Literature DB >> 6223975

Are variations among right-handed individuals in perceptual asymmetries caused by characteristic arousal differences between hemispheres?

J Levy, W Heller, M T Banich, L A Burton.   

Abstract

We propose that much of the variance among right-handed subjects in perceptual asymmetries on standard behavioral measures of laterality arises from individual differences in characteristic patterns of asymmetric hemispheric arousal. Dextrals with large right-visual-field (RVF) advantages on a tachistoscopic syllable-identification task (assumed to reflect characteristically higher left-hemisphere than right-hemisphere arousal) outperformed those having weak or no visual-field asymmetries (assumed to reflect characteristically higher right-hemisphere than left-hemisphere arousal). The two groups were equal, however, in asymmetries of error patterns that are thought to indicate linguistic or nonlinguistic encoding strategies. For both groups, relations between visual fields in the ability to discriminate the accuracy of performance followed the pattern of syllable identification itself, suggesting that linguistic and metalinguistic processes are based on the same laterally specialized functions. Subjects with strong RVF advantages had a pessimistic bias for rating performance, and those with weak or no asymmetries had an optimistic bias, particularly for the left visual field (LVF). This is concordant with evidence that the arousal level of the right hemisphere is closely related to affective mood. Finally, consistent with the arousal model, leftward asymmetries on a free-vision face-processing task became larger as RVF advantages on the syllable task diminished and as optimistic biases for the LVF, relative to the RVF, increased.

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6223975     DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.9.3.329

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  9 in total

1.  Perceptual asymmetry and youths' responses to stress: Understanding vulnerability to depression.

Authors:  Megan Flynn; Karen D Rudolph
Journal:  Cogn Emot       Date:  2007

2.  Categorization versus distance: hemispheric differences for processing spatial information.

Authors:  J B Hellige; C Michimata
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1989-11

Review 3.  Implicit affective cues and attentional tuning: an integrative review.

Authors:  Ronald S Friedman; Jens Förster
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  Visuospatial Bias in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Evidence from Line Bisection Tasks.

Authors:  Chunyan Liu; Huajie Zhai; Shuhua Su; Sutao Song; Gongxiang Chen; Yi Jiang
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2021-11-16

5.  Brain laterality, depression and anxiety disorders: New findings for emotional and verbal dichotic listening in individuals at risk for depression.

Authors:  Gerard E Bruder; Jorge Alvarenga; Karen Abraham; Jamie Skipper; Virginia Warner; Daniel Voyer; Bradley S Peterson; Myrna M Weissman
Journal:  Laterality       Date:  2015-11-19

6.  Reciprocal organization of the cerebral hemispheres.

Authors:  Iain McGilchrist
Journal:  Dialogues Clin Neurosci       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 5.986

7.  Hemispheric biases and the control of visuospatial attention: an ERP study.

Authors:  Kevin M Spencer; Marie T Banich
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2005-08-24       Impact factor: 3.288

8.  Approach-avoidance activation without anterior asymmetry.

Authors:  Andero Uusberg; Helen Uibo; Riti Tiimus; Helena Sarapuu; Kairi Kreegipuu; Jüri Allik
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-03-11

9.  Characteristic visuomotor influences on eye-movement patterns to faces and other high level stimuli.

Authors:  Joseph M Arizpe; Vincent Walsh; Chris I Baker
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-07-29
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.