Cerebral Lateralization of Global-Local Processing in Left- and Right-Handed People

2005 ◽  
Vol 100 (3) ◽  
pp. 734-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Ali Goodarzi ◽  
Mohammad Reza Taghavi ◽  
Mohammad Reza Zoughi
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Local Processing ◽  
Cerebral Lateralization ◽  
Left Handed ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Paradigm Analysis ◽  
Local Superiority

Cerebral lateralization of global-local processing of 70 left-handed and 70 right-handed students was compared using a computerized global-local task in a half-visual field paradigm. Analysis showed that left-handed individuals were slower than right-handed individuals in processing Globally Directed stimuli presented to the left visual field (right hemisphere). In addition, left-handed individuals showed smaller local superiority in the left hemisphere to the right-handed individuals. These findings are more consistent with Levy's prediction of spatial inferiority of left-handed individuals than Geschwind and Galaburda's or Annett's hypotheses.

Bias for the Left Visual Field in Rapid Serial Visual Presentation: Effects of Additional Salient Cues Suggest a Critical Role of Attention

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 266-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamila Śmigasiewicz ◽  
Dariusz Asanowicz ◽  
Nicole Westphal ◽  
Rolf Verleger
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Early Posterior Negativity ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right

Everyday experience suggests that people are equally aware of stimuli in both hemifields. However, when two streams of stimuli are rapidly presented left and right, the second target (T2) is better identified in the left hemifield than in the right hemifield. This left visual field (LVF) advantage may result from differences between hemifields in attracting attention. Therefore, we introduced a visual cue shortly before T2 onset to draw attention to one stream. Thus, to identify T2, attention was correctly positioned with valid cues but had to be redirected to the other stream with invalid ones. If the LVF advantage is caused by differences between hemifields in attracting attention, invalid cues should increase, and valid cues should reduce the LVF advantage as compared with neutral cues. This prediction was confirmed. ERP analysis revealed that cues evoked an early posterior negativity, confirming that attention was attracted by the cue. This negativity was earlier with cues in the LVF, which suggests that responses to salient events are faster in the right hemisphere than in the left hemisphere. Valid cues speeded up, and invalid cues delayed T2-evoked N2pc; in addition, valid cues enlarged T2-evoked P3. After N2pc, right-side T2 evoked more sustained contralateral negativity than left T2, least long-lasting after valid cues. Difficulties in identifying invalidly cued right T2 were reflected in prematurely ending P3 waveforms. Overall, these data provide evidence that the LVF advantage is because of different abilities of the hemispheres in shifting attention to relevant events in their contralateral hemifield.

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 Low-frequency electroencephalogram oscillations govern left-eye lateralization during anti-predatory responses in the music frog

2020 ◽  
Vol 223 (21) ◽  
pp. jeb232637
Author(s):  
Jiangyan Shen ◽  
Ke Fang ◽  
Ping Liu ◽  
Yanzhu Fan ◽  
Jing Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Brain Area ◽  
Power Spectra ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
The Right ◽  
Electroencephalogram Eeg ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Steady Velocity

ABSTRACTVisual lateralization is widespread for prey and anti-predation in numerous taxa. However, it is still unknown how the brain governs this asymmetry. In this study, we conducted behavioral and electrophysiological experiments to evaluate anti-predatory behaviors and dynamic brain activities in Emei music frogs (Nidirana daunchina), to explore the potential eye bias for anti-predation and the underlying neural mechanisms. To do this, predator stimuli (a model snake head and a leaf as a control) were moved around the subjects in clockwise and anti-clockwise directions at steady velocity. We counted the number of anti-predatory responses and measured electroencephalogram (EEG) power spectra for each band and brain area (telencephalon, diencephalon and mesencephalon). Our results showed that (1) no significant eye preferences could be found for the control (leaf); however, the laterality index was significantly lower than zero when the predator stimulus was moved anti-clockwise, suggesting that left-eye advantage exists in this species for anti-predation; (2) compared with no stimulus in the visual field, the power spectra of delta and alpha bands were significantly greater when the predator stimulus was moved into the left visual field anti-clockwise; and, (3) generally, the power spectra of each band in the right-hemisphere for the left visual field were higher than those in the left counterpart. These results support that the left eye mediates the monitoring of a predator in music frogs and lower-frequency EEG oscillations govern this visual lateralization.

Visual Masking, Handedness, and Laterality

1974 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 803-811 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. M. Luria
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Visual Masking ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Black Disk ◽  
Left Handed ◽  
Masking Stimulus ◽  
The Right

Monocular thresholds for a black disk and for single letters, presented either alone or followed by a masking stimulus, were obtained for both eyes of 16 left-handed Ss and 16 right-handed Ss. Thresholds for the disk tended to be lower when it was presented to the right visual field, particularly for the left eye and for right-handers. Thresholds for the letters tended to be lower when presented to the right visual field of right-handers and to the left visual field of left-handers. The masking stimulus enhanced these differences for the disk but not for the letters.

