Cerebral lateralization of global-local processing of 70 left-handed and 70 right-handed students was compared using a computerized global-local task in a half-visual field paradigm. Analysis showed that left-handed individuals were slower than right-handed individuals in processing Globally Directed stimuli presented to the left visual field (right hemisphere). In addition, left-handed individuals showed smaller local superiority in the left hemisphere to the right-handed individuals. These findings are more consistent with Levy's prediction of spatial inferiority of left-handed individuals than Geschwind and Galaburda's or Annett's hypotheses.
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.
AnnettM.ManningM. (1989) The disadvantages of dextrality for intelligence. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 213–226.
3.
BradshawI. L.NettletonN. C.TaylorM. J. (1981) Right hemisphere language and cognitive deficit in sinistrals?Neuropsychologia, 19, 113–132.
4.
CeroneL. J.McKeeverW. F. (1999) Failure to support the right shift theory's hypothesis of a heterozygote advantage for cognitive abilities. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 109–123.
5.
FinkG. R.HalliganP. W.MarshallJ. C.FrithC. D.FrackowiakR. S. J.DolanR. J. (1996) Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees?Nature, 382, 626–628.
6.
GeschwindN.GalaburdaA. M. (1985) Cerebral lateralization: biological mechanisms, associations, and pathology: I-II. A hypothesis and a program for research. Archives of Neurology, 42, 428–459, 521–552.
7.
GoodarziM. A.WykesT.HemsleyD. R. (2000) Cerebral lateralization of global-local processing in people with schizotypy. Schizophrenia Research, 1, 115–121.
8.
HarshmanR. A.HampsonE.BerenbaumS. A. (1983) Individual differences in cognitive abilities and brain organizaiton: Part 1. Sex and handedness in ability. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 37, 144–192.
9.
HicksR. E.KinsbourneM. (1978) Human handedness. In KinsbourneM. (Ed.), Asymmetrical function of the brain. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer. Press. Pp. 523–552.
10.
KimchiR. (1992) Primacy of wholistic processing and global/local paradigm: a critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 24–38.
11.
KolataG. (1983) Math genius may have hormonal basis. Science, 222, 1312.
12.
LevyJ. (1969) Possible basis for the evolution of lateral specialization of the human brain. Nature, 224, 614–615.
13.
MartinezA.MosesP.FrankL.BuxtonA.WongE.StilesJ. (1997) Hemispheric asymmetries in global and local processing: evidence from fMRI. NeuroReport, 8, 1685–1689.
14.
McKeeverW. F. (1986) The influence of handedness, sex, familial sinistrality and andogyny on language laterality, verbal ability, and spatial ability. Cortex, 13, 321–326.
15.
NavonD. (1977) Forest before trees: the precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353–383.
16.
OldfieldR. C. (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.
17.
RichD. A.McKeeverW. F. (1990) An investigation of immune system disorder as a marker for anomalous dominance. Brain and Cognition, 12, 55–72.
18.
RobertsonL. C. (1995) Hemispheric specialization and cooperation in processing complex visual patterns. In KitterleF. F. (Ed.), Hemispheric communication: mechanisms and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 301–318.
19.
RobertsonL. C.LambM. R. (1991) Neuropsychological contributions to theories of part/whole organization. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 299–330.
20.
SergentJ. (1982) The cerebral balance of power: confrontation or cooperation?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 253–272.
21.
TanakaH. K.OnoeH.TsukadaH.FujitaI. (2001) Attentional modulation of neural activity in the macaque inferior temporal cortex during global and local processing. Neuroscience Research, 39, 469–472.
22.
WeberB.SchwarzU.KneifelS.TreyerV.BuckA. (2000) Hierarchical visual processing is dependent on the oculomotor system. NeuroReport, 11, 241–247.
