Literature DB >> 2354647

Interhemispheric interaction: how do the hemispheres divide and conquer a task?

M T Banich1, A Belger.   

Abstract

The present studies investigated how dividing processing between the hemispheres affects task performance. In particular, they examined whether dividing processing between the hemispheres leads to a performance advantage only when task demands exceed a certain threshold. In Experiment 1 processing demands were manipulated by varying the difficulty of the decision process. In the more difficult task, subjects decided as quickly as possible whether two of three letters had the same name (e.g. A a), whereas in the less difficult task they simply decided whether two of the three were physically identical (e.g. A A). As expected, dividing processing between the hemispheres aided performance for the more difficult name-identity task whereas it actually hindered performance for easier physical-identity task. In Experiment 2, subjects made a physical-identity decision about a different stimulus, digits. The pattern of results found in Experiment 1 for the physical-identity task was replicated; interhemispheric processing hindered task performance. These results indicate that the physical characteristics of a stimulus have minimal influence on the extent to which interhemispheric processing aids task performance. In Experiment 3, subjects were required to make more difficult decisions about digits. In one task, they decided whether the sum of two of the three digits was greater than or equal to 10, and in the other they decided if the value of a particular digit was less than either of the other two. Dividing processing between the hemispheres led to faster performance for both tasks, similar to the results for the name-identity condition. In sum, these experiments suggest that when task requirements are demanding, performance is enhanced by distributing processing across the hemispheres.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2354647     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-9452(13)80076-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cortex        ISSN: 0010-9452            Impact factor:   4.027


  45 in total

1.  The spatiotemporal dynamics of illusory contour processing: combined high-density electrical mapping, source analysis, and functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Micah M Murray; Glenn R Wylie; Beth A Higgins; Daniel C Javitt; Charles E Schroeder; John J Foxe
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  The neural basis of the bilateral distribution advantage.

Authors:  Stefan Pollmann; Eran Zaidel; D Yves von Cramon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-09-24       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 3.  The role of the corpus callosum in interhemispheric transfer of information: excitation or inhibition?

Authors:  Juliana S Bloom; George W Hynd
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 7.444

4.  Interhemispheric interaction expands attentional capacity in an auditory selective attention task.

Authors:  Paige E Scalf; Marie T Banich; Andrew B Erickson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-03-01       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Relationship between intelligence and the size and composition of the corpus callosum.

Authors:  Amanda D Hutchinson; J L Mathias; B L Jacobson; L Ruzic; A N Bond; Marie T Banich
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Effects of severing the corpus callosum on electrical and BOLD functional connectivity and spontaneous dynamic activity in the rat brain.

Authors:  Matthew E Magnuson; Garth J Thompson; Wen-Ju Pan; Shella D Keilholz
Journal:  Brain Connect       Date:  2014-01-23

7.  A unilateral field advantage for detecting repeated elements.

Authors:  Serena Jenelle Butcher; Patrick Cavanagh
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-05

8.  The number of attentional foci and their precision are dissociated in the posterior parietal cortex.

Authors:  Won Mok Shim; G A Alvarez; T J Vickery; Y V Jiang
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-09-25       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  Atypical hemispheric asymmetry in the perception of negative human vocalizations in individuals with Williams syndrome.

Authors:  Anna Järvinen-Pasley; Seth D Pollak; Anna Yam; Kiley J Hill; Mark Grichanik; Debra Mills; Allan L Reiss; Julie R Korenberg; Ursula Bellugi
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2009-12-11       Impact factor: 3.139

10.  Competition in visual cortex impedes attention to multiple items.

Authors:  Paige E Scalf; Diane M Beck
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-01-06       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.