Interhemispheric Integration of Compound Nouns: Effects of Stimulus Arrangement and Mode of Presentation

1987 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 663-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Marc Berger ◽  
Etienne Perret ◽  
Annemarie Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Pictorial Representation ◽  
Reading Habits ◽  
Mode Of Presentation ◽  
Compound Nouns ◽  
Bilateral Condition ◽  
Stimulus Arrangement ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Normal subjects had to name German compound nouns which were presented tachistoscopically. The compound nouns were displayed either unilaterally to the left or right visual field or bilaterally with one element to each visual field. In the bilateral condition a distinction was made as to whether familiar or unfamiliar arrangement of the elements was used. Representation in print was compared with pictorial representation of the compound nouns. A right visual-field superiority was observed with printed representation, but no laterality effects with pictorial representation. Bilateral processing was superior to unilateral processing. Within the bilateral conditions, the familiar arrangement of the elements yielded a significantly better performance than unfamiliar arrangement. This difference can be explained by reading habits and/or by different styles of interhemispheric integration.

Role of Interstimulus and Stimulus-Hemisphere Compatibility in the Process of Interhemispheric Integration

1988 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 503-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Marc Berger ◽  
Etienne Perret ◽  
Annemarie Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Pictorial Representation ◽  
Compatibility Analysis ◽  
Compound Nouns ◽  
The Right

Normal subjects had to name German compound nouns which were presented tachistoscopically. The compound nouns were displayed either unilaterally to the left or right visual field, or bilaterally with one element to the left and one to the right visual field. A distinction was made between the bilateral conditions as to whether the representation of the elements, printed and/or pictorial, included a high or low interstimulus and a high or low stimulus-hemisphere compatibility. Analysis indicated firstly a superiority of the left hemisphere for the naming of compound nouns in mixed print and pictorial representation. Secondly, the performance in the bilateral conditions was moderated by stimulus-hemisphere compatibility. In the process of interhemispheric integration stimulus-hemisphere compatibility proved more crucial than interstimulus compatibility. Analyses of errors further illustrated hemispheric behaviour.

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.

Left and Right Visual Field Superiority for Letter Classification

1979 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Jonides
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Perceptual Processing ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Two letter classification experiments examine the hypothesis that lateral asymmetries in perceptual processing are sensitive to subtle changes in task demands. The first experiment reports a right visual field superiority for an easy letter classification, but a left field superiority for a difficult classification using the same population of stimuli. Experiment II demonstrates that the right field superiority can be reversed if the easy classification trials are embedded among more difficult trials. The implications of these results for theories of hemispheric localization are discussed.

scholarly journals Does Judgment Feedback affect Visual-Field Superiority as a function of Stimulus Structure and Content?

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Anamitra Basu
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Response Latency ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Recognition Accuracy ◽  
Presentation Mode ◽  
Feedback Condition ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Dependent Variables ◽  
Stimulus Content ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Visual-field advantage was envisaged as a function of presentation mode (unilateral, bilateral), stimulus structure (word, face), and stimulus content (emotional, neutral) in two conditions, with and without feedback of judgment. Split visual-field paradigm was taken into account with recognition accuracy and response latency as the dependent variables. Stimuli were significantly better recognized in left visual-field than in right visual-field. Unilaterally, rather than bilaterally, presented stimuli were significantly better recognized. Emotional content were intensely recognized than neutral content. Analysis using multivariate ANOVA suggested that words as well as faces were recognized better without judgment feedback condition as compared to with judgment feedback condition; however these stimuli were judged with significantly less response latency following judgment feedback.

Visual-Field Asymmetries in Letter Recognition: Evidence for Asymmetry in Early Visual Registration

1979 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-191
Author(s):  
Colin Pitblado ◽  
Michael Petrides ◽  
Gary Riccio
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Recognition Accuracy ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Letter Recognition ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Cerebral Asymmetry ◽  
Exposure Field ◽  
The Right

Two experiments on visual-field differences in tachistoscopic letter recognition are described. In the first, a bright pre-exposure field with a black fixation point was used, and the conventionally expected dominance of the right visual field was found. However, a large number of “blank” trials were observed, in which subjects completely failed to detect the presence of the flashed target. These “blanks” were themselves significantly asymmetric between visual fields, suggesting that asymmetry in early stimulus registration may play an unsuspected role in typical measures of cerebral asymmetry in recognition accuracy. This was confirmed in a second experiment in which use of dark pre-exposure fields eliminated “blanks” and led to higher over-all accuracy, with no visual-field differences. Implications for interpretation of laterality data with normal subjects are discussed.

Individual Variation in Directional Bias in Visual Perception

Perception ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marian Annett
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Visual Perception ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Reading Habits ◽  
Directional Bias ◽  
The Right ◽  
Lateral Bias ◽  
Onset Asynchrony

Directional biases in visual perception were examined for individual differences in sixty-five subjects on two tasks. One task required judgments of the onset asynchrony of pairs of dots presented at random, either one dot in each visual field, or both in the left visual field (LVF), or the right visual field (RVF). The second task required the recall of four letter strings presented randomly in either visual field. Dot-asynchrony judgments were influenced by two main biases: first, an outward from the centre bias in both visual fields, and second, a lateral bias which was significantly from left to right (L—R) in the total sample. A substantial minority of subjects were biased to judge the dots as occurring in right to left (R—L) order. Accuracy of letter report decreased fairly consistently from L—R in the RVF but varied in the LVF. Some subjects showed a L—R report gradient, some a R—L gradient, and some a U-shaped recall pattern. Significant correlations between measures of L—R and R—L biases on the two tasks show that the biases have some stable foundation. The findings suggest that there are directional biases affecting visual perception which are due neither to learned reading habits, nor to cerebral specialization of function.

Visual Half-Field Differences in the Recognition of Bilaterally Presented Single Letters and Vertically Spelled Words

1972 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 815-818 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter F. McKeever ◽  
Kathleen M. Gill
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Visual Masking ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Reading Habits ◽  
Field Placement ◽  
Temporal Patterning ◽  
Lateral Dominance ◽  
Temporal Registration ◽  
Tachistoscopic Recognition

Tachistoscopic recognition of bilaterally presented single letters and vertically spelled words as a function of the lateral visual-half-field placement of the stimuli was examined. Right visual-field recognition superiority obtained for both types of stimuli, but the percentage of Ss showing right-field superiority was much lower than obtained in earlier experiments using horizontally spelled words as stimuli. Data from this aggregate of experiments were discussed in terms of compatibility with the view that reading habits play at least some role in producing right-field superiority with horizontal words. It was suggested that reading habits are not fundamental to the results and that all the data can be encompassed within a lateral dominance and visual masking-temporal registration sequence model in which the temporal patterning of inputs from differing retinal locations plays a major role in producing left-right differences for horizontally displayed words.

Hemispheric Competence and Perceptual Confusability

1983 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justine Sergent
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Present Experiment ◽  
Significant Interaction ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Previous Experiment ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Methodological Procedures ◽  
Visual Field Superiority ◽  
Exact Replication

Hemispheric competence in performing easy and difficult letter classification was examined in an exact replication of a previous experiment by Jonides (1979). The present experiment failed to confirm Jonides's finding of right visual field advantage in conditions of perceptual confusability and left visual field superiority when the stimuli were easily discriminable. The results showed a trend in the opposite direction, but no significant interaction. This divergence is discussed with respect to existing evidence and methodological procedures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document