Categorical and metric spatial processes distinguished by task demands and practice

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 153-166

  Banich, Marie T ^a   Federmeier, Kara D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN FUNCTION; COMPUTER; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEFT HEMISPHERE; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL FIELD;

ADULT; ATTENTION; DISTANCE PERCEPTION; DOMINANCE, CEREBRAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 0032936523     PISSN: 0898929X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/089892999563292     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Banich, M. T. (1997). Neuropsychology: The neural bases of mental function. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
2. Banich, M. T., Elledge, V. C., & Stolar, N. (1992). Variations in lateralized processing among right-handers: Effects on patterns of cognitive performance. Cortex, 28, 273-288.
3. Belger, A. (1993). Influences of hemispheric specialization and interaction on task performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL.
4. Belger, A., & Banich, M. T. (1998). Costs and benefits of integrating information between the cerebral hemispheres: A computational perspective. Neuropsychology, 12, 380-398.
5. Boles, D. B. (1992). Factor analysis and the cerebral hemispheres: Temporal, occipital and frontal functions. Neuropsychologia, 30, 963-988.
6. Chabris, C. F., & Kosslyn, S. M. (1998). How do the cerebral hemispheres contribute to encoding spatial relations? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 8-14.
7. Christman, S. (1989). Perceptual characteristics in visual laterality research. Brain and Cognition, 11, 238-257.
8. Christman, S., Kitterle, F. L., & Hellige, J. B. (1991). Hemispheric asymmetry in the processing of absolute versus relative spatial frequency. Brain and Cognition, 16, 62-73.
9. Cook, N. D., Früh, H., & Lundis, T. (1995). The cerebral hemispheres and neural network simulation: Design considerations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 410-422.
10. Cowin, E. L., & Hellige, J. B. (1992). Categorical versus coordinate spatial processing: Effects of blurring and hemispheric asymmetry. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 156-164.
11. Hellige, J. B., Bloch, M. I., & Taylor, A. K. (1988). Multi-task investigation of individual differences in hemispheric asymmetry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 176-187.
12. Hellige, J. B., Bloch, M. I., Cowin, E. L., Eng, T., Eviatar, Z., & Sergent, V. (1994). Individual variation in hemispheric asymmetry: Multitask study of effects related to handedness and sex. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 235-256.
13. Hellige, J. B., & Cowin, E. L. (1996). Effects of stimulus arrangement on hemispheric differences and interhemispheric interaction for processing letter trigrams. Neuropsychology, 10, 247-253.
14. Hellige, J. B., & Michimata, C. (1989). Categorization versus distance: Hemispheric differences for processing spatial information. Memory and Cognition, 17, 770-776.
15. Hoyer, W. J., & Rybash, J. M. (1992). Age and visual field differences in computing visual-spatial relations. Psychology and Aging, 7, 339-342.
16. Humphreys, G. W., & Riddoch, M. J. (1984). Routes to object constancy: Implications from neurological impairments of object constancy. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 26A, 385-415.
17. Ivry, R. B., & Lebby, P. C. (1993). Hemispheric differences in auditory perception are similar to those found in visual perception. Psychological Science, 4, 41-45.
18. Kim, H., & Levine, S. C. (1991). Sources of between-subjects variability in perceptual asymmetries: A meta-analytic review. Neuropsychologia, 29, 877-888.
19. Kim, H., & Levine, S. C. (1992). Variations in characteristic perceptual asymmetry: Modality specific and modality general components. Brain and Cognition, 19, 21-47.
20. Kim, H., Levine, S. C., & Kertesz, S. (1990). Are variations among subjects in laterality asymmetry real individual differences or random error in measurement?: Putting variability in its place. Brain and Cognition, 14, 220-242.
21. Koenig, O., Reiss, L. P., & Kosslyn, S. M. (1990). The development of spatial relations representations: Evidence from studies of cerebral lateralization. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 119-130.
22. Kosslyn, S. M. (1987). Seeing and imagining in the cerebral hemispheres: A computational approach. Psychological Review, 94, 148-175.
23. Kosslyn, S. M., Anderson, A. K., Hillger, L. A., & Hamilton, S. E. (1994). Hemispheric differences in sizes of receptive fields or attentional biases? Neuropsychology, 8, 139-147.
24. Kosslyn, S. M., Chabris, C. F., Marsolek, C. J., & Koenig, O. (1992). Categorical versus coordinate spatial relations: Computational analyses and computer simulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 562-577.
25. Kosslyn, S. M., Chabris, C. G., Marsolek, C. J., Jacobs, R. A., & Koenig, O. (1995). On computational evidence for different types of spatial relations encoding: Reply to Cook et al. (1995). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 423-431.
26. Kosslyn, S. M., Koenig, O., Barrett, A., Cave, C. B., Tang, J., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (1989). Evidence for two types of spatial representations: Hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 723-735.
27. Laeng, B. (1994). Lateralization of categorical and coordinate spatial functions: A study of unilateral stroke patients. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 189-203.
28. Laeng, B., & Peters, M. (1995). Cerebral lateralization for the processing of spatial coordinates and categories in left-and right-handers. Neuropsychologia, 33, 421-439.
29. Levine, S. C., Banich, M. T., and Kim, H. (1987). Variations in arousal asymmetry: Implications for face processing. In D. Ottoson, (Ed.), Duality and unity of the brain, Wenner-Gren International Symposium Series, vol. 47 (pp. 207-222). London: MacMillian.
30. Levine, S. C., Banich, M. T., and Koch-Weser, M. (1984). Variations in patterns of lateral asymmetry among dextrals. Brain and Cognition, 3, 317-334.
31. Levine, S. C., Banich, M. T., and Koch-Weser, M. (1988). Face recognition: A general or specific right hemisphere capacity? Brain and Cognition, 8, 303-325.
32. Levy, J., Heller, W., Banich, M. T., & Burton, L. A. (1983a). Are variations among right-handed individuals in perceptual asymmetries caused by characteristic arousal differences between hemispheres? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 329-359.
33. Levy, J. Heller, W., Banich, M. T., & Burton, L. A. (1983b). Asymmetries of perception in free viewing of chimeric faces. Brain and Cognition, 2, 404-419.
34. Rybash, J. M., & Hoyer, W. J. (1992). Hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate spatial representations: A reappraisal. Memory and Cognition, 20, 271-276.
35. Sergent, J. (1985). Influence of task and input factors on hemispheric involvement in face processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 846-861.
36. Sergent, J. (1991a). Judgments of relative position and distance on representations of spatial relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 91, 762-780.
37. Sergent, J. (1991b). Processing of spatial relations within and between the disconnected cerebral hemispheres. Brain, 114, 1025-1043.
38. Servos, P., & Peters, M. (1990). A clear left hemisphere advantage for visuo-spatially based verbal categorization. Neuropsychologia, 28, 1251-1260.