Die laterale responsasimmetrie wat ná digotiese stimulering blyk, is op verskeie maniere verklaar. Dieselfde verklaringskonsepte as wat na aanleiding van bevindinge in die ouditiewe modaliteit geformuleer is, is sonder sistematiese en omvattende evaluering oorgeneem ter verklaring van soortgelyke asimmetrieë in die visuele, taktiele en motoriese modaliteite. In hierdie studie is die vyf mees algemene verklaringsmodelle geïdentifiseer, toetsbare afleidings daaruit gemaak en kernkonstrukte in 'n multifaktoriaalontwerp geoperasionaliseer met die oog op die evaluering van die relatiewe toereikendheid van hierdie modelle. 'n Digotiese syfertoets en vier digotiese woordtoetse is saamgestel. In laasgenoemde is fonologiese en semantiese veranderlikes gemanipuleer. Hierdie toetse is aan 64 persone met hoogs waarskynlike linkerhemisfeerspraaklokalisering onder verskillende aandags- en geheuekondisies gegee. Die oororde en lateraliteit, asook die kanaal van rapportering en moeilikheidsgraad van die taak is sistematies gekontroleer. Die response is op drie wyses nagesien. Toetsing vir betekenisvolle verskille is gedoen. By sowel die syfertoets as die woordtoetse is 'n betekenisvolle regteroorsuperioriteit verkry. Die mate van asimmetrie is nie konsekwent beter by bepaalde vlakke van spesifieke faktore soos deur die differensiële verklaringsmodelle voorspel nie, maar enkele betekenisvolle interaksies tussen veranderlikes kom voor. Die resultate steun die algemene funksionele hemisferiese asimmetriemodel en falsifieer die orde-effekgeheuemodel. Die differensiële geheue-, aandags- en persepsie(moeilikheidsgraad-)modelle blyk ontoereikend te wees ter verklaring van die responsasimmetrieë, maar aandags-, geheue-, en taakmoeilikheidsfaktore asook die interaksie tussen hierdie prosesse speel wel onder bepaalde kondisies 'n rol in die bepaling van die relatiewe grootte van die asimmetrie.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnnettM.KilshawD. (1982). Mathematical ability and lateral asymmetry. Cortex, 18, 547–568.
2.
BartzW.SatzP.FennellE. (1967). Grouping strategies in dichotic listening: The effects of instructions, rate, and ear asymmetry. The Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(1), 132–136.
3.
BerlucciG.BrizzolaraD.MarziC. A.RizzolattiG.UmiltaC. (1974). Can lateral asymmetries in attention explain interfield differences in visual perception?Cortex, 10, 177–185.
4.
BirkettP.TerryM. (1982). Laterality, order of report and attention in a dichotic CV syllable task. Cortex, 18(2), 227–244.
5.
BlumsteinS.E.GoodglassH.TartterV.C. (1975). The reliability of ear advantage in dichotic listening. Brain and Language, 2, 226–236.
6.
BlumsteinS.E.TartterV.C.MichelD.HirschB.LeiterE. (1977). The role of distinctive features in the dichotic perception of vowels. Brain and Language, 4(1), 508–520.
7.
BorkowskiJ. G.SpreenO.StutzJ.Z. (1965). Ear preference and abstractness in dichotic listening. Psychonomic Science, 3, 547–548.
8.
BradshawJ.L.BurdenV.NettletonN.C. (1986). Dichotic and dichhaptic techniques. Neuropsychologia, 24(1), 79–90.
9.
BradshawJ.L.NettletonN.C. (1983). Human cerebral asymmetry. Hertfordshire, England: Prentice-Hall.
10.
BranchC.MilnerB.RasmussenT. (1964). Intracarotid sodium-amytal for the lateralization of cerebral speech dominance. Journal of Neurosurgery, 16, 399–405.
11.
BrydenM.P. (1962). Order of report in dichotic listening. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 16, 291–299.
12.
BrydenM.P. (1967). An evaluation of some models of laterality effects in dichotic listening. Acta otolaryngologica, 63, 595–604.
13.
BrydenM.P.MunhallK.AllardF. (1983). Attentional biases and the right-ear effect in dichotic listening. Brain and Language, 18, 236–248.
14.
BrydenM.P.MurrayJ.E. (1985). Toward a model of dichotic listening performance. Brain and Cognition, 4, 241–257.
15.
CaplanB.KinsbourneM. (1982). Cognitive style and dichotic asymmetries of disabled readers. Cortex, 18, 357–366.
16.
ChomskyN.HalleM. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.
