Hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate spatial relations during an image generation task: evidence from children and adults

Hemispheric specialization of categorical and coordinate image generation was assessed in adults, 8-year-old and 10-year-old children. In a standardized image generation task, participants decided whether probes, presented in a blank grid (categorical task) or bracketed square (coordinate task), would have appeared on a previously studied letter. To ensure that participants mentally generated the target letter, probe location was varied. "Early" probes appeared on letter segments that are first produced when the letter is drawn; while "late" probes appeared on later produced segments. Like previous adult studies, the grid task elicited a left hemisphere "categorical" strategy; while the bracket task elicits a right hemisphere "coordinate" strategy. However, contrary to previous research, the results reveal the significant and complex effects of probe location on categorical and coordinate image generation abilities. Specifically, early probes elicited a strong right hemisphere advantage for both tasks across all ages, whereas late probes produced a left hemisphere dissociation between categorical and coordinate processing. The left hemisphere dissociation was evident only for 10-year-olds and adults, suggesting that younger children are not yet proficient in generating spatial representations.

[1]  A. Postma,et al.  On the hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate spatial relations: a review of the current evidence , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[2]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Categorical and Metric Spatial Processes Distinguished by Task Demands and Practice , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[3]  William J. Hoyer,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate spatial representations: A reappraisal , 1992, Memory & cognition.

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

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

[6]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Neural systems that encode categorical versus coordinate spatial relations: PET investigations , 1998, Psychobiology.

[7]  Richard J. Davidson,et al.  The asymmetrical brain , 2003 .

[8]  Stephen M Kosslyn,et al.  Sequential processes in image generation , 1988, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  B. Laeng Lateralization of Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Functions: A Study of Unilateral Stroke Patients , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[10]  C. B. Cave,et al.  Evidence for two types of spatial representations: hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate relations. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  J. Hellige,et al.  Individual variation in hemispheric asymmetry: multitask study of effects related to handedness and sex. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[12]  Lawrence R. Frank,et al.  Functional MRI of Global and Local Processing in Children , 2002, NeuroImage.

[13]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  Encoding Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Relations Without Input-Output Correlations: New Simulation Models , 1999, Cogn. Sci..

[14]  J. Sergent Processing of spatial relations within and between the disconnected cerebral hemispheres. , 1991, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[15]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Categorical versus coordinate spatial relations: computational analyses and computer simulations. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  S. Kosslyn Seeing and imagining in the cerebral hemispheres: a computational approach. , 1987, Psychological review.

[17]  Bruno Laeng,et al.  Cerebral lateralization for the processing of spatial coordinates and categories in left- and right-handers , 1995, Neuropsychologia.

[18]  N. Donnelly,et al.  The Role of Stimulus Factors in Making Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Judgments , 1999, Brain and Cognition.

[19]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Age differences in imagery abilities. , 1990, Child development.

[20]  C. Michimata Hemispheric Processing of Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Relations in Vision and Visual Imagery , 1997, Brain and Cognition.

[21]  R. Bruyer,et al.  Dissociation between Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Computations: Modulation by Cerebral Hemispheres, Task Properties, Mode of Response, and Age , 1997, Brain and Cognition.

[22]  C. Segebarth,et al.  Categorical and coordinate spatial relations: fMRI evidence for hemispheric specialization. , 1999, Neuroreport.

[23]  Vera Maljkovic,et al.  Two types of image generation: Evidence for left and right hemisphere processes , 1995, Neuropsychologia.

[24]  Antígona Martínez,et al.  Hemispneric asymmetries in global and local processing: evidence from fMRI , 1997, Neuroreport.

[25]  J. Sergent Judgments of relative position and distance on representations of spatial relations. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  J. Hellige,et al.  Categorization versus distance: Hemispheric differences for processing spatial information , 1989, Memory & cognition.

[27]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  The development of spatial relation representations: evidence from studies of cerebral lateralization. , 1990, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[28]  J. Hellige,et al.  Categorical versus Coordinate Spatial Processing: Effects of Blurring and Hemispheric Asymmetry , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[29]  S. Christman,et al.  Upper and lower visual field differences in categorical and coordinate judgments , 1998 .

[30]  L. Robertson,et al.  Neuropsychological contributions to theories of part/whole organization , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.