The effects of display and report order asymmetries on lateralized word recognition

Word recognition typically is better or faster in the right visual field than in the left visual field, an effect that often interacts with the handedness of subjects or the phonetic characteristics of the language employed. While these findings suggest a hemispheric locus, it is possible that the field difference is confounded with display or report order asymmetries. Here two experiments manipulate word orientation (horizontal vs. vertical), letter symmetry, and report order variables, and they demonstrate a generalized right field superiority that fails to interact with other factors. Since the superiority appears even when all apparent artifactual asymmetries are eliminated, the findings support a hemispheric interpretation.

[1]  B. Shanon.  Lateralization effects in the perception of Hebrew and English words , 1982, Brain and Language.

[2]  J. Orbach.  Differential recognition of Hebrew and English words in right and left visual fields as a function of cerebral dominance and reading habits , 1967 .

[3]  Takeshi Hatta,et al.  Differential processing of Kanji and Kana stimuli in Japanese people: Some implications from stroop-test results , 1981, Neuropsychologia.

[4]  C. Umilta,et al.  Effects of Phonetic Similarity and Order of Report on the Right Ear Advantage , 1983, Cortex.

[5]  J. Bradshaw,et al.  A word-naming deficit in nonfamilial sinistrals? Laterality effects of vocal responses to tachistoscopically presented letter strings , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

[6]  Word fragments as recall cues: Role of syllables , 1973 .

[7]  J. Bradshaw,et al.  The use of laterally presented words in research into cerebral asymmetry: Is directional scanning likely to be a source of artifact? , 1981, Brain and Language.

[8]  J. Beaumont,et al.  Imageability does not interact with visual field in lateral word recognition with oral report , 1983, Brain and Language.

[9]  J. Schmuller,et al.  Bilateral tachistoscopic perception, handedness, and laterality II. Nonverbal stimuli , 1980, Brain and Language.

[10]  M. P. Bryden,et al.  Left-right differences in tachistoscopic recognition as a function of familiarity and pattern orientation. , 1970 .

[11]  R. Graves.  Mouth asymmetry, dichotic ear advantage and tachistoscopic visual field advantage as measures of language lateralization , 1983, Neuropsychologia.

[12]  E. R. Harcum.  Visual hemifield differences as conflicts in direction of reading. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  Donna M. Piazza.  The influence of sex and handedness in the hemispheric specialization of verbal and nonverbal tasks , 1980, Neuropsychologia.

[14]  J. Rosen,et al.  Tachistoscopic word recognition performance under conditions of simultaneous bilateral presentation , 1975, Neuropsychologia.

[15]  J. Schmuller,et al.  Bilateral tachistoscopic perception, handedness, and laterality , 1979, Brain and Language.

[16]  David B. Boles,et al.  Hemispheric Interaction in Visual Field Asymmetry , 1983, Cortex.

[17]  D. Boles,et al.  Age of acquisition and visual field asymmetry in word recognition , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  D. Boles.  Sex in lateralized tachistoscopic word recognition , 1984, Brain and Language.

[19]  Sumiko Sasanuma,et al.  Tachistoscopic recognition of kana and kanji words , 1977, Neuropsychologia.

[20]  Adam V. Reed.  Microcomputer display timing: Problems and solutions , 1979 .

[21]  C. Barry.  Hemispheric asymmetry in lexical access and phonological encoding , 1981, Neuropsychologia.

[22]  E. Zurif,et al.  Familial handedness and left-right differences in auditory and visual perception , 1969 .

[23]  Karen Huffman,et al.  The Importance of Being First: An Analysis of Tachistoscopic Presentations of Words , 1983, Cortex.

[24]  Merrill F. Garrett,et al.  Hemisphere differences in the recognition of closed and open class words , 1983, Neuropsychologia.

[25]  S. P. Springer,et al.  Left brain, right brain , 1981 .

[26]  Bryden Mp.  Ear preference in auditory perception. , 1963 .

[27]  M. Bourdeau,et al.  Hemispheric differences for semantically and phonologically primed nouns: A tachistoscopic study in normals , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[28]  A. Young,et al.  Studies toward a model of laterality effects for picture and word naming , 1980, Brain and Language.

[29]  Laterality Effects in Dichotic Listening , 1967, Nature.

[30]  M. P. Bryden,et al.  Laterality: Functional Asymmetry in the Intact Brain , 1982 .

[31]  I. Nachshon,et al.  Dissociation of hemifield reaction time differences from verbal stimulus directionality. , 1974, Journal of experimental psychology.

[32]  H. Goodglass,et al.  Differential Recognition of Tachistoscopically Presented English and Hebrew Words in Right and Left Visual Fields , 1965, Perceptual and motor skills.

[33]  B. Eriksen,et al.  The importance of being first: A tachistoscopic study of the contribution of each letter to the recognition of four-letter words , 1974 .