Hemispheric differences in global and local processing dependent on exposure duration

The main purpose of the present experiment was to examine hemispheric differences in the analysis of global and local components of verbal hierarchical stimuli, by manipulating the parameters of the procedure, in the form of varying duration exposures (50, 100 and 200 msec). Subjects had to decide whether or not a target-letter appeared in the stimuli. The results provide evidence that the cerebral hemispheres may differ in their ability to process global and local information, but only under certain conditions. A RH-LVF advantage in accuracy rate was found in the detection of the target at global level and a LH-RVF advantage in the detection of the target at local level, but only with a presentation of 50 msec. At 100 and 200 msec of exposure duration, differences between the two hemispheres were not found.

[1]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The order of visual processing: “Top-down,” “bottom-up,” or “middle-out” , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  P. Merikle,et al.  Global precedence in attended and nonattended objects. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  D. Navon.  Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  D. Luna,et al.  Processing dominance of global and local information in visual patterns. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[5]  Global precedence: Information availability or use? Reply to Navon. , 1981 .

[6]  R Kimchi,et al.  Selective attention to global and local levels in the comparison of hierarchical patterns , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  J Sergent,et al.  Theoretical and methodological consequences of variations in exposure duration in visual laterality studies , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  G. Cohen.  Hemispheric differences in serial versus parallel precessing. , 1973, Journal of experimental psychology.

[9]  W H Corwin,et al.  Effects of perceptual quality on the processing of human faces presented to the left and right cerebral hemispheres. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  R Kimchi,et al.  Hemispheric processing of global form, local form, and texture. , 1991, Acta psychologica.

[11]  Lynn C. Robertson,et al.  Attention and interference in the processing of global and local information: Effects of unilateral temporal-parietal junction lesions , 1989, Neuropsychologia.

[12]  G L Shulman,et al.  The Role of Spatial-Frequency Channels in the Perception of Local and Global Structure , 1986, Perception.

[13]  M R Lamb,et al.  Do response time advantage and interference reflect the order of processing of global- and local-level information? , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  J. Sergent.  The cerebral balance of power: confrontation or cooperation? , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  D. Boles.  Global versus local processing: Is there a hemispheric dichotomy? , 1984, Neuropsychologia.

[16]  B. Milner,et al.  Right temporal-lobe contribution to global visual processing , 1991, Neuropsychologia.

[17]  F. Allard,et al.  Visual hemifield differences depend on typeface , 1976, Brain and Language.

[18]  G. Tiberghien,et al.  Sensitivity of cerebral hemispheres to the local and global components of verbal and non-verbal stimuli , 1988 .

[19]  J. Hellige,et al.  Effects of stimulus duration on processing lateralized faces , 1985 .

[20]  T. Pring.  The Effect of Stimulus Size and Exposure Duration on Visual Field Asymmetries , 1981, Cortex.

[21]  J R Antes,et al.  Gobal-local precedence in picture processing , 1984, Psychological research.

[22]  L. Robertson,et al.  The effect of visual angle on global and local reaction times depends on the set of visual angles presented , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[23]  Philip M. Merikle,et al.  Global precedence: the effect of exposure duration , 1984 .

[24]  Maryanne Martin.  Local and global processing: The role of sparsity , 1979 .

[25]  R. Knight,et al.  Component mechanisms underlying the processing of hierarchically organized patterns: inferences from patients with unilateral cortical lesions. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[26]  J. Polich,et al.  Hemispheric local/global processing revisited. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[27]  J. Bradshaw,et al.  The nature of hemispheric specialization in man , 1981, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[28]  John L. Bradshaw,et al.  Human cerebral asymmetry , 1978, Trends in Neurosciences.

[29]  J Sergent,et al.  The effects of sensory limitations on hemispheric processing. , 1983, Canadian journal of psychology.

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

[31]  M. Mena.  Can certain stimulus characteristics influence the hemispheric differences in global and local processing , 1992 .

[32]  Maryanne Martin,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for local and global processing , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

[33]  J. Wilding,et al.  Hemispheric Differences in Matching Stroop-Type Letter Stimuli , 1982, Cortex.

[34]  J. Baird,et al.  Global precedence in visual pattern recognition , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  G R Grice,et al.  Forest before trees? It depends where you look , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  J E Hoffman,et al.  Interaction between global and local levels of a form. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[37]  D. Navon,et al.  Does global precedence really depend on visual angle? , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.