Right visual field superiority for letter recognition with partial report.

1976 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 134-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenichi Hirata ◽  
M. P. Bryden
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Letter Recognition ◽  
Partial Report ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Components of the Laterality Effect in Letter Recognition: Asymmetries in Iconic Storage

1976 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Letter Recognition ◽  
Partial Report ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Backward Masking ◽  
Selective Sampling ◽  
Full Report ◽  
Laterality Effect ◽  
The Right

A partial report procedure and a backward masking paradigm were employed to explore lateral asymmetries in components of letter recognition. Stimulus displays were displaced off-centre into the left visual field (LVF) or the right visual field (RVF). Visual field differences in the effect of a delayed backward mask indicated an RVF superiority in the rate of read-out or encoding. Comparison of masked and unmasked full report also yielded estimates of iconic persistence. The persistence of these peripheral displays was surprisingly brief, although it was significantly longer in the LVF (57 ms) than in the RVF (34 ms). Precueing by colour and by location produced a larger partial report advantage in the RVF, reflecting a superiority in selective sampling. With postcueing no partial report effect was obtained at any delay, and this failure was attributed to the briefness of the iconic persistence.

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.

scholarly journals Does Judgment Feedback affect Visual-Field Superiority as a function of Stimulus Structure and Content?

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Anamitra Basu
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Response Latency ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Recognition Accuracy ◽  
Presentation Mode ◽  
Feedback Condition ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Dependent Variables ◽  
Stimulus Content ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Visual-field advantage was envisaged as a function of presentation mode (unilateral, bilateral), stimulus structure (word, face), and stimulus content (emotional, neutral) in two conditions, with and without feedback of judgment. Split visual-field paradigm was taken into account with recognition accuracy and response latency as the dependent variables. Stimuli were significantly better recognized in left visual-field than in right visual-field. Unilaterally, rather than bilaterally, presented stimuli were significantly better recognized. Emotional content were intensely recognized than neutral content. Analysis using multivariate ANOVA suggested that words as well as faces were recognized better without judgment feedback condition as compared to with judgment feedback condition; however these stimuli were judged with significantly less response latency following judgment feedback.

Interhemispheric Integration of Compound Nouns: Effects of Stimulus Arrangement and Mode of Presentation

1987 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 663-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Marc Berger ◽  
Etienne Perret ◽  
Annemarie Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Pictorial Representation ◽  
Reading Habits ◽  
Mode Of Presentation ◽  
Compound Nouns ◽  
Bilateral Condition ◽  
Stimulus Arrangement ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Normal subjects had to name German compound nouns which were presented tachistoscopically. The compound nouns were displayed either unilaterally to the left or right visual field or bilaterally with one element to each visual field. In the bilateral condition a distinction was made as to whether familiar or unfamiliar arrangement of the elements was used. Representation in print was compared with pictorial representation of the compound nouns. A right visual-field superiority was observed with printed representation, but no laterality effects with pictorial representation. Bilateral processing was superior to unilateral processing. Within the bilateral conditions, the familiar arrangement of the elements yielded a significantly better performance than unfamiliar arrangement. This difference can be explained by reading habits and/or by different styles of interhemispheric integration.

Visual-Field Asymmetries in Letter Recognition: Evidence for Asymmetry in Early Visual Registration

1979 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-191
Author(s):  
Colin Pitblado ◽  
Michael Petrides ◽  
Gary Riccio
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Recognition Accuracy ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Letter Recognition ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Cerebral Asymmetry ◽  
Exposure Field ◽  
The Right

Two experiments on visual-field differences in tachistoscopic letter recognition are described. In the first, a bright pre-exposure field with a black fixation point was used, and the conventionally expected dominance of the right visual field was found. However, a large number of “blank” trials were observed, in which subjects completely failed to detect the presence of the flashed target. These “blanks” were themselves significantly asymmetric between visual fields, suggesting that asymmetry in early stimulus registration may play an unsuspected role in typical measures of cerebral asymmetry in recognition accuracy. This was confirmed in a second experiment in which use of dark pre-exposure fields eliminated “blanks” and led to higher over-all accuracy, with no visual-field differences. Implications for interpretation of laterality data with normal subjects are discussed.

