Interhemispheric integration of letter stimuli presented foveally or extra-foveally

Cortex

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 69-83

  Lavidor, Michal ^a   Ellis, Andrew W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HULL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Abstract letter matching; Interhemispheric integration; Nasotemporal overlap; Split fovea; Visual word recognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE FIXATION; FEMALE; HEMISPHERE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; READING; RETINA FOVEA; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL FIELD; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 0037326282     PISSN: 00109452     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70075-3     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Banich MT. The missing link: The role of interhemispheric interaction in attentional processing. Brain and Cognition, 36: 128-157, 1998.
2. Banich MT and Belger A. Interhemispheric interaction: How do the hemispheres divide and conquer a task? Cortex, 26: 77-94, 1990.
3. Banich MT, Passarotti A and Chambers C. The role of the corpus callosum in attentional processing. Poster presented at the Inaugural Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, San Francisco, California, 1994.
4. Belger A and Banich MT. Interhemispheric interaction affected by computational complexity. Neuropsychologia, 30: 923-931, 1992.
5. Boles DB and Eveland DC. Visual and phonetic codes and the process of generation in letter matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9: 657-675, 1983.
6. Bouma H. Visual interference in the parafoveal recognition of initial and final letters of words. Vision Research, 13: 767-782, 1973.
7. Brandt T, Stephan T, Bense S, Yousry TA and Dieterich M. Hemifield visual motion stimulation: An example of interhemispheric crosstalk. NeuroReport, 11: 2803-2809, 2000.
8. Brysbaert M. Interhemispheric transfer and the processing of foveally presented stimuli. Behavioral Brain Research, 64: 151-161, 1994.
9. Brysbaert M, Vitu F and Schroyens W. The right visual field advantage and the optimal viewing position effect: On the relation between foveal and parafoveal word recognition. Neuropsychology, 10: 385-395, 1996.
10. Bunt AH and Minckler DS. Foveal sparing: New anatomical evidence for bilateral representation of the central retina. Archives of Ophthalmology, 95: 1445-1447, 1977.
11. Ellis AW, Young AW and Anderson, C. Modes of word recognition in the left and right cerebral hemispheres. Brain and Language, 35: 254-273, 1988.
12. Estes WK. Interactions of signal and background variables in visual processing. Perception and Psychophysics, 12: 278-86, 1972.
13. Eviatar Z and Zaidel E. Letter matching in the hemispheres: Speed accuracy trade-offs. Neuropsychologia, 30: 699-710, 1992.
14. Fendrich R and Gazzaniga MS. Evidence of foveal splitting in a commissurotomy patient. Neuropsychologia, 27: 273-281, 1989.
15. Fendrich R, Wessinger CM and Gazzaniga MS. Nasotemporal overlap at the retinal vertical meridian - Investigations with a callosotomy patient. Neuropsychologia, 34: 637-646, 1996.
16. Gauthier GM and Volle M. Two dimensional eye movement monitor for clinical laboratory recordings. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 39: 285-291, 1975.
17. Gray LG, Galetta SL, Siegal T and Schatz NJ. The central visual field in homonymous hemianopia - Evidence for unilateral foveal representation. Archives of Neurology, 54: 312-317, 1997.
18. Harvey Jr. LO. Single representation of the visual midline in humans. Neuropsychologia, 16: 601-610, 1978.
19. Hatta T and Tuji S. Interhemispheric integration of number stimuli - Comparison of Arabic with Kanji numerals. Cortex, 29: 359-364, 1993.
20. Haun F. Functional dissociation of the hemispheres using foveal visual input. Neuropsychologia, 16: 725-733, 1978.
21. Lavidor M and Ellis AW. Word length and orthographic neighborhood size effects in the left and right cerebral hemispheres. Brain and Language, 80: 45-62, 2002.
22. Lavidor M, Ellis AW, Shillcock R and Bland T. Evaluating a split processing model of visual word recognition: Effects of word length. Cognitive Brain Research, 12: 265-272, 2001.
23. Lavidor M, Ellis AW, Shillcock R and Hayes A. Evaluating a split processing model of visual word recognition: Effects of orthographic neighborhood size, in preparation.
24. Leventhal AG, Ault SJ and Vitek DJ. The nasotemporal division in primate retina: The neural bases of macular sparing and splitting. Science, 240: 66-67, 1988.
25. Liederman J and Meehan P. When is between hemisphere division of labor advantageous? Neuropsychologia, 24: 863-874, 1986.
26. Liederman J and Sohn YS. Presentations of words to separate hemispheres prevents interword illusory conjunctions. International Journal of Neuroscience, 97: 1-16, 1999.
27. Lines CR and Milner AD. Nasotemporal overlap in the human retina investigated by means of simple reaction time to lateralized light flash. Experimental Brain Research, 50: 166-172, 1983.
28. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analyses of handedness, The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9: 97-113, 1971.
29. Portin K and Hari R. Human parieto-occipital visual cortex: Lack of retinotopy and foveal magnification. Proceedings of the Royal Society, B266: 981-985, 1999.
30. Posner MI and Mitchell RF. Chronometric analysis of classification. Psychological Review, 74: 392-409, 1967.
31. Rubinstein O, Henik A and Dronkers NF. Is the right hemisphere capable of reading and understanding a word? Presented in ESCOP, Edinburgh 4-7 September, 2001.
32. Shillcock R, Ellison TM and Monaghan P. Eye-fixation behavior, lexical storage and visual word recognition in a split processing model. Psychological Review, 107: 824-851, 2000.
33. Stone J. The naso-temporal division of the cat's retina. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 136: 585-600, 1966.
34. Stone J, Leicester J and Sherman SM. The naso-temporal division of the monkey's retina. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 150: 333-348, 1973.
35. Sugishita M, Hamilton CR, Sakuma I and Hemmi I. Hemispheric representation of the central retina of commissurotomized subjects. Neuropsychologia, 32: 399-415, 1994.
36. Trauzettel-Klosinski S and Reinhard J. The vertical field border in hemianopia and its significance for fixation and reading. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 39: 2177-2186, 1998.
37. Wyatt HJ. Nasotemporal overlap and visual field sparing. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 17: 1128-1130, 1978.
38. Young LR and Sheena D. Survey of eye movement recording methods. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 7: 397-429, 1975.
39. Zihl J. Cerebral disturbances of elementary visual functions. In JW Brown (Ed), Neuropsychology of the Visual Perception, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989, pp. 35-58.