17.
CohenA.EbelingC. L.FokkemaK.Van HolkA.G.F. (1961). Fonologie van het Nederlands en het Fries. s'Gravenhage: Nijhoff.
18.
DawsonM.E.SchnellA.M. (1982). Electrodermal responses to attended and nonattended significant stimuli during dichotic listening. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8(2), 315–324.
19.
DeeH.L.FontenotD.J. (1973). Cerebral dominance and lateral differences in perception and memory. Neuropsychologia, 11, 167–173.
20.
DudaP.D.BrownJ. (1984). Lateral asymmetry of positive and negative emotions. Cortex, 20, 253–261.
21.
FairweatherH.BrizzolaraD.TabossiP.UmiltaC. (1982). Functional cerebral lateralization; dichotomy or plurality?Cortex, 18, 51–66.
22.
FoglianiA.M.Fogliani-MessinaT.M.BarlettaF.CarusoG. (1982). Hemispheric functionality patterns between dextrals and sinistrals in tactile-visual tasks at lower or higher level of mental processes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 291–297.
23.
GeffenG.QuinnK. (1984). Hemispheric spesialization and ear advantages in processing speech. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 273–291.
24.
GodfreyJ.J. (1974). Perceptual difficulty and the right ear advantage for vowels. Brain and Language, 1, 323–336.
25.
GoodglassH.PeckE.A. (1972). Dichotic ear order effects in Korsakoff and normal subjects. Neuropsychologia, 10, 211–217.
26.
HartjeW.WillmesK.WenigerD. (1985). Is there parallel and independent hemispheric processing of intonational and phonetic components of dichotic speech stimuli?Brain and Language, 24, 83–99.
27.
HealeyJ.M.LiedermannJ.GeschwindN. (1986). Handedness is not a unidimensional trait. Cortex, 22, 33–53.
28.
HeilmanK.M.BowersD.RasburyW.C.RayR.M. (1977). Ear asymmetries on a selective attentional task. Brain and Language, 4(3), 390–395.
29.
HelligeJ.B.WongT.M. (1983). Hemisphere-spesific interference in dichotic listening: task variables and individual differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112(2), 218–239.
30.
HinesD.SatzP.ClementiaR. (1973). Perceptual and memory components of the superior recall of letters from right visual half fields. Neuropsychologia, 7, 13–22.
31.
HiscockM.BergstromK.J. (1982). The lengthy persistence of priming effects in dichotic listening. Neuropsychologia, 20(1), 43–53.
32.
HugdahlK.AndersonS. (1986). The ‘forced attention paradigm’ in dichotic listening to CV-syllables: A comparison between adults and children. Cortex, 22(3), 417–432.
33.
InglisJ. (1962). Dichotic stimulation, temporal lobe damage, and the perception and storage of auditory stimuli — a note on Kimura's findings. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 16, 11–17.
JasonG.W. (1983). Hemispheric asymmeties in motor function: I. Left-hemisphere spesialization for memory but not performance. Neuropsychologia, 21(1), 35–45.
36.
KallmanH.J. (1978). Can expectancy explain reaction time ear asymmetries?Psychologia, 16, 225–228.
37.
KimuraD. (1961a). Some effects of temporal lobe damage on auditory perception. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 15(3), 156–165.
38.
KimuraD. (1961b). Cerebral dominance and the perception of verbal stimuli. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 15(3), 166–171.
39.
KimuraD. (1962). Perceptual and memory functions of the left temporal lobe — a reply to Dr Ingils. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 16, 181–221.
40.
KimuraD. (1967). Functional asymmetry of the brain in dichotic listening. Cortex, 3, 163–178.
41.
KimuraD.DurnfordM. (1974). Normal studies on the function of the right hemisphere in vision. In DimondS.J.BeaumontJ.G. (Eds.), Hemisphere function in the human brain. (pp. 25–47). London: Paul Elek.
42.
KinsbourneM. (1970). The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta-Psychologia, 33, 193–201.
43.
KinsbourneM. (1973). The control of attention by interaction between the cerebral hemispheres. In KornblumS. (Ed.), Attention and performance IV (pp. 239–256). London: Academic Press.
44.
KinsbourneM. (1975). The mechanism of hemispheric control of the lateral gradient of attention. In RabbittM.P.A.DornicS. (Eds), Attention and performance V (pp. 81–97). London: Academic Press.
45.
KraftR.H. (1982). Relationship of ear specialization to degree of task difficulty, sex, and lateral preference. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 54(3), 703–714.
46.