Hemispheric Competence and Perceptual Confusability

1983 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justine Sergent
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Present Experiment ◽  
Significant Interaction ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Previous Experiment ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Methodological Procedures ◽  
Visual Field Superiority ◽  
Exact Replication

Hemispheric competence in performing easy and difficult letter classification was examined in an exact replication of a previous experiment by Jonides (1979). The present experiment failed to confirm Jonides's finding of right visual field advantage in conditions of perceptual confusability and left visual field superiority when the stimuli were easily discriminable. The results showed a trend in the opposite direction, but no significant interaction. This divergence is discussed with respect to existing evidence and methodological procedures.

scholarly journals Word learning and the cerebral hemispheres: from serial to parallel processing of written words

2009 ◽  
Vol 364 (1536) ◽  
pp. 3675-3696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew W. Ellis ◽  
Roberto Ferreira ◽  
Polly Cathles-Hagan ◽  
Kathryn Holt ◽  
Lisa Jarvis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parallel Processing ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Word Learning ◽  
Word Reading ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Letter Recognition ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Word Forms ◽  
The Right

Reading familiar words differs from reading unfamiliar non-words in two ways. First, word reading is faster and more accurate than reading of unfamiliar non-words. Second, effects of letter length are reduced for words, particularly when they are presented in the right visual field in familiar formats. Two experiments are reported in which right-handed participants read aloud non-words presented briefly in their left and right visual fields before and after training on those items. The non-words were interleaved with familiar words in the naming tests. Before training, naming was slow and error prone, with marked effects of length in both visual fields. After training, fewer errors were made, naming was faster, and the effect of length was much reduced in the right visual field compared with the left. We propose that word learning creates orthographic word forms in the mid-fusiform gyrus of the left cerebral hemisphere. Those word forms allow words to access their phonological and semantic representations on a lexical basis. But orthographic word forms also interact with more posterior letter recognition systems in the middle/inferior occipital gyri, inducing more parallel processing of right visual field words than is possible for any left visual field stimulus, or for unfamiliar non-words presented in the right visual field.

Cerebral Asymmetries in Random-Dot Stereopsis: Reversal of Direction with Changes in Dot Size

Perception ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 683-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin B Pitblado
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Hemispheric Specialization ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Cerebral Asymmetries ◽  
Form Recognition ◽  
Random Dot Stereograms ◽  
Visual Field Effect ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The Right ◽  
Visual Field Superiority

Visual field differences in stereoscopic form recognition using Julesz-type random dot stereograms were investigated. Dot size was varied in order to test the possibility that variations in the carrier dimension have contributed to past estimates of visual field differences. Twelve male and twelve female subjects, all right-handed, appeared for three test sessions—one with each different dot size. In each session the stimuli were flashed twenty-four times in each visual field, for 120 ms. Results showed no overall visual field effect, but a highly significant interaction between visual field and dot size. For small dots, left visual field superiority was observed, as previously reported by Durnford and Kimura. With large dots, however, the right visual field was superior. This reversal of visual field differences as a function of dot size implies that there is no consistent cerebral hemispheric specialization for stereopsis or stereoscopic form recognition per se. Instead, it appears that there is relative hemispheric specialization for responding to the carrier of stereoscopic information.

scholarly journals Superior Recall of Letters in the Right Visual Field with Bilateral Presentation and Partial Report

Cortex ◽  
1975 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Rosen ◽  
Frank Curcio ◽  
William Mackavey ◽  
John Hebert
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Partial Report ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Superior Recall ◽  
Bilateral Presentation ◽  
The Right
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document