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.

Parallel but Temporally Displaced Visual Half-Field Metacontrast Functions

1974 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 258-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter F. McKeever ◽  
Max Suberi
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Stimulus Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Field Function ◽  
Processing Delay ◽  
The Right ◽  
Onset Asynchrony

Using a classic letter-ring metacontrast paradigm, left and right visual field meta-contrast functions were separately determined. The parallel U-shaped recognition functions for both half-fields were found to interact differentially with stimulus onset asynchrony, the left visual field function being displaced by 13 ms toward longer test stimulus-masking stimulus separations. This result was consistent with the hypothesis of longer processing time requirements for verbal stimuli delivered to the right than to the left hemisphere. This indicates that the neural locus (loci) responsible for left visual field verbal processing delay is (are) capable of mediating metacontrast phenomena. It was tentatively concluded that a relative processing delay within the right hemisphere underlies the differing visual half-field metacontrast interaction with stimulus onset asynchrony.

Lateralization of defence mechanisms: Differing influences on perception with left and right visual field presentation of anxiety‐arousing stimulation

1989 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingegerd Carlsson
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Defence Mechanisms ◽  
Psychoanalytic Literature ◽  
Contrast Technique ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Perceptual Styles

Forty‐five undergraduate students were randomly divided into two groups and tested with the Meta‐Contrast Technique (MCT), in the left or right visual field (VF). In the MCT, the presentation of a subliminal threatening picture is intended to evoke anxiety and ego mechanisms of defence against it. More signs of repressive plus isolating defences were found in the left hemisphere (LH) group. Signs of projection plus regression tended to be more common in the right hemisphere (RH) group. The total number of anxiety signs in the MCT protocols did not differ between the groups. A clear sex difference was noticed, namely that the female LH and RH groups showed significant lateralization, while the male groups did not differ significantly on a combined defensive score. The data suggest that the left and right hemispheres may show differing perceptual styles, which are described as ego mechanisms of defence in the psychoanalytic literature.

scholarly journals Facing each other: mammal mothers and infants prefer the position favouring right hemisphere processing

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 20170707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrey Giljov ◽  
Karina Karenina ◽  
Yegor Malashichev
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Spatial Interactions ◽  
Flying Foxes ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Social Processing ◽  
The Right

The right hemisphere plays a crucial role in social processing. Human mothers show a robust left cradling/holding bias providing greater right-hemispheric involvement in the exchange of social information between mother and infant. Here, we demonstrate that a similar bias is evident in face-to-face spatial interactions in marine and terrestrial non-primate mammals. Walruses and Indian flying foxes showed a significant population-level preference for the position which facilitates the use of the left visual field in both mother and infant. This behavioural lateralization may have emerged owing to benefits conferred by the enhanced right-hemispheric social processing providing the mother and infant an optimal perception of each other.

A Dissociation between the Representation of Tool-use Skills and Hand Dominance: Insights from Left- and Right-handed Callosotomy Patients

2005 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott H. Frey ◽  
Margaret G. Funnell ◽  
Valerie E. Gerry ◽  
Michael S. Gazzaniga
Keyword(s):  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Tool Use ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Hand Dominance ◽  
Conceptual Level ◽  
Left Hand ◽  
Left Handed ◽  
Contralateral Hand ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right

The overwhelming majority of evidence indicates that the left cerebral hemisphere of right-handed humans is dominant both for manual control and the representation of acquired skills, including tool use. It is, however, unclear whether these functions involve common or dissociable mechanisms. Here we demonstrate that the disconnected left hemispheres of both right- and left-handed split-brain patients are specialized for representing acquired tool-use skills. When required to pantomime actions associated with familiar tools (Experiment 2), both patients show a right-hand (left hemisphere) advantage in response to tool names, pictures, and actual objects. Accuracy decreases as stimuli become increasingly symbolic when using the left hand (right hemisphere). Tested in isolation with lateralized pictures (Experiment 3), each patient's left hemisphere demonstrates a significant advantage over the right hemisphere for pantomiming tool-use actions with the contralateral hand. The fact that this asymmetry occurs even in a left-handed patient suggests that the left hemisphere specialization for representing praxis skills can be dissociated from mechanisms involved in hand dominance located in the right hemisphere. This effect is not attributable to differences at the conceptual level, as the left and right hemispheres are equally and highly competent at associating tools with observed pantomimes (Experiment 4).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document