Differential Recognition of Tachistoscopically Presented English and Hebrew Words in Right and Left Visual Fields

1965 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 431-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melvin I. Barton ◽  
Harold Goodglass ◽  
Amnon Shai
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Cerebral Hemisphere ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Cerebral Dominance ◽  
Consistent Finding ◽  
Differential Recognition ◽  
The Right ◽  
Language Areas

In this study, the role of lateral cerebral dominance in the consistent finding of lower tachistoscopic thresholds in the right than in the left visual field for alphabetic material was tested for readers of Hebrew and English. Twenty Israeli Ss were presented with Hebrew and English three-letter words, printed vertically, through a monocular tachistoscope, displaced to left or right of fixation by 2°21′. Ten American Ss were also tested for three-letter English words, under similar conditions. Significantly lower thresholds in the right field were found for both groups and for both languages, despite the fact that Hebrew, unlike English, is read from right to left. These findings tend to support the hypothesis that alphabetic stimuli arriving in the major cerebral hemisphere are more readily recognized than similar stimuli arriving in the hemisphere contralateral to the language areas.

Critique of Heron's Directional-Reading Conflict Theory of Scanning

1969 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 271-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Fudin
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Slight Modification ◽  
Conflict Theory ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Way

Heron (1957) proposed a theory of scanning of tachistoscopically presented alphabetical stimuli. It provided a unifying framework to interpret the disparate results obtained when a target is exposed such that half of it is in the left visual field and half in the right visual field, and when arrays are presented laterally, i.e., either in the right or left field. The theory basically holds that eye-movement tendencies established through reading are also operative in covert scanning because tachistoscopically exposed material is encoded in a manner similar to the way it is read. This paper accepts this position but offers a critical evaluation of Heron's ideas as to the manner in which these tendencies function. This discussion and a reexamination of the role of these tendencies in reading lead to the conclusion that they operate sequentially, not simultaneously, as Heron contended. A slight modification in Heron's theory is offered in light of this conclusion.

Visual Field Sensitivity on a Two-Choice Discrimination Task

1981 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Salmon ◽  
Albert Rodwan
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Signal Detection ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Discrimination Task ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Detection Analysis ◽  
Field Sensitivity ◽  
Signal Detection Analysis ◽  
The Right ◽  
Stimulation Of

A signal-detection analysis was used to evaluate visual-field sensitivity on a two-choice (same/different) discrimination task. Pairs of unfamiliar geometrical forms were presented tachistoscopically to the right or left visual fields of 12 subjects. Of 12 subjects 11 obtained left visual-field values which exceeded those of the right. The data suggested that the superiority of stimulation of the left visual field resulted from greater sensitivity to “same” figure pairs.

Effect of Learning on Hemispheric Dominance and Free Recall in a Single Subject

1972 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lester C. Shine ◽  
Joseph Wiant ◽  
Frank Da Polito
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Field Condition ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Hemispheric Dominance ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Single Subject ◽  
The Right

This experiment was designed to investigate the effect of learning on the free recall of letters presented tachistoscopically either to the left visual field, the right visual field, or identically and simultaneously to both visual fields. A modified Shine-Bower analysis of variance was used to analyze S's performance. The results indicate that initially, in accord with previous research, the right visual field is superior to the left visual field in performance, but that this superiority tends to reduce across trials and practically disappears in the later trials. Also, the right visual field condition is not appreciably better in performance than the condition with both visual fields.

scholarly journals Single-Case Neuropsychological Assessment of a Patient with a Posterior Parietal Lesion Using Behavioral Testing and Resting-State fMRI

2021 ◽  
Vol 05 (03) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Elisa Martín-Arévalo ◽  
◽  
Carole Guedj ◽  
François Cotton ◽  
Gilles Rode ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Functional Connectivity ◽  
Resting State ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Resting State Fmri ◽  
Occipital Area ◽  
Posterior Parietal ◽  
The Right

