Visual Field Asymmetries for Motion Processing in Deaf and Hearing Signers

Recently, we reported a strong right visual field/left hemisphere advantage for motion processing in deaf signers and a slight reverse asymmetry in hearing nonsigners (Bosworth & Dobkins, 1999). This visual field asymmetry in deaf signers may be due to auditory deprivation or to experience with a visual-manual language, American Sign Language (ASL). In order to separate these two possible sources, in this study we added a third group, hearing native signers, who have normal hearing and have learned ASL from their deaf parents. As in our previous study, subjects performed a direction-of-motion discrimination task at different locations across the visual field. In addition to investigating differences in left vs right visual field asymmetries across subject groups, we also asked whether performance differences exist for superior vs inferior visual fields and peripheral vs central visual fields. Replicating our previous study, a robust right visual field advantage was observed in deaf signers, but not in hearing nonsigners. Like deaf signers, hearing signers also exhibited a strong right visual field advantage, suggesting that this effect is related to experience with sign language. These results suggest that perceptual processes required for the acquisition and comprehension of language (motion processing in the case of ASL) are recruited by the left, language-dominant, hemisphere. Deaf subjects also exhibited an inferior visual field advantage that was significantly larger than that observed in either hearing group. In addition, there was a trend for deaf subjects to perform relatively better on peripheral than on central stimuli, while both hearing groups showed the reverse pattern. Because deaf signers differed from hearing signers and nonsigners along these domains, the inferior and peripheral visual field advantages observed in deaf subjects is presumably related to auditory deprivation. Finally, these visual field asymmetries were not modulated by attention for any subject group, suggesting they are a result of sensory, and not attentional, factors.

[1]  Karen R. Dobkins,et al.  Left-Hemisphere Dominance for Motion Processing in Deaf Signers , 1999 .

[2]  S. Christman.  Cerebral asymmetries in sensory and perceptual processing , 1997 .

[3]  Patricia Siple,et al.  Visual Constraints for Sign Language Communication , 2013 .

[4]  Karen Emmorey,et al.  Enhanced Facial Diserimination: Effects of Experience With American Sign Language , 1997 .

[5]  O. Andreassen,et al.  Mice Deficient in Cellular Glutathione Peroxidase Show Increased Vulnerability to Malonate, 3-Nitropropionic Acid, and 1-Methyl-4-Phenyl-1,2,5,6-Tetrahydropyridine , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[6]  G. Hartmann.  II. Changes in visual acuity through simultaneous stimulation of other sense organs. , 1933 .

[7]  M. Marschark,et al.  Psychological perspectives on deafness , 2014 .

[8]  F. Previc.  Functional specialization in the lower and upper visual fields in humans: Its ecological origins and neurophysiological implications , 1990, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[9]  Virginia Volterra,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for sign language , 1996, Neuropsychologia.

[10]  Wing Hong Lore,et al.  Central and peripheral visual processing in hearing and nonhearing individuals , 1991 .

[11]  R. Markman,et al.  Lateral cerebral differences in the deaf in response to linguistic and nonlinguistic stimuli , 1977, Brain and Language.

[12]  H N Reynolds.  Effects of foveal stimulation on peripheral visual processing and laterality in deaf and hearing subjects. , 1993, The American journal of psychology.

[13]  U. Bellugi,et al.  Enhanced facial discrimination: effects of experience with American sign language. , 1997, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[14]  K. Emmorey,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for ASL signs and english words: Differences between imageable and abstract forms , 1993, Neuropsychologia.

[15]  Ila Parasnis,et al.  Parafoveal attention in congenitally deaf and hearing young adults , 1985, Brain and Cognition.

[16]  A. Watson.  Probability summation over time , 1979, Vision Research.

[17]  U. Bellugi,et al.  Language, modality and the brain , 1989, Trends in Neurosciences.

[18]  H. Neville,et al.  Attention to central and peripheral visual space in a movement detection task. III. Separate effects of auditory deprivation and acquisition of a visual language , 1987, Brain Research.

[19]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Visual imagery and visual-spatial language: Enhanced imagery abilities in deaf and hearing ASL signers , 1993, Cognition.

[20]  S. McCullough,et al.  Face processing by deaf ASL signers: evidence for expertise in distinguished local features. , 1997, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[21]  Marta Kutas,et al.  Altered visual-evoked potentials in congenitally deaf adults , 1983, Brain Research.

[22]  Karen R. Dobkins,et al.  The Effects of Spatial Attention on Motion Processing in Deaf Signers, Hearing Signers, and Hearing Nonsigners , 2002, Brain and Cognition.

[23]  C. Hutton,et al.  Visual Attention to the Periphery Is Enhanced in Congenitally Deaf Individuals , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  David R Badcock,et al.  Asymmetries in the Sensitivity to Motion in Depth: A Centripetal Bias , 1993, Perception.

[25]  M. Carrasco,et al.  Characterizing visual performance fields: effects of transient covert attention, spatial frequency, eccentricity, task and set size. , 2001, Spatial vision.

[26]  P. Hammond,et al.  Hemifield Differences in Perceived Velocity , 1986, Perception.

[27]  Jane E. Raymond,et al.  Directional anisotropy of motion sensitivity across the visual field , 1994, Vision Research.

[28]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Psychophysical isolation of movement sensitivity by removal of familiar position cues , 1981, Vision Research.

[29]  W. Weibull.  A Statistical Distribution Function of Wide Applicability , 1951 .

[30]  U. Bellugi,et al.  The linguistic basis of left hemisphere specialization. , 1992, Science.

[31]  Reynolds Hn,et al.  Effects of foveal stimulation on peripheral visual processing and laterality in deaf and hearing subjects. , 1993 .

[32]  Stephen D. Christman,et al.  Chapter 9 The relation between left-right and upper-lower visual field asymmetries , 1997 .