LevyB.A.BaddeleyB. (1971). Recall of semantic clusters in primary memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22, 8–13.
47.
LevyJ. (1983). Is cerebral asymmetry of function a dynamic process? Implications for specifying degree of lateral differentiation. Neuropsychologia, 21(1), 3–11.
48.
LevyJ.HellerW.BanichM.T.BurtonL.A. (1983). Are variations among right-handed individuals in perceptual asymmetries caused by characteristic arousal differences between hemispheres?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9(3), 329–359.
49.
LibermanA.M.CooperF.S.ShankweilerD.P.Studdert-KennedyM. (1967). Perceptions of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74(6), 431–461.
50.
LiedermanJ. (1986). Determinants of enhancement of the right visual field advantage by bilateral vs. unilateral stimuli. Cortex, 22(4), 553–566.
51.
MohrE.CostaL. (1985). Ear asymmetry in dichotic listening tasks which increase in difficulty. Brain and Language, 24, 233–245.
52.
MoraisJ.DarwinC.J. (1974). Ear differences for same-different reaction times to monaurally presented speech. Brain and Language, 1, 383–390.
53.
MorayN. (1969). Attention: Selective processes in vision and hearing. London: Hutchinson.
54.
MoscovitchM.ScullianD.ChristieD. (1976). Early versus late stages of processing and their relation to functional hemispheric asymmetries in face recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, 2, 401–416.
55.
NachshonI. (1973). Effects of cerebral dominance and attention on dichotic listening. TIT-Journal of Life Sciences, 3(4), 107–114.
56.
NeillW.T. (1977). Inhibitory and fasilitory processes in selective attention. Journal of Experimental, Human and Perceptual Performance, 3(3), 444–450.
Oscar-BermanM.RehbeinL.PorfertA.GoodglassH. (1978). Dichhaptic hand-order effects with verbal and non-verbal tactile stimuli. Brain and Language, 6, 323–333.
59.
PetersM. (1977). Simultaneous performance of two motor activities: The factor of timing. Neuropsychologia, 15, 461–465.
60.
SatzP.AchenbachE.PattishallE.FennellE. (1965). Order of report, ear asymmetry and handedness in dichotic listening. Cortex, 1, 377–396.
61.
Schulman-GalambosC. (1977). Dichotic listening performance in elementary and college students. Neuropsychologia, 15, 577–584.
62.
ShanonB. (1984). Asymmetries in musical aesthetic judgments. Cortex, 20, 567–573.
63.
SpreenO.SpellacyF.J.ReidJ.R. (1970). The effect of interstimulus interval and intensity or ear asymmetry for non-verbal stimuli in dichotic listening. Neuropsychologia, 8(2), 245–250.
64.
StuartA.D.SchepersJ.M. (1987). Kognitiewe vermoëns van persone met regterhemisferiese taalverteenwoordiging. Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif vir Sielkunde, 17, 9–14.
65.
Studdert-KennedyM.ShankweilerD. (1970). Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 48, 2(2), 579–594.
66.
Studdert-KennedyM.ShankweilerD.PisoniD. (1972). Auditory and phonetic processes is speech perception: Evidence from a dichotic study. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 455–466.
TodorJ.I.KyprieP.M.PriceH. L. (1982). Lateral asymmetries in arm, wrist and finger movements. Cortex, 18, 515–523.
69.
WeddingD.CyrusP. (1986). Recognition of emotion in hemifaces presented to the left and right visual fields. International Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 161–164.
70.
WhiteM.J. (1973). Does cerebral dominance offer a sufficient explanation for laterality differences in tachistoscopic recognition?Perceptual and Motor Skills, 36, 479–485.
71.
WilkensA.MoscowitchM. (1978). Selective impairment of semantic memory after temporal lobectomy. Neuropsychologia, 16, 73–79.
72.
WinerB.J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
73.
WissingM.P. (1978). Funksionele hemisferiese asimmetrie met spesifieke verwysing na die digotiese stimuleringstegniek. Ongepubliseerde proefskrif, Potchefstroomse Universiteit vir CHO, Potchefstroom.
74.
WissingD.P.WissingM.P. (1980). Kenmerkprosessering tydens digotiese stimulering. Taalfasette, 27(2), 132–150.
75.
WitelsonS.F. (1974). Hemispheric specialization for linguistic and non-linguistic tactual perception using a dichotomous stimulation technique. Cortex, 10, 3–17.
76.
YamamotoM.HattaT. (1982). Sex, task difficulty and hemispheric differences in somatosensory function in normal children. Psychologia, 25, 115–120.
