial Relation ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Frequencies ◽  
Categorical Task ◽  
The Right ◽  
Coordinate Spatial Relations

Right-handed participants performed the categorical and coordinate spatial relation judgments on stimuli presented to either the left visual field—right hemisphere (LVF-RH) or the right visual field—left hemisphere (RVF-LH). The stimulus patterns were formulated either by bright dots or by contrast-balanced dots. When the stimuli were bright, an RVF-LH advantage was observed for the categorical task, whereas an LVF-RH advantage was observed for the coordinate task. When the stimuli were contrast balanced, the RVF-LH advantage was observed for the categorical task, but the LVF-RH advantage was eliminated for the coordinate task. Because the contrast-balanced dots are largely devoid of low spatial frequency content, these results suggest that processing of low spatial frequency is responsible for the right hemisphere advantage for the coordinate spatial processing.

The Role of High Spatial Frequencies in Hemispheric Processing of Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Relations

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. 1576-1582 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matia Okubo ◽  
Chikashi Michimata
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
High Spatial Frequency ◽  
Spatial Relation ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Frequencies ◽  
Low Pass ◽  
Categorical Task

Right-handed participants performed categorical and coordinate spatial relation tasks on stimuli presented either to the left visual field-right hemisphere (LVF-RH) or to the right visual field-left hemisphere (RVF-LH). The stimuli were either unfiltered or low-pass filtered (i.e., devoid of high spatial frequency content). Consistent with previous studies, the unfiltered condition produced a significant RVF-LH advantage for the categorical task and an LVF-RH advantage for the coordinate task. Low-pass filtering eliminated this Task × Visual Field interaction; thus, the RVF-LH advantage disappeared for the categorical task. The present results suggest that processing of high spatial frequency contributes to the left hemispheric advantage for categorical spatial processing.

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.

Spatial-Frequency Discrimination, Brain Lateralisation, and Acute Intake of Alcohol

Perception ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 729-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reidulf G Watten ◽  
Svein Magnussen ◽  
Mark W Greenlee
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Frequency Discrimination ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Spatial Frequencies ◽  
Balanced Placebo Design ◽  
Acute Intake

The effect of alcohol (breath-alcohol level of 0.1%) on perceptual discrimination of low (1.5 cycles deg−1) and high (8 cycles deg−1) spatial frequencies in the left and right visual field was measured in eighteen right-handed males, in a double-blind, balanced placebo design. Discrimination thresholds for briefly (180 ms) presented sinusoidal gratings were determined by two-alternative forced-choice judgments with four interleaving psychophysical staircases providing random trial-to-trial variation of reference spatial frequency and visual field, in addition to a random (±10%) jitter of reference spatial frequency. Alcohol produced overall higher discrimination thresholds but did not alter the visual-field balance: no main effect of visual field was observed, but in both placebo and alcohol conditions spatial frequency interacted with visual field in the direction predicted by the spatial-frequency hypothesis of hemispheric asymmetry in visual-information processing, with left-visual-field/right-hemisphere superiority in discrimination of low spatial frequencies and right-visual-field/left-hemisphere superiority in discrimination of high spatial frequencies.

Spatial Processing and Hemispheric Asymmetry: Contributions of the Transient/Magnocellular Visual System

1998 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 472-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Cowin Roth ◽  
Joseph B. Hellige
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Hemispheric Asymmetry ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Spatial Task ◽  
Spatial Processing ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Green Background ◽  
Categorical Task ◽  
The Right

Right-handed observers were presented with stimuli consisting of a line and two horizontally separated dots. A categorical spatial task required observers to indicate whether the dots were above or below the line, and a coordinate spatial task required observers to indicate whether the line could fit into the space between the two dots. For the coordinate task, reaction time was faster when the stimuli were presented to the left visual field (right hemisphere) than when the stimuli were presented to the right visual field (left hemisphere). The opposite hemispheric asymmetry was obtained for the categorical task. In addition, coordinate spatial processing took longer with stimuli presented on a red background than with stimuli presented on a green background. The opposite trend characterized categorical spatial processing. Because the color red attenuates processing in the transient/magnocellular visual pathway, these results suggest that coordinate spatial processing is more dependent on the transient/magnocellular pathway than is categorical spatial processing. However, manipulations of color condition had no effect on visual field (hemispheric) asymmetries, suggesting that the two hemispheres rely on the same visual information and on the same computational mechanisms as each other—although they do not always use that information with equal efficiency.