This study integrated functional connectivity measures using resting-state fMRI and behavioral data from a single-case observation of patient (PER) one year after right-hemispheric hemorrhage in the intraparietal sulcus and superior parietal lobule (IPS/SPL). PER showed no sign of clinical neglect. Her behavioral performance in the visuo-manual pointing task and in the letter discrimination task under conditions of endogenous and exogenous attentional cueing was compared between the left (affected) and right (unaffected/control) peripheral visual fields. The resting-state fMRI demonstrated an imbalance between the right and left hemispheric frontoparietal functional connectivity within the dorsal attentional and motor networks. Although the frontal and occipital cortices were not structurally damaged, specific fronto-occipital functional connectivity was imbalanced, which was strongly associated with the behavioral changes. First, the activity in the right frontal eye field showed weaker correlations with the activity in the right inferior occipital area compared to the correlation with the activity in the left inferior occipital area. This imbalanced fronto-occipital functional connectivity was accompanied by a specific impairment in endogenous covert attention in the left visual field. Second, the activity within M1 in both hemispheres showed weaker correlations with the activity of the right cuneus compared to the correlation with the activity in the left cuneus. The imbalanced fronto-occipital functional connectivity was associated with the impairment of the reaching movement of the left and right hands towards the left visual field (optic ataxia). Altogether, our results showed that a lesion to the posterior parietal cortex affects the relationship between distal regions underlying the sensorimotor and attentional abilities

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.

Asynchrony of Lateral Onset as a Factor in Difference in Visual Field

1976 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Hatta
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Perceptual Process ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Stimulus Interval ◽  
Laterality Effect ◽  
The Right

An experiment in matching judgments was designed to examine a role of perceptual process in apparent asymmetry. Recognition of Hirakana letters (Japanese letters) was required. The experimental condition in which stimuli were presented to the left visual field first and to the right visual field second produced more errors for all stimulus intervals (0 to 60 msec.) than experimental conditions where stimuli were presented to the right visual field first and to the left one second. Especially, superiority of the latter condition was marked with the longest stimulus interval employed. These results indicate superiority of the left hemisphere function for recognizing Hirakana letters and suggest that not only memory but also perceptual process contributes to this laterality effect.

Recognition of Alphabetical Arrays Presented in the Right and Left Visual Fields

1969 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Fudin
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Stimulus Presentation ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Cell Assembly ◽  
A Cell ◽  
Experimental Findings ◽  
The Right ◽  
Central Fixation

Six-letter nonsense arrays were tachistoscopically presented successively in the right visual field (RVF) and left visual field (LVF) at four different displacements from a central fixation point (FP) to 20 Ss. Recognition scores were significantly greater for material exposed in the RVF at each of the first three displacements and for the average of all displacements. In each case the higher recognition score for stimuli in the RVF was limited to letters located in the left-array half (letters 1, 2 and 3). An investigation into the dynamics of scanning indicated that these three letters are more advantageously situated when presented in the RVF. This methodological inconsistency brings into question the use of the results obtained from the successive mode of stimulus presentation as evidence for Hebb's notion of a cell assembly. Several ideas concerning the dynamics of scanning which emerged from the experimental findings were discussed.

Perception of Geometrical Arrays Tachistoscopically Exposed in Right and Left Visual Fields

1975 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 831-834 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Fudin ◽  
Darryl B. Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Physiological Mechanism ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Extensive Experience ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right ◽  
Left Movement

Geometrical stimuli (48 6-item arrays of familiar forms, e.g., circle), tachistoscopically presented in the right or left visual field, were more accurately perceived in the right than left visual field by 15 college students. Targets about half the length of the displays exposed here were perceived with equal facility in both visual fields (Bryden, 1960). Results suggest that length of array might affect the difference in perceptual accuracy of forms shown in the right and left visual fields. Figures in the right visual field were predominantly processed from left to right, and forms in the left visual field from right to left. Since more symbols were identified in the right than left visual field, the left to right encoding sequence may be more efficient than a right to left movement. Limited experience of most Ss in reading symbols from left to right is probably only one factor. Extensive experience reading alphabetical material from left to right might have developed the physiological mechanism underpinning this sequence more than the one serving the opposite movement.

Hemispheric Asymmetry in Reaction Time to Color Stimuli

1977 ◽  
Vol 45 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1151-1155 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Pirot ◽  
T. W. Pulton ◽  
L. W. Sutker
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Asymmetry ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Left Hand ◽  
Simple Detection ◽  
Color Field ◽  
The Right ◽  
Male Subjects

The simple detection of colored stimuli in the right, center, and left visual fields was examined. 10 male subjects were used in a reaction time paradigm with color (red, green, or blue), field, and hand as independent variables. A significantly faster RT to stimuli presented in the left visual field was observed, and further the left visual field-left hand combination was the fastest of all the combinations of visual-field × hand. A significant interaction of color × field suggested that red may be processed on a higher order level even in a simple detection task.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document