Methods for Studying Cerebral Hemispheric Function

Beaumont, J. Graham

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-773250-3.50009-7

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 164 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…With both methods of responding there is an assumption that the response will not influence the measurement of hemispheric differences; however, this is not necessarily this case (Beaumont, 1983). For example, it is possible that, as language is LH dominant, verbal responding may lead to an overestimation of the performance of the LH.…”

Section: Methods Of Responding and Measures Takenmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The logic behind DVF methodology is that a stimulus presented to one visual field is initially received and processed by the contralateral hemisphere (Beaumont, 1983). Therefore a stimulus presented in the left visual field (LVF) is initially received and processed by the right hemisphere (RH), and a stimulus presented in the right visual field (RVF) is initially projected to and processed by the left hemisphere (LH) (see Figure 1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The divided visual field paradigm: Methodological considerations

Bourne

2006

Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition

243

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The divided visual field methodology has been used to examine a wide variety of lateralised processes. When conducting such studies it is important to employ a number of strict controls in order to maximise the effectiveness of the paradigm for examining the processing of stimuli by each hemisphere. The use of these controls is discussed in this paper. The following issues are discussed: selection of participants; methods of fixation control; presenting stimuli unilaterally; methods of responding; and measures that can be taken. The use of the divided visual field paradigm to examine interhemispheric cooperation is also discussed. Employing the recommended controls provides an effective and relatively easy method of examining the role of each hemisphere in the processing of stimuli.

show abstract

Section: Methods Of Responding and Measures Takenmentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The divided visual field paradigm: Methodological considerations

Bourne

2006

Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition

243

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this paradigm, in each trial two similar stimuli (a combination of a cross and a dot) are presented sequentially; the first stimulus in the center of the screen, and the second in the left or right visual hemifield. The visual half field presentation of the second stimulus allows for inferences about hemispheric lateralization as a visual stimulus presented briefly in one visual hemifield is initially perceived and processed by the contralateral hemisphere (Beaumont, 1983). In the categorical task, participants decided whether the dots in the two stimuli were in same quadrant (relative to the cross).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual differences in spatial relation processing: Effects of strategy, ability, and gender

Ham

2011

Brain and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous studies have focused on the distinction between categorical and coordinate spatial relations. Categorical relations are propositional and abstract, and often related to a left hemisphere advantage. Coordinate relations specify the metric information of the relative locations of objects, and can be linked to right hemisphere processing. Yet, not all studies have reported such a clear double dissociation; in particular the categorical left hemisphere advantage is not always reported. In the current study we investigated whether verbal and spatial strategies, verbal and spatial cognitive abilities, and gender could account for the discrepancies observed in hemispheric lateralization of spatial relations. Seventy-five participants performed two visual half field, match-to-sample tasks (Van der Ham et al., 2007; 2009) to study the lateralization of categorical and coordinate relation processing. For each participant we determined the strategy they used in each of the two tasks. Consistent with previous findings, we found an overall categorical left hemisphere advantage and coordinate right hemisphere advantage. The lateralization pattern was affected selectively by the degree to which participants used a spatial strategy and by none of the other variables (i.e., verbal strategy, cognitive abilities, and gender). Critically, the categorical left hemisphere advantage was observed only for participants that relied strongly on a spatial strategy. This result is another piece of evidence that categorical spatial relation processing relies on spatial and not verbal processes.

show abstract

“…Although a left-hand advantage was found for right-handed male subjects, it did not prove to be statistically significant. Since there is evidence to suggest that hand preference may not reflect cerebal asymmetry (Beaumont, 1983;Strauss, 1986), an independent measure of cerebral asymmetry would be required to test for right-hemisphere processing for language among the right-handed subjects used. Brodie (1987) used a consonant-vowel dichotic listening test in an experiment designed to relate hand proficiency in weight discrimination to the lateralization of cerebral function.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex and hand-preference effects in the simultaneous and consecutive discrimination of lifted weight

Brodie

1988

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differential thresholds (DLs) for lifted weight were measured in one-handed consecutive and two-handed simultaneous discrimination paradigms using 1eft-and right-handed, male and female subjects. In one-handed discrimination, no preferred-hand advantage was found for either 1eft-or right-handed subjects. Left-handed subjects were found to perform better than right-handed subjects with both left and right hand. A constant error was found in two-handed simultaneous discrimination, in which the subjects reported that weights felt heavier in one hand than in the other. Neither hand preference nor hand sensitivity was found to correlate with the direction of the error. A sex difference was found in two-handed simultaneous weight discrimination: DLs for male subjects differed between left and right, whereas DLs for female subjects did not. The results are discussed in terms of hemispheric specialization and recent theories of motor control.

show abstract

Methods for Studying Cerebral Hemispheric Function

Cited by 22 publications

References 164 publications

The divided visual field paradigm: Methodological considerations

The divided visual field paradigm: Methodological considerations

Individual differences in spatial relation processing: Effects of strategy, ability, and gender

Sex and hand-preference effects in the simultaneous and consecutive discrimination of lifted weight

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About