Categorical versus Coordinate Spatial Processing: Effects of Blurring and Hemispheric Asymmetry

1994 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth L. Cowin ◽  
Joseph B. Hellige
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Spatial Processing ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Horizontal Line ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Categorical Task ◽  
The Right

The present experiment examined the effects of dioptric blurring on the performance of two different spatial processing tasks using the same visual stimuli. One task (the above/below, categorical task) required subjects to indicate whether a dot was above or below a horizontal line. The other task (the coordinate, near/far task) required subjects to indicate whether the dot was within 3 mm of the line. For both tasks, the stimuli on each trial were presented to either the right visual field and left hemisphere (RVF/LH) or the left Visual field and right hemisphere (LVF/RH). For the above/below task, dioptric blurring consistently increased reaction time (RT) and did so equally on LVF/RH and RVF/LH trials. Furthermore, there was no significant difference between the two visual fields for either clear or blurred stimuli. For the near/far task, dioptric blurring had no consistent effect on either RT or error rate for either visual field. On an initial block of trials, however, there were significantly fewer errors on LVF/RH than on RVF/LH trials, with the LVF/RH advantage being independent of whether the stimuli were clear or blurred. This initial LVF/RH advantage disappeared quickly with practice, regardless of whether the stimuli were clear or blurred. This pattern of results suggests that for both cerebral hemispheres, somewhat different aspects of visual information are relevant for categorical versus coordinate spatial processing and that the right hemisphere is superior to the left for coordinate (but not categorical) spatial processing.

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.

Summation Priming and Coarse Semantic Coding in the Right Hemisphere

1994 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Beeman ◽  
Rhonda B. Friedman ◽  
Jordan Grafman ◽  
Enrique Perez ◽  
Sherri Diamond ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Input Word ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Semantic Fields ◽  
The Right ◽  
Prime Target ◽  
Strong Associate ◽  
Target Words

There are now numerous observations of subtle right hemisphere (RH) contributions to language comprehension. It has been suggested that these contributions reflect coarse semantic coding in the RH. That is, the RH weakly activates large semantic fields—including concepts distantly related to the input word—whereas the left hemisphere (LH) strongly activates small semantic fields—limited to concepts closely related to the input (Beeman, 1993a,b). This makes the RH less effective at interpreting single words, but more sensitive to semantic overlap of multiple words. To test this theory, subjects read target words preceded by either “Summation” primes (three words each weakly related to the target) or Unrelated primes (three unrelated words), and target exposure duration was manipulated so that subjects correctly named about half the target words in each hemifield. In Experiment 1, subjects benefited more from Summation primes when naming target words presented to the left visual field-RH (Ivf-RH) than when naming target words presented to the right visual field-LH (rvf-LH), suggesting a RH advantage in coarse semantic coding. In Experiment 2, with a low proportion of related prime-target trials, subjects benefited more from “Direct” primes (one strong associate flanked by two unrelated words) than from Summation primes for rvf-LH target words, indicating that the LH activates closely related information much more strongly than distantly related information. Subjects benefited equally from both prime types for Ivf-RH target words, indicating that the RH activates closely related information only slightly more strongly, at best, than distantly related information. This suggests that the RH processes words with relatively coarser coding than the LH, a conclusion consistent with a recent suggestion that the RH coarsely codes visual input (Kosslyn, Chabris, Mar-solek, & Koenig, 1992).

Electroencephalographic Activity in a Flanker Interference Task Using Japanese Orthography

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 971-979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuhei Yamaguchi ◽  
Genya Toyoda ◽  
Jiang Xu ◽  
Shotai Kobayashi ◽  
Avishai Henik
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Hemispheric Specialization ◽  
Late Phase ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Interference Effects ◽  
Interference Task ◽  
Dorsolateral Prefrontal ◽  
The Right

The neural activities for color word interference effects were investigated using event-related brain potentials (ERPs) recorded in a flanker-type interference task. Kanji words (Japanese morphograms) and kana words (Japanese phono-grams) were used as the flanker stimuli to obtain insights about hemispheric specialization for processing two types of Japanese orthographies. Interference effects in reaction time were larger when kanji words were presented in the left visual field and when kana words were in the right visual field. ERPs were modulated by the incongruent flankers, which generated a negative ERP component with the different onset and offset depending on flanker attributes. Consistent with the behavioral data, the interference-related negativity was observed for kanji words presented in the left visual field and for kana words in the right visual field. The negativity distributed maximally over the fronto-central site. The early part of the negativity distributed strongly over the frontal midline area, whereas it extended bilaterally over the frontal area in the late phase. The present results support the view of preferential processing of kanji in the right hemisphere and that of kana in the left hemisphere. The temporal profile of scalp topographies for the interference-related neural activity suggests that the medial and dorsolateral prefrontal regions may be involved in maintaining attentional set and conflict resolution.

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.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document