Genetics of Laterality

Bryden, M.P.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-138180-6.50016-x

Cited by 117 publications

(184 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

160

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, after fixation on the center of a word, the first half of the word is initially transmitted lus is conveyed to the "wrong" cerebral hemisphere. The reasoning is the same as the one behind the more familiar VHF paradigm [8,10]. Fixations on the second, third, fourth,... letter progressively increase the amount of information that must be transferred across the commissures for subjects with left cerebral dominance, and decrease the amount of information that must be transferred for subjects with right cerebral dominance.…”

Section: Processing Foveally Presented Wordsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…This is because fixations on the beginning of a word make most of the word fall in the appropriate VHF for subjects with left cerebral dominance, whereas fixations on the end of word make the word fall in the appropriate VHF for subjects with right cerebral dominance. The hypothesis does not imply that the normal word-beginning superiority found for unselected subjects (90%-95% of whom are left cerebral hemisphere dominant [ 10]), will turn into a wordend superiority for subjects with right hemisphere dominance; it only implies that the word-beginning superiority, which is probably partly due to linguistic factors, will be smaller for subjects with right cerebral dominance.…”

Section: Processing Foveally Presented Wordsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interhemispheric transfer and the processing of foveally presented stimuli

Brysbaert

1994

Behavioural Brain Research

124

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two arguments are commonly given in favor of a nasotemporal overlap along the vertical meridian of the visual field: anatomical findings and the existence of macular sparing in hemianopia. A review of the literature, however, points to the weakness of the evidence. The anatomical indications are exclusively based on horseradish peroxidase studies, which can not give an unequivocal answer to the amount of overlap in central vision, and which were not supported by a recent study that made use of the more direct ["C]2deoxy-D-glucose technique. The argument of macular sparing in hemianopia appears to be derived evidence that depends on the validity of the anatomical findings. In addition, behavioral studies consistently failed to find functional confirmation of the overlap. To further test the possibility of bilateral representation in central vision, a new paradigm is proposed. It is argued that if interhemispheric transfer is needed for the processing of foveally presented stimuli, the word-beginning superiority effect should be larger for subjects with left hemisphere dominance than for subjects with right hemisphere dominance. Results are in line with the hypothesis and point to the fact that interhemispheric transfer of visual information may be involved in more processing than usually accepted. It is also noted that transfer time seems to depend on the amount of information that must be transferred, and is significantly shorter than the estimates obtained in visual half field studies.Key words: Corpus callosum; Interhemispheric transfer; Macular sparing; Foveal vision; Optimal viewing position; Visual half field studies vision in the foveal region, a phenomenon called macular or foveal sparing. I will discuss the two arguments successively. Anatomical evidence of a hemiretinal overlapThe anatomical evidence for an overlap between the nasal and the temporal hemiretina comes from studies of unilateral sectioning of the optic tract or unilateral electrophoretic injection of horseradish peroxidase (HRP) into the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) [ 19,20,35,36,52,53,55]. This technique allows tracing the ganglion cells of the retina which project to the dLGN and from there to the visual cortex. The general finding is that in a strip of about 0.2 mm along the vertical midline, ipsilaterally and contralaterally projecting ganglion cells intermingle. This is true both for cats and monkeys. According to Leventhal et al. [35,36] the overlap is primarily due to the presence of ipsilaterally projecting cells in the nasal hemiretina, rather than to contralaterally projecting cells in the temporal hemiretina. Interhemispheric transfer and the processing of foveally presented stimuliDue to the partial decussation of the optic nerves at the optic chiasm, the human visual field is split in two halves: the left and the right visual field (LVF and RVF). Both hemifields project to the contralateral cerebral hemisphere. That is, stimuli presented in the LVF are transmitted to the right cerebral hemisphere, and stimu...

show abstract

Section: Processing Foveally Presented Wordsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Processing Foveally Presented Wordsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interhemispheric transfer and the processing of foveally presented stimuli

Brysbaert

1994

Behavioural Brain Research

124

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, there is evidence pointing both to the right hemisphere hypothesis (e.g., Borod et al, 1998;Burt & Perrett, 1997), as well as data supporting the valence hypothesis (e.g., Canli, 1999;Jansari, Tranel, & Adolphs, 2000;Reuter-Lorentz & Davidson, 1981); additional complications may arise from an interaction with gender effects (Van Strien & Van Beek, 2000). Some modifications propose that the valence hypothesis may indeed hold for the experience and perhaps the expression of emotions but that the perception of emotion is better described according to the right hemisphere hypothesis (Borod, 1992;Bryden, 1982;Canli, 1999;Davidson, 1993). On the other hand, there is evidence that both the perception of emotion and aspects of the experience (awareness of the details of one's feelings) rely on the same right hemisphere mechanisms (Lane, Kivley, Du Bois, Shamasundara, & Schartz, 1995).…”

Section: Lateralized Perception Of Emotion: the Right Cerebral Hemispmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognizing Emotion from Facial Expressions: Psychological and Neurological Mechanisms

Adolphs

2002

Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews

1,190

862

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognizing emotion from facial expressions draws on diverse psychological processes implemented in a large, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The sheer diversity of findings precludes any simple summary and argues against the isolation of only a few structures. Instead, it is becoming clear that recognizing facial emotion draws on multiple strategies subserved by a large array of different brain structures. This review will focus on those processes and structures whose role we understand best at present and will focus primarily on data from functional imaging and lesion studies. The review will not cover details of face identity processing or of facial emotion processing in psychiatric disorders.

show abstract

“…Consequently the total number of questions of each type depended on the design of the packs used. Respondents were tested on handedness, using an adaptation of a standard questionnaire (Bryden 1982), and left-handers were excluded from the research.…”

Section: H 2 : Non-verbal Materials Will Have a Higher Recall When It mentioning

confidence: 99%