Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study tested the neurological hypothesis which Dallenbach (1923) proposed to explain the differences in attensity for visual stimuli presented to the right and left of ocular fixation. The result predicted by Dallenbach, of greater attensity on the side opposite the preferred hand, was not obtained. Differences in attensity which were consistently reported by several Os but which were idiosyncratic in direction were explained in terms of attention. This study also determined whether O's perception of relative attensity to the left and right of fixation or other overt characteristics of laterality were correlated with perceptual accuracy to the left and right. Since all Os reproduced the elements of tachistoscopic patterns to the left of fixation more accurately, this study provides additional evidence against the hypothesis of lateral dominance, in terms of a stable ‘structural’ difference, as the determinant of hemifield differences in the perception of visual patterns of multiple elements.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bryden

M. P.

Tachistoscopic recognition and cerebral dominance. Percept. mot. Skills, 1964, 19, 686.

Burke

R. S.

, & Dallenbach

K. M.

Position vs. intensity as a determinant of attention of left-handed observers. Amer. J. Psychol., 1924, 35, 267–269.

Crovitz

H. F.

, & Zener

A group test for assessing hand- and eye-dominance. Amer. J. Psychol., 1962, 75, 271–276.

Dallenbach

K. M.

Attributive vs. cognitive clearness. J. exp. Psychol., 1920, 3, 183–230.

Dallenbach

K. M.

Position vs. intensity as a determinant of clearness. Amer. J. Psychol., 1923, 34, 282–286.

Glanville

A. D.

, & Dallenbach

K. M.

The range of attention. Amer. J. Psychol., 1929,41,233–236.

Harcum

E. R.

Reproduction of linear visual patterns tachistoscopically exposed in various orientations. Williamsburg, Va: College of William and Mary, 1964.

Harcum

E. R.

Mnemonic organization as a determinant of error-gradients in visual pattern perception. Percept. mot. Skills, 1966, 22, 671–696. (Monogr. Suppl. 5-V22)

Harcum

E. R.

Lateral dominance as a determinant of temporal order of responding. In Kinsbourne

(Ed.), Hemispheric asymmetry of function. London: Tavistock, 1967, in press. (a)

10.

Harcum

E. R.

The parallel functions of serial learning and tachistoscopic pattern perception. Psychol. Rev., 1967, 74, 51–62. (b)

11.

Harcum

E. R.

, & Dyer

D. W.

Monocular and binocular reproduction of binary stimuli appearing right and left of fixation. Amer. J. Psychol., 1962, 75, 56–65.

12.

Harcum

E. R.

, Hartman

R. R.

, & Smith

N. F.

Pre- vs post-knowledge of required reproduction sequence for tachistoscopic patterns. Canad. J. Psychol., 1963, 17, 264–273.

13.

Heron

Perception as a function of retinal locus and attention. Amer. J. Psychol., 1957, 70, 38–48.

14.

Klmura

The effect of letter position on recognition. Canad. J. Psychol., 1959, 13, 1–10.

15.

Kirssin

J. E.

Differences in visual attensity to the left and right of fixation. Va J. Sci., 1966, 17, 363. (Abstract)

16.

Penfield

, & Roberts

Speech and brain-mechanisms. Princeton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1959.

17.

White

A. M.

, & Dallenbach

K. M.

Position vs. intensity as a determinant of the attention of left-handed observers. Amer. J. Psychol., 1932, 44, 175–179.

18.

Winnick

W. A.

, & Dornbush

R. L.

Pre- and post-exposure processes in tachistoscopic identification. Percept. mot. Skills, 1965, 20, 107–113.

19.

Winters

J. J.

Jr. , & Gerjuoy

I. R.

Lateral preference for identical geometric forms: I. Normals. Percept. & Psychophys., 1966, 1, 101–103.

Relative Attensity of Stimuli in Left and Right Visual Hemifields 1

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References