Lateralization of defence mechanisms: Differing influences on perception with left and right visual field presentation of anxiety‐arousing stimulation

1989 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingegerd Carlsson
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Defence Mechanisms ◽  
Psychoanalytic Literature ◽  
Contrast Technique ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Perceptual Styles

Forty‐five undergraduate students were randomly divided into two groups and tested with the Meta‐Contrast Technique (MCT), in the left or right visual field (VF). In the MCT, the presentation of a subliminal threatening picture is intended to evoke anxiety and ego mechanisms of defence against it. More signs of repressive plus isolating defences were found in the left hemisphere (LH) group. Signs of projection plus regression tended to be more common in the right hemisphere (RH) group. The total number of anxiety signs in the MCT protocols did not differ between the groups. A clear sex difference was noticed, namely that the female LH and RH groups showed significant lateralization, while the male groups did not differ significantly on a combined defensive score. The data suggest that the left and right hemispheres may show differing perceptual styles, which are described as ego mechanisms of defence in the psychoanalytic literature.

Vocal Reaction Times to Tachistoscopically Presented High- and Low-Frequency Verbs: Some Evidence for Selective Minor Hemisphere Linguistic Analysis

1988 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 803-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Rastatter ◽  
Catherine Loren
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Intact Brain ◽  
The Right

The current study investigated the capacity of the right hemisphere to process verbs using a paradigm proven reliable for predicting differential, minor hemisphere lexical analysis in the normal, intact brain. Vocal reaction times of normal subjects were measured to unilaterally presented verbs of high and of low frequency. A significant interaction was noted between the stimulus items and visual fields. Post hoc tests showed that vocal reaction times to verbs of high frequency were significantly faster following right visual-field presentations (right hemisphere). No significant differences in vocal reaction time occurred between the two visual fields for the verbs of low frequency. Also, significant differences were observed between the two types of verbs following left visual-field presentation but not the right. These results were interpreted to suggest that right-hemispheric analysis was restricted to the verbs of high frequency in the presence of a dominant left hemisphere.

Categorical and Metric Spatial Processes Distinguished by Task Demands and Practice

1999 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie T. Banich ◽  
Kara D. Federmeier
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Receptive Fields ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Spatial Processing ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Metric Distance ◽  
The Right ◽  
Categorical Spatial Relations

In this study we examined Kosslyn's (1987) claim that the right hemisphere exhibits a relative superiority for processing metric spatial relations, whereas the left hemisphere exhibits a relative superiority for processing categorical spatial relations. In particular, we examined whether some failures to observe strong visual field (VF) advantages in previous studies might be due to practice effects that allowed individuals to process tasks in alternative manners (e.g., to process a metric task using a categorical strategy). We used two versions of a task previously employed by Hellige and Michimata (1989) in which individuals judge the metric (distance) or categorical (above/below) spatial relations between a bar and a dot. In one version, the position of the bar was held static. In another, the bar's position varied. This manipulation prevented participants from using the computer screen as a reference frame, forcing them to compute the spatial relationships on the basis of the relevant items only (i.e., the bar and the dot). In the latter, but not the former version of the task we obtained evidence supporting Kosslyn's hypothesis, namely, a significant right visual field (RVF) advantage for categorical spatial processing and a trend toward a left visual field (LVF) advantage for metric spatial processing. Furthermore, the pattern of results for trials on which information was presented centrally (CVF trials) was similar to that observed on RVF trials, whereas the pattern for trials in which identical information was presented in each visual field (BVF trials) was similar to that observed on LVF trials. Such a pattern is consistent with Kosslyn's suggestion that categorical processing is better suited for cells with small receptive fields and metric processing for cells with larger receptive fields.

Hemispheric Asymmetries in a Signal Detection Task

1983 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 923-929 ◽  
Author(s):  
John L. Andreassi ◽  
Charles S. Rebert ◽  
Ferol F. Larsen
Keyword(s):  
Signal Detection ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Vigilance Task ◽  
Verbal Stimulus ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Male Subjects ◽  
Central Fixation

Reaction time and signal detection performance were measured during a 78-min. vigilance task. 12 right-handed male subjects served in two experimental sessions. Subjects focused on a central fixation point and responded to signals presented at unpredictable times in one of three locations: 2.5° to right of central fixation, central, and 2.5° to the left of center. Subjects decided whether to press a response key with either the left or right hand with each presentation. Over-all vigilance performance (signal detections and response time) was similar for left and right visual-field presentations. Evidence from reaction times indicated that responses controlled by the left hemisphere were faster to a verbal stimulus (T) while reactions controlled by the right hemisphere were faster to an apparent non-verbal stimulus, an inverted T.

Left and Right Visual Field Superiority for Letter Classification

1979 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Jonides
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Perceptual Processing ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Two letter classification experiments examine the hypothesis that lateral asymmetries in perceptual processing are sensitive to subtle changes in task demands. The first experiment reports a right visual field superiority for an easy letter classification, but a left field superiority for a difficult classification using the same population of stimuli. Experiment II demonstrates that the right field superiority can be reversed if the easy classification trials are embedded among more difficult trials. The implications of these results for theories of hemispheric localization are discussed.

Hemispheric Processing of Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Relations in the Absence of Low Spatial Frequencies

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matia Okubo ◽  
Chikashi Michimata
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Spatial Relation ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Spatial Frequencies ◽  
Categorical Task ◽  
The Right ◽  
Coordinate Spatial Relations

Right-handed participants performed the categorical and coordinate spatial relation judgments on stimuli presented to either the left visual field—right hemisphere (LVF-RH) or the right visual field—left hemisphere (RVF-LH). The stimulus patterns were formulated either by bright dots or by contrast-balanced dots. When the stimuli were bright, an RVF-LH advantage was observed for the categorical task, whereas an LVF-RH advantage was observed for the coordinate task. When the stimuli were contrast balanced, the RVF-LH advantage was observed for the categorical task, but the LVF-RH advantage was eliminated for the coordinate task. Because the contrast-balanced dots are largely devoid of low spatial frequency content, these results suggest that processing of low spatial frequency is responsible for the right hemisphere advantage for the coordinate spatial processing.

Summation Priming and Coarse Semantic Coding in the Right Hemisphere

1994 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Beeman ◽  
Rhonda B. Friedman ◽  
Jordan Grafman ◽  
Enrique Perez ◽  
Sherri Diamond ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Input Word ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Semantic Fields ◽  
The Right ◽  
Prime Target ◽  
Strong Associate ◽  
Target Words

There are now numerous observations of subtle right hemisphere (RH) contributions to language comprehension. It has been suggested that these contributions reflect coarse semantic coding in the RH. That is, the RH weakly activates large semantic fields—including concepts distantly related to the input word—whereas the left hemisphere (LH) strongly activates small semantic fields—limited to concepts closely related to the input (Beeman, 1993a,b). This makes the RH less effective at interpreting single words, but more sensitive to semantic overlap of multiple words. To test this theory, subjects read target words preceded by either “Summation” primes (three words each weakly related to the target) or Unrelated primes (three unrelated words), and target exposure duration was manipulated so that subjects correctly named about half the target words in each hemifield. In Experiment 1, subjects benefited more from Summation primes when naming target words presented to the left visual field-RH (Ivf-RH) than when naming target words presented to the right visual field-LH (rvf-LH), suggesting a RH advantage in coarse semantic coding. In Experiment 2, with a low proportion of related prime-target trials, subjects benefited more from “Direct” primes (one strong associate flanked by two unrelated words) than from Summation primes for rvf-LH target words, indicating that the LH activates closely related information much more strongly than distantly related information. Subjects benefited equally from both prime types for Ivf-RH target words, indicating that the RH activates closely related information only slightly more strongly, at best, than distantly related information. This suggests that the RH processes words with relatively coarser coding than the LH, a conclusion consistent with a recent suggestion that the RH coarsely codes visual input (Kosslyn, Chabris, Mar-solek, & Koenig, 1992).

Cerebral Lateralization of Global-Local Processing in Left- and Right-Handed People

2005 ◽  
Vol 100 (3) ◽  
pp. 734-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Ali Goodarzi ◽  
Mohammad Reza Taghavi ◽  
Mohammad Reza Zoughi
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Local Processing ◽  
Cerebral Lateralization ◽  
Left Handed ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Paradigm Analysis ◽  
Local Superiority

Cerebral lateralization of global-local processing of 70 left-handed and 70 right-handed students was compared using a computerized global-local task in a half-visual field paradigm. Analysis showed that left-handed individuals were slower than right-handed individuals in processing Globally Directed stimuli presented to the left visual field (right hemisphere). In addition, left-handed individuals showed smaller local superiority in the left hemisphere to the right-handed individuals. These findings are more consistent with Levy's prediction of spatial inferiority of left-handed individuals than Geschwind and Galaburda's or Annett's hypotheses.

Electroencephalographic Activity in a Flanker Interference Task Using Japanese Orthography

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 971-979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuhei Yamaguchi ◽  
Genya Toyoda ◽  
Jiang Xu ◽  
Shotai Kobayashi ◽  
Avishai Henik
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Hemispheric Specialization ◽  
Late Phase ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Interference Effects ◽  
Interference Task ◽  
Dorsolateral Prefrontal ◽  
The Right

The neural activities for color word interference effects were investigated using event-related brain potentials (ERPs) recorded in a flanker-type interference task. Kanji words (Japanese morphograms) and kana words (Japanese phono-grams) were used as the flanker stimuli to obtain insights about hemispheric specialization for processing two types of Japanese orthographies. Interference effects in reaction time were larger when kanji words were presented in the left visual field and when kana words were in the right visual field. ERPs were modulated by the incongruent flankers, which generated a negative ERP component with the different onset and offset depending on flanker attributes. Consistent with the behavioral data, the interference-related negativity was observed for kanji words presented in the left visual field and for kana words in the right visual field. The negativity distributed maximally over the fronto-central site. The early part of the negativity distributed strongly over the frontal midline area, whereas it extended bilaterally over the frontal area in the late phase. The present results support the view of preferential processing of kanji in the right hemisphere and that of kana in the left hemisphere. The temporal profile of scalp topographies for the interference-related neural activity suggests that the medial and dorsolateral prefrontal regions may be involved in maintaining attentional set and conflict resolution.

Right Hemisphere Memory Bias Does Not Extend to Involuntary Memories for Negative Scenes

Perception ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-38
Author(s):  
Ella K. Moeck ◽  
Nicole A. Thomas ◽  
Melanie K. T. Takarangi
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Hemisphere ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Memory Bias ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Differences ◽  
Involuntary Memory ◽  
Involuntary Memories ◽  
The Right

Attention is unequally distributed across the visual field. Due to greater right than left hemisphere activation for visuospatial attention, people attend slightly more to the left than the right side. As a result, people voluntarily remember visual stimuli better when it first appears in the left than the right visual field. But does this effect—termed a right hemisphere memory bias—also enhance involuntary memory? We manipulated the presentation location of 100 highly negative images (chosen to increase the likelihood that participants would experience any involuntary memories) in three conditions: predominantly leftward (right hemisphere bias), predominantly rightward (left hemisphere bias), or equally in both visual fields (bilateral). We measured subsequent involuntary memories immediately and for 3 days after encoding. Contrary to predictions, biased hemispheric processing did not affect short- or long-term involuntary memory frequency or duration. Future research should measure hemispheric differences at retrieval, rather than just encoding.

Bias for the Left Visual Field in Rapid Serial Visual Presentation: Effects of Additional Salient Cues Suggest a Critical Role of Attention

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 266-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamila Śmigasiewicz ◽  
Dariusz Asanowicz ◽  
Nicole Westphal ◽  
Rolf Verleger
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Early Posterior Negativity ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Right

Everyday experience suggests that people are equally aware of stimuli in both hemifields. However, when two streams of stimuli are rapidly presented left and right, the second target (T2) is better identified in the left hemifield than in the right hemifield. This left visual field (LVF) advantage may result from differences between hemifields in attracting attention. Therefore, we introduced a visual cue shortly before T2 onset to draw attention to one stream. Thus, to identify T2, attention was correctly positioned with valid cues but had to be redirected to the other stream with invalid ones. If the LVF advantage is caused by differences between hemifields in attracting attention, invalid cues should increase, and valid cues should reduce the LVF advantage as compared with neutral cues. This prediction was confirmed. ERP analysis revealed that cues evoked an early posterior negativity, confirming that attention was attracted by the cue. This negativity was earlier with cues in the LVF, which suggests that responses to salient events are faster in the right hemisphere than in the left hemisphere. Valid cues speeded up, and invalid cues delayed T2-evoked N2pc; in addition, valid cues enlarged T2-evoked P3. After N2pc, right-side T2 evoked more sustained contralateral negativity than left T2, least long-lasting after valid cues. Difficulties in identifying invalidly cued right T2 were reflected in prematurely ending P3 waveforms. Overall, these data provide evidence that the LVF advantage is because of different abilities of the hemispheres in shifting attention to relevant events in their contralateral hemifield.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document