Right news, good news! The valence hypothesis and hemispheric asymmetries in auditory imagery

Prete, Giulia; Tommasi, Vincenza; Tommasi, Luca

doi:10.1080/23273798.2019.1659990

Cited by 17 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dichotic listening tasks have been validated to accurately assess lateralized language processing using a large variety of neuroscientific methods, for example fMRI 32 – 34 , PET 35 or individuals with chronic or temporary hemispheric lesions 36 – 39 . The right ear advantage can be found even in the absence of auditory stimuli as demonstrated via auditory imagery tasks 40 – 42 . Furthermore, it can be modulated through attention and unilateral high frequency stimulation via TMS 43 , 44 but seems to be unaffected by constant stimulation applied through tDCS 45 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A large-scale estimate on the relationship between language and motor lateralization

Packheiser

Schmitz

Arning

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human language is dominantly processed in the left cerebral hemisphere in most of the population. While several studies have suggested that there are higher rates of atypical right-hemispheric language lateralization in left-/mixed-handers, an accurate estimate of this association from a large sample is still missing. In this study, we comprised data from 1,554 individuals sampled in three previous studies in which language lateralization measured via dichotic listening, handedness and footedness were assessed. Overall, we found a right ear advantage indicating typical left-hemispheric language lateralization in 82.1% of the participants. While we found significantly more left-handed individuals with atypical language lateralization on the categorical level, we only detected a very weak positive correlation between dichotic listening lateralization quotients (LQs) and handedness LQs using continuous measures. Here, only 0.4% of the variance in language lateralization were explained by handedness. We complemented these analyses with Bayesian statistics and found no evidence in favor of the hypothesis that language lateralization and handedness are related. Footedness LQs were not correlated with dichotic listening LQs, but individuals with atypical language lateralization also exhibited higher rates of atypical footedness on the categorical level. We also found differences in the extent of language lateralization between males and females with males exhibiting higher dichotic listening LQs indicating more left-hemispheric language processing. Overall, these findings indicate that the direct associations between language lateralization and motor asymmetries are much weaker than previously assumed with Bayesian correlation analyses even suggesting that they do not exist at all. Furthermore, sex differences seem to be present in language lateralization when the power of the study is adequate suggesting that endocrinological processes might influence this phenotype.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A large-scale estimate on the relationship between language and motor lateralization

Packheiser

Schmitz

Arning

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the dominant theories on emotional brain lateralization is the right-hemisphere hypothesis which proposes that the right hemisphere is more dominant for processing of positive and negative emotions 21 , 22 . Regarding negative emotions, the valence hypothesis similarly suggests a right hemispheric processing dominance 23 . It could be speculated that the right hemisphere is selectively primed by stress resulting in changes in FHAs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dichotic listening performance and interhemispheric integration after stress exposure

Berretz

Packheiser

Wolf

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional hemispheric asymmetries (FHAs) have been thought to be relatively stable over time. However, past research has shown that FHAs are more plastic than initially thought. Endocrinological processes have been demonstrated to alter FHAs. As the product of the stress-activated hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis, cortisol influences information processing at every level from stimulus perception to decision making and action. To investigate the influence of acute stress on FHAs, 60 participants performed a Banich–Belger task, as well as a verbal and an emotional dichotic listening task in two sessions. One session included a stress induction via the Trier Social Stress Test, the other session included a control procedure. We calculated across-field advantages (AFAs) in the Banich–Belger task and lateralization quotients for reaction times and responses per side in both dichotic listening tasks. There were no significant differences between the stress and control session in the dichotic listening tasks. In contrast, there was evidence for an influence of cortisol and sympathetic activation indicated by salivary alpha amylase changes on AFAs in the Banich–Belger task. This indicates that acute stress and the related increase in cortisol do not influence dichotic listening performance. However, stress does seem to affect interhemispheric integration of information. Future research using EEG, fMRI and pharmacological interventions is needed to further characterize the relation of hemispheric asymmetries and acute stress.

show abstract

“…One group of eight questions (the movement conditions) focused on ear preference for a message spoken into one ear when a participant imaged being approached by a person who spoke to that participant or imaged approaching a person and speaking to that person, and these questions reflected all pairwise 2 × 2 × 2 combinations of the sex of imaged person (male, female), valence of the message (positive, negative), and direction of movement (the stationary participant imaged being approached by a person who spoke to them, the participant imaged approaching a stationary person to whom he or she spoke). Following Prete et al (2016) and Prete, Tommasi, et al (2020), participants were instructed to imagine that the imaged person spoke into one of their ears or that they spoke into one ear of the imaged person. One group of two questions focused on ear preference for an image of the sound of a flute and an image of the sound of a tuba.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prete, Tommasi, et al (2020) had participants image that they were being spoken to in one ear or were speaking into an ear of another person, and the messages being spoken were positively-valenced (e.g., “you won!”) or negatively-valenced (e.g., “you lost!”). They found a right ear preference for messages having positive valence but no ear preference for messages having negative valence.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Subjective Lateralization within Auditory Imagery: Valence and Verbality

Hubbard

Ruppel

2022

Imagination, Cognition and Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments examined whether auditory imagery was localized to the left or right ear. Building on research of Prete and colleagues, in Experiment 1, participants imaged a person spoke into their ear or they spoke into an imaged person's ear. Valence of the message was positive (e.g., “you won!”) or negative (e.g., “you lost!”), and sex of the imaged person and whether the participant or imaged person was imaged to have moved was varied. Positively-valenced messages were more likely to be imaged at the right ear; negatively-valenced messages were more likely to be imaged at the left ear. In Experiment 2, participants imaged a positively-valenced (e.g., a kitten purring) or a negatively-valenced (e.g., fingernails scratching a chalkboard) nonverbal sound. Both positively-valenced nonverbal sounds and negatively-valenced nonverbal sounds were imaged at the right ear. Auditory imagery vividness and clarity, handedness, and preferred telephone ear did not generally correlate with ear preferences. Implications for lateralization of language, emotion, and auditory frequency; the inner voice/inner ear distinction; and methods of analysis are discussed.

show abstract

Right news, good news! The valence hypothesis and hemispheric asymmetries in auditory imagery

Cited by 17 publications

References 54 publications

A large-scale estimate on the relationship between language and motor lateralization

A large-scale estimate on the relationship between language and motor lateralization

Dichotic listening performance and interhemispheric integration after stress exposure

Subjective Lateralization within Auditory Imagery: Valence and Verbality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About