Although both single letters and groups of 3 letters are more readily identified when they appear in the right visual field, right visual-field superiority on the 2 tasks is not correlated. Single letters presented in mirror-image orientation are also better identified in the right visual field. These results suggest that hemispheric dominance is more important than directional scanning in determining left-right differences in the recognition of single-letter material.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BartonM. I.GoodglassH.ShaiA.The differential recognition of tachistoscopically presented English and Hebrew words in right and left visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 21, 431–437.
2.
BrydenM. P.Tachistoscopic recognition of non-alphabetical material. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1960, 14, 78–86.
3.
BrydenM. P.Tachistoscopic recognition and cerebral dominance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1964, 19, 686.
BrydenM. P.RaineyC. A.Left-right differences in tachistoscopic recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963, 66, 578–581.
6.
CrovitzH. F.ZenerK.A group test for assessing hand- and eye-dominance. American Journal of Psychology, 1962, 73, 271–276.
7.
DornbushR. L.WinnickW. A.Right-left differences in tachistoscopic identification of paralogs as a function of order of approximation to English letter sequences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 20, 1222–1224.
8.
HarcumE. R.FinkelM. E.Explanation of Mishkin and Forgays' result as a directional-reading conflict. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1963, 17, 224–234.
9.
HayashiT.Ocular dominance and visual field differences in luminous figure fragmentation and tachistoscopic recognition. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Waterloo, 1965.
10.
HeronW.Perception as a function of retinal locus and attention. American Journal of Psychology, 1957, 70, 38–48.
11.
KimuraD.Cerebral dominance and the perception of verbal stimuli. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1961, 15, 166–171.
12.
MishkinM.ForgaysD. G.Word recognition as a function of retinal locus. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1952, 43, 43–48.
13.
OrbachJ.Retinal locus as a factor in the recognition of visually perceived words. American Journal of Psychology, 1952, 65, 555–562.
14.
OvertonW.WienerM.Visual field position and word-recognition threshold. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 71, 249–253.
15.
TerraceH.The effects of retinal locus and attention on the perception of words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959, 58, 382–385.
16.
WykeM.EttlingerG.Efficiency of recognition in left and right visual fields: Its relation to the phenomenon of visual extinction. Archives of Neurology, Chicago, 1961, 5, 659–665.
