Interhemispheric Communication Influences Reading Behavior

We can read words at an amazing speed, with the left hemisphere taking the burden of the processing in most readers (i.e., over 95% of right-handers and about 75% of left-handers). Yet, it is a long-standing question whether word reading in central vision is possible without information transfer between the left and right hemispheres (LH/RH). Here we show that such communication is required by comparing word naming latencies and eye movement data of people with LH language dominance and a unique sample of healthy RH dominant people. The results reveal that individuals with LH speech dominance name words faster when they are allowed to fixate at the word beginning, whereas RH dominants are faster for fixations toward the end. In text reading, the eyes of LH dominants land more to the left than the eyes of RH dominants, making more information directly available to the dominant hemisphere. We conclude that the traditional view of bilateral projections in central vision is incorrect. In contrast, interhemispheric communication is needed in central vision, and eye movements are adjusted to optimize information uptake. Our findings therefore call into question the explanation of macular sparing in hemianopia based on a bilaterally projecting fovea. In addition, these results are in line with the increase of white matter in the splenium of the corpus callosum when people learn to read.

[1]  E Emmanu SUBTLEX-NL: A new measure for Dutch word frequency based on film subtitles , 2010 .

[2]  Danielle S Bassett,et al.  Dynamic network structure of interhemispheric coordination , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Split fovea theory and the role of the two cerebral hemispheres in reading: A review of the evidence , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

[4]  R. C. Oldfield THE ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS OF HANDEDNESS , 1971 .

[5]  Brian A Wandell,et al.  Temporal-callosal pathway diffusivity predicts phonological skills in children , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  K. Rayner The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search , 2009, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[7]  Michal Lavidor,et al.  The nature of foveal representation , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[8]  R. C. Oldfield The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[9]  Cathy J. Price,et al.  Top-down modulation of ventral occipito-temporal responses during visual word recognition , 2011, NeuroImage.

[10]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Further fMRI validation of the visual half field technique as an indicator of language laterality: A large-group analysis , 2011, Neuropsychologia.

[11]  M. Seghier,et al.  An anatomical signature for literacy , 2009, Nature.

[12]  S. Coren,et al.  Lateral preferences and human behavior , 1981 .

[13]  E. Ringelstein,et al.  Handedness and hemispheric language dominance in healthy humans. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[14]  S. Dehaene Reading in the Brain: The Science and Evolution of a Human Invention , 2009 .

[15]  Philippe De Maeyer,et al.  Combining user logging with eye tracking for interactive and dynamic applications , 2015, Behavior research methods.

[16]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  The left ventral occipito-temporal response to words depends on language lateralization but not on visual familiarity. , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[17]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Speech dominance is a better predictor of functional brain asymmetry than handedness: A combined fMRI word generation and behavioral dichotic listening study , 2013, Neuropsychologia.

[18]  Ferath Kherif,et al.  r Human Brain Mapping 32:1602–1614 (2011) r Regional and Hemispheric Determinants of Language Laterality: Implications for Preoperative fMRI , 2022 .

[19]  Walsh,et al.  Opinion - The nature of foveal representation , 2004 .

[20]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Interhemispheric transfer and the processing of foveally presented stimuli , 1994, Behavioural Brain Research.

[21]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Colateralization of Broca’s area and the visual word form area in left-handers: fMRI evidence , 2012, Brain and Language.

[22]  S Lehéricy,et al.  The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[23]  Suzanne E. Welcome,et al.  Does degree of asymmetry relate to performance? An investigation of word recognition and reading in consistent and mixed handers , 2009, Brain and Cognition.

[24]  D. Boles,et al.  “Does degree of asymmetry relate to performance?” A critical review , 2011, Brain and Cognition.

[25]  Marko Wilke,et al.  LI-tool: A new toolbox to assess lateralization in functional MR-data , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[26]  D. Carey,et al.  Quantifying cerebral asymmetries for language in dextrals and adextrals with random-effects meta analysis , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[27]  J. O'Regan,et al.  Optimal landing position in reading isolated words and continuous text , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[28]  A. Jacobs,et al.  Optimal viewing position effect in word recognition: A challenge to current theory. , 1992 .

[29]  K. Rayner,et al.  Eye movement control in reading: word predictability has little influence on initial landing positions in words , 2001, Vision Research.

[30]  R. Verleger,et al.  Deployment and release of interhemispheric inhibition in dual-stream rapid serial visual presentation , 2014, Biological Psychology.

[31]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Foveal Word Reading Requires Interhemispheric Communication , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[32]  A. Leff A historical review of the representation of the visual field in primary visual cortex with special reference to the neural mechanisms underlying macular sparing , 2004, Brain and Language.

[33]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Visual constraints in written word recognition: evidence from the optimal viewing-position effect , 2005 .

[34]  D. Barr,et al.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.