Subjects were asked to indicate, by a simple motor response, the presence or absence of a word (signal) in unilaterally presented five-letter words and nonwords (noise). Both vertical and horizontal orientation of stimuli were employed. Detection accuracy (d') did not differ between visual hemifields and was greater for horizontal than for vertical orientation. Decision making was more conservative for left-hemifield presentation and more conservative for vertical orientation. Models of perceptual asymmetry based on structural differences between cerebral hemispheres are weakened by the results.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BartonM.GoodglassH.ShaiA.Differential recognition of tachistoscopically presented English and Hebrew words in right and left visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 21, 431–437.
2.
BradshawJ.GatesE.Visual field differences in verbal tasks: Effects of task familiarity and sex of subject. Brain and Language, 1978, 5, 166–187.
3.
BrydenM.Left-right differences in tachistoscopic recognition as a function of familiarity and pattern orientation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 84, 120–122.
4.
GardnerE.BranskiD.Unilateral cerebral activation and perception of gaps: A signal detection analysis. Neuropsychologia, 1976, 14, 43–53.
5.
GoodglassH.BartonM.Handedness and differential perception of verbal stimuli in left and right visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1963, 17, 851–854.
6.
HeronW.Perception as a function of retinal locus and attention. American Journal of Psychology, 1957, 70, 38–48.
7.
KimuraD.Dual functional asymmetry of the brain in visual perception. Neuropsychology, 1966, 4, 275–285.
8.
KinsbourneM.The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta Psychologica, 1970, 33, 193–201.
9.
KuceraH.FrancisW.Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown Univer. Press, 1967.
10.
McKeeverW.GillK.Visual half-field differences in the recognition of bilaterally presented single letters and vertically spelled words. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1972, 34, 815–818.
11.
McKeeverW.HolingM.Bilateral tachistoscopic word recognition as a function of hemisphere stimulated and interhemispheric transfer time. Neuropsychologia, 1971, 9, 281–288.
12.
NeisserU.Decision-time without reaction-time: Experiments in visual scanning. American Journal of Psychology, 1963, 76, 376–385.
RobertshawS.SheldonM.Laterality effects in judgment of the identity and position of letters: A signal detection analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1976, 28, 115–121.
15.
ShefskyM.StensonH.MillerL.Hemispheric asymmetry: A signal detection analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1980, 51, 599–604.
16.
ShefskyM.StensonH.MillerL.Visual laterality effects: A signal detection analysis. Perception and Psychophysics, 1981, in press.
17.
SwetsJ.TannerW.BirdsallT.Decision processes in perception. Psychological Review, 1961, 68, 301–340.
18.
WhiteM.Laterality differences in perception: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 72, 387–405.
19.
WhiteM.Hemispheric asymmetries in tachistoscopic information-processing. British Journal of Psychology, 1972, 63, 497–508.
