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.

Hemispheric Asymmetry as a Function of Handedness: Perception of Facial Affect Stimuli

1996 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 264-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Erik Everhart ◽  
David W. Harrison ◽  
W. David Crews
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Asymmetry ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Affective Stimuli ◽  
Left Handed ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right

Hemispheric asymmetry in 14 left- and 14 right-handed persons shown tachistoscopically presented emotional stimuli to left and right visual fields was examined using a forced-choice, reaction-time paradigm in which subjects were asked to identify positive and negative faces. Neutral faces were included within the two-alternative forced-choice paradigm. Reaction time and response-bias measures were recorded. Analysis indicated differential lateralization for left-handed and right-handed subjects with respect to neutral affective stimuli. While right-handed subjects' perceptions of neutral stimuli remained consistent across visual fields, left-handed ones identified neutral stimuli as more positive (happy) when presented to the left visual field and negative (angry) when presented to the right visual field. Implications for differential lateralization patterns among left- and right-handed adults are discussed.

Reaction Time, Bilateral Differences, and the Poggendorff and Ponzo Illusions

1978 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 871-874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis E. Clayson
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Magnitude Estimation ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Pattern Characteristic ◽  
Bilateral Differences ◽  
The Right ◽  
Encoding Strategy

12 subjects responded with either hand to tachistoscopically presented Poggendorff and Ponzo figures in both their right and left visual fields. Reaction time decreased as illusory magnitude increased for both figures. Reaction time was faster for both figures when presented in the right visual field and showed a pattern characteristic of a dichotomous encoding strategy, while the reaction time for the figures presented in the left visual field followed a pattern characteristic of magnitude estimation.

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

scholarly journals Exploration of the Hemispheric Differences in Number Processing of the Brain

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-61
Author(s):  
Aaron Wyland Walters
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Reaction Time Data ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Differences ◽  
Time Data ◽  
Central Target ◽  
The Right

Abstract The current study explored how reaction time and accuracy differed in the left and right visual fields by altering various dot clusters in both number and organization. Researchers have hypothesized that the left hemisphere uses counting to judge small, disorganized clusters of objects accurately and that the right hemisphere uses estimation to judge clusters organized in geometric shape accurately. The current study tested both visual fields of participant’s with organized and unorganized clusters of dots. Dots were clustered between 3 and 12. The clusters were presented on separate sides of a computer screen to analyze visual field differences in counting and estimation. A central target was presented on the screen to maintain central focus for the visual fields. Data from 40 participants (30 men, 10 women) from a small liberal arts college indicated that when clusters reached between 7 and 8 dots, organization in the right visual field created inaccuracy in judgment. Reaction time data indicated that as number level increased, reaction time slowed. Reaction time data also showed that organization slowed reaction times in both visual fields. These data indicated that different numerical judgment abilities do exist within the hemispheres.

Attention and Hemispheric Differences in Reaction Time during Simultaneous Audio-Visual Tasks

1973 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 404-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina Geffen ◽  
J. L. Bradshaw ◽  
N. C. Nettleton
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Auditory Task ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Differences ◽  
Language Functions ◽  
The Right

The effect of different types of competing auditory tasks on laterality differences in visual perception was investigated. Right-handed subjects were presented with digits which occurred randomly in the left or right visual fields. They responded vocally to previously specified digits in a go, no-go reaction time situation. In the absence of any competing auditory task, digits presented in the right visual field were processed more quickly. This visual field difference in reaction time was in the same direction while subjects performed a secondary musical task. However, when a secondary verbal task had to be performed, digits in the left visual field received faster responses. The results support the view that the right hemisphere is capable of some language functions, and that hemispheric differences in performance have at their basis a quantitative asymmetry, which can be reversed even in normal subjects by overloading their limited capacity.

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.

scholarly journals Right hemisphere superiority for executive control of attention

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfredo Spagna ◽  
Tae Hyeong Kim ◽  
Tingting Wu ◽  
Jin Fan
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Orienting ◽  
Conflict Effect ◽  
Hemisphere Dominance ◽  
The Right

AbstractOver forty years have passed since the first evidence showing the unbalanced attentional allocation of humans across the two visual fields, and since then, a wealth of behavioral, neurophysiological, and clinical data increasingly showed a right hemisphere dominance for orienting of attention. However, inconsistent evidence exists regarding the right-hemisphere dominance for executive control of attention, possibly due to a lack of consideration of its dynamics with the alerting and orienting functions. In this study, we used a version of the Attentional Network Test with lateralized presentation of the stimuli to the left visual field (processed by the right hemisphere, RH) and right visual field (processed by the left hemisphere, LH) to examine visual field differences in executive control of attention under conditions of alerting or orienting. Analyses of behavioral performance (reaction time and error rate) showed a more efficient executive control (reduced conflict effect) in the RH compared to the LH for the reaction time, under conditions of increased alerting and of informative spatial orienting. These results demonstrate the right-hemisphere superiority for executive control, and that this effect depends on the activation of the alerting and orienting functions.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document