Michael E. R. Nicholls

The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality.

We examined the effects of modality expectancy on human performance. Participants judged azimuth (left vs. right location) for an unpredictable sequence of auditory, visual, and tactile targets. In some blocks, equal numbers of targets were presented in each modality. In others, the majority (75%) of the targets were presented in just one expected modality. Reaction times (RTs) for targets in an unexpected modality were slower than when that modality was expected or when no expectancy applied. RT costs associated with shifting attention from the tactile modality were greater than those for shifts from either audition or vision. Any RT benefits for the most likely modality were due to priming from an event in the same modality on the previous trial, not to the expectancy per se. These results show that stimulus-driven and expectancy-driven effects must be distinguished in studies of attending to different sensory modalities.

Cross-modal links in exogenous covert spatial orienting between touch, audition, and vision

Three experiments investigated cross-modal links between touch, audition, and vision in the control of covert exogenous orienting. In the first two experiments, participants made speeded discrimination responses (continuous vs. pulsed) for tactile targets presented randomly to the index finger of either hand. Targets were preceded at a variable stimulus onset asynchrony (150,200, or 300 msec) by a spatially uninformative cue that was either auditory (Experiment 1) or visual (Experiment 2) on the same or opposite side as the tactile target. Tactile discriminations were more rapid and accurate when cue and target occurred on the same side, revealing cross-modal covert orienting. In Experiment 3, spatially uninformative tactile cues were presented prior to randomly intermingled auditory and visual targets requiring an elevation discrimination response (up vs. down). Responses were significantly faster for targets in both modalities when presented ipsilateral to the tactile cue. These findings demonstrate that the peripheral presentation of spatially uninforrnative auditory and visual cues produces cross-modal orienting that affects touch, and that tactile cues can also produce cross-modal covert orienting that affects audition and vision.

Free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for the judgement of brightness, numerosity and size

Perceptual asymmetries under free-viewing conditions were investigated in 24 normal dextral adults. Three tasks were administered that required participants to chose between a pair of left/right reversed stimuli on the basis of their brightness, numerosity or size. These stimulus features were represented asymmetrically within the stimuli, so that each stimulus appeared darker, larger or more numerous on the left or right sides. Participants more often selected the stimulus with the relevant feature on the left-hand side for all three tasks. Response times for leftward responses were faster than rightward responses. Split-half reliabilities revealed a high level of consistency within the tasks. However, the correlation between tasks was low. These results suggest that the different tasks, while showing similar levels of perceptual asymmetry, engage distinct sets of lateralised processes.

Can free-viewing perceptual asymmetries be explained by scanning, pre-motor or attentional biases?

Judgments of relative magnitude between the left and right sides of a stimulus are generally weighted toward the features contained on the left side. This leftward perceptual bias could be the result of, (a) left-to-right scanning biases, (b) pre-motor activation of the right hemisphere, or (c) a left hemispatial attentional bias. The relative merits of these explanations of perceptual asymmetry were investigated. In Experiment 1, English and Hebrew readers made luminance judgements for two left/right mirror-reversed luminance gradients (greyscales task). Despite different reading/scanning habits, both groups exhibited a leftward perceptual bias. English and Hebrew readers also performed a line bisection task. Scanning biases were controlled by asking participants to follow a marker as it moved left-to-right or right-to-left and then stop it as it reached the midpoint of the line. Despite controlling scanning, a leftward bias was observed in both groups. In Experiment 2, peripheral spatial cues were presented prior to the greyscales stimuli. English readers showed a reduction in the leftward bias for right-sided cues as compared to left-sided and neutral cues. Right-side cues presumably overcame a pre-existing leftward attentional bias. In both experiments, pre-motor activation was controlled using bimanual responses. Despite this control, a leftward bias was observed throughout the study. The data support the attentional bias account of leftward perceptual biases over the scanning and pre-motor activation accounts. Whether or not unilateral hemispheric activation provides an adequate account of this attentional bias is discussed.

Eye position predicts what number you have in mind

Despite the apparent simplicity of picking numbers at random, it is virtually impossible to produce a sequence of truly random numbers. Although numbers seem to pop-up spontaneously in ones mind, their choice is invariably influenced by previously generated numbers [1]. Here, we demonstrate how the eyes and their position give an insight into the nature of the systematic choices made by the brains ‘random number generator’. By measuring a persons vertical and horizontal eye position, we were able to predict with reliable confidence the size of the next number — before it was spoken. Specifically, a leftward and downward change in eye position announced that the next number would be smaller than the last. Correspondingly, if the eyes changed position to the right and upward, it forecast that the next number would be larger. Apart from supporting the old wisdom that it is often the eyes that betray the mind, the findings highlight the intricate links between supposedly abstract thought processes, the bodys actions and the world around us.

Temporal Processing Asymmetries Between the Cerebral Hemispheres: Evidence and Implications

This paper reviews a large body of research which has investigated the capacities of the cerebral hemispheres to process temporal information. This research includes clinical, non-clinical, and electrophysiological experimentation. On the whole, the research supports the notion of a left hemisphere advantage for temporal resolution. The existence of such an asymmetry demonstrates that cerebral lateralisation is not limited to the higher-order functions such as language. The capacity for the resolution of fine temporal events appears to play an important role in other left hemisphere functions which require a rapid sequential processor. The functions that are facilitated by such a processor include verbal, textual, and fine movement skills. The co-development of these functions with an efficient temporal processor can be accounted for with reference to a number of evolutionary scenarios. Physiological evidence favours a temporal processing mechanism located within the left temporal cortex. The function of this mechanism may be described in terms of intermittency or travelling moment models of temporal processing. The travelling moment model provides the most plausible account of the asymmetry.

The greyscales task: a perceptual measure of attentional bias following unilateral hemispheric damage

The two cerebral hemispheres in humans have been suggested to control contralaterally opposed attentional biases. These biases may be revealed by unilateral hemispheric damage, which often causes contralesional spatial neglect, particularly when the right hemisphere (RH) is affected. Subtle attentional biases have also been observed in normal observers in tasks requiring judgements of horizontal spatial extent, brightness, numerosity and size. Here, we examined attentional biases for judging the darker of two left-right mirror-reversed brightness gradients under conditions of free viewing (the greyscales task). We compared performances of patients with damage to the RH (n=78) and left hemisphere (LH; n=20) with those of normal controls (n=20). Controls showed a small but significant leftward bias, implying a subtle asymmetry favouring the RH. In contrast, RH and LH patients showed extreme rightward and leftward biases, respectively, both of which differed significantly from that of controls. For the patient groups, performance on clinical tests of neglect (cancellation and line bisection) did not predict their greyscales scores. Pathological biases were present in patients without clinical neglect or visual field defects, suggesting that the attentional bias measured by the greyscales task can be dissociated from clinical neglect and visual sensory loss. The greyscales task offers an efficient means of quantifying pathological attentional biases in unilateral lesion patients; it is easy to administer and score, and may be particularly useful for clinical trials of recovery and rehabilitation following stroke.

Laterality of expression in portraiture: putting your best cheek forward

Portraits, both photographic and painted, are often produced with more of one side of the face showing than the other. Typically, the left side of the face is overrepresented, with the head turned slightly to the sitters right. This leftward bias is weaker for painted male portraits and non-existent for portraits of scientists from the Royal Society. What mechanism might account for this bias? Examination of portraits painted by left– and right–handers and of self–portraits suggests that the bias is not determined by a mechanical preference of the artist or by the viewers aesthetics. The leftward bias seems to be determined by the sitters and their desire to display the left side of their face, which is controlled by the emotive, right cerebral hemisphere. When we asked people to portray as much emotion as possible when posing for a family portrait, they tended to present the left side of their face. When asked to pose as scientists and avoid portraying emotion, participants tended to present their right side. The motivation to portray emotion, or conceal it, might explain why portraits of males show a reduced leftward bias, and also why portraits of scientists from the Royal Society show no leftward bias.

Nature's Experiment?: Handedness and Early Childhood Development

In recent years, a large body of research has investigated the various factors affecting child development and the consequent impact of child development on future educational and labor market outcomes. In this article, we contribute to this literature by investigating the effect of handedness on child development. This is an important issue given that around 10% of the world’s population is left-handed and given recent research demonstrating that child development strongly affects adult outcomes. Using a large, nationally representative sample of young children, we find that the probability of a child being left-handed is not significantly related to child health at birth, family composition, parental employment, or household income. We also find robust evidence that left-handed (and mixed-handed) children perform significantly worse in nearly all measures of development than right-handed children, with the relative disadvantage being larger for boys than girls. Importantly, these differentials cannot be explained by different socioeconomic characteristics of the household, parental attitudes, or investments in learning resources.

The Flinders Handedness survey (FLANDERS): A brief measure of skilled hand preference

Knowing whether an individual prefers the left or right hand for skilled activities is important to researchers in experimental psychology and neuroscience. The current study reports on a new measure of skilled hand preference derived from the Provins and Cunliffe (1972) handedness inventory. Undergraduates (n = 3324) indicated their lateral preference for their hands, feet, eyes and ears. A measure of hand performance and familial handedness was also obtained. Factor analysis identified ten items that loaded on skilled hand preference and these were included in the new FLANDERS questionnaