Processing speed, laterality patterns, and memory encoding as a function of hemispheric dominance

Coleman, S. M.; Zenhausern, Robert

doi:10.3758/bf03329478

Cited by 23 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several hypotheses may be suggested to explain such findings. First, sex‐differences in processing speed between right and left cerebral hemispheres may generate a pattern of aggression that differs in males and females if one hemisphere is slightly faster than the other in taking control of a specific behavior (e.g., models in humans; Coleman & Zenhausern, ; Grushin & Reggia, ). In our study, we analyzed agonistic interactions that were initiated by king penguins and therefore unpredictable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex‐specific lateralization during aggressive interactions in breeding king penguins

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brain and behavioral asymmetries (termed "lateralization"; e.g., preferential eye‐use) have been mostly described in controlled laboratory conditions, although striking similarities of hemispheric brain control for specific behaviors have also been shown in the wild. Visual lateralization may provide ecological advantages by allowing complementary roles played by the left–right lateral and frontal visual field in distant or close motion detection of predators or other threats. In this study, we tested for lateralization in aggressive behavior in wild king penguins (Aptenodytes patagonicus), seabirds breeding in a context of strong colonial aggressiveness, and subject to on‐land‐based predation of their egg or chick. We show that males initiated more agonistic interactions when a congener was located in their right frontal visual field and in their left lateral visual field. The results obtained in females were the exact opposite for each subdivision of their visual fields. Complementary lateralization in male and female penguins may be part of a more general phenomenon, allowing partners to coordinate their behavior during reproduction. This may be especially true during the period of courtship, during which these seasonally monogamous and monomorphic seabirds engage in mutual mate choice based on a complex and ritualized display of ornaments located on the left and right lateral sides of the head. Those results open exciting questions as to whether hemispheric control of aggression is a commonly selected phenotypic trait across colonial seabirds.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex‐specific lateralization during aggressive interactions in breeding king penguins

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, rather than concluding that images (or visual representations, if roughly equivalent) are processed in parallel while other representations are processed in a serial manner, a much more restricted conclusion is warranted. The studies by Coleman and Zenhausern (1979), Helige (1975), Kinsbourne (1975), and Maniscalco and DeRosa (1979), among others, suggest that memory encoding and scanning are highly complex tasks influenced by task demands, type and organization of stimulus materials, and even perhaps physiological differences (e .g., hemispheric dominance) between individuals. Indeed, the fragility of the parallel-serial distinction is exemplified in the present research, in which images produce parallel processing, but only when probes are directed centrally or to the RH.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory scanning of described images and undescribed images: Hemispheric differences

Bersted

1983

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seamon (1972) has found that reaction times (RTs) to memory probes do not increase with memory set size (M) for words encoded in mental images in a memory scanning task. Rothstein and Atkinson (1975) have failed to replicate Seamon's results. Experiment 1 investigated this discrepancy by manipulating one methodological difference (whether images were or were not described) between the two investigations. Results revealed that described images produced typical linear increases in RT with M. Undescribed images, however, revealed no change in RT with M for positive probes (i.e., the word presented was contained in the current memory set).Experiment 2 manipulated to which visual field probes were presented (RVF = right visual field; LVF = left visual field). Results showed that the imagery group showed no relation between RT and M for probes presented to the LVF, but a linear relation for probes presented to the RVF. Described-image and repetition groups revealed a linear relation between RT and M no matter which visual field received the probe.Since Sternberg (1966) introduced the memory scanning task, hundreds of studies have been performed to investigate the type of processing that occurs in item recognition. In this paradigm, a small number of stimuli (the memory set) is presented to the subject. A probe or test stimulus is then presented to the subject. The sub· ject's task is to make a "yes" response if the probe is a member of the memory set and a "no" response if it is not. Sternberg (1966) found a linear function for the relationship between reaction time (RT) and memory set size (M). He concluded that subjects engaged in a serial search process in which subjects sequentially compared the encoded test stimulus against the memorial representations of each of the items in the memory set. In addition, he concluded that the serial search process was exhaustive because the slopes of "yes" and "no" RTs in relation to memory set were parallel. In general, a monotonic increase in RT with M has typically been found (e.g., J. A. Anderson, 1973;Briggs, 1974;Nickerson, 1972). Seamon (1972) has presented an interesting exception to the generalization that RT is linearly related to M. He found that a group of subjects instructed to use relational imagery to remember the words in each memory set (varying in size from one to three words) showed no increase in RT with M. A second group in Seamon's investigation using a repetition strategy to remember words in the memory sets exhibited the more common linear increase of RT with M. Seamon suggested that memory codes for repetitively rehearsed memory sets required a sequential comparison process, whereas words represented in a visually imagined scene could be processed in parallel. 1 Similarly, Paivio (1971) has suggested that imagery leads to a visual memory code that he believes is a parallel processing system, in contrast to verbal processing, which is thought to operate in a sequential manner. Rothstein and Atkinson (1975), however, attempted and failed to replicate Se...

show abstract

“…Zenhausern (Note 1) has developed a paper-and-pencil test based on "Your Style of Learning and Thinking" (Torrance, Reynolds, Riegel, & Ball, 1978) that has successfully differentiated right and left activators in thinking style (Zenhausern, Note 1), information processing (Coleman & Zenhausern, 1979), maze learning (Zenhausern & Nickel, 1979), and the perception of emotion (Zenhausern, Notaro, Grosso, & Schiano, in press ).1 The purpose of this paper is to replicate the fmdings of Smokier and Shevrin (1979) using this groupadministered trait measure of hemispheric preference.…”

Section: Differential Hemispheric Activation and Handedness And Hystementioning

confidence: 99%

Differential hemispheric activation and handedness and hysterical and obsessive personality styles

Dunivin

Zenhausern

1981

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Processing speed, laterality patterns, and memory encoding as a function of hemispheric dominance

Cited by 23 publications

References 13 publications

Sex‐specific lateralization during aggressive interactions in breeding king penguins

Sex‐specific lateralization during aggressive interactions in breeding king penguins

Memory scanning of described images and undescribed images: Hemispheric differences

Differential hemispheric activation and handedness and hysterical and obsessive personality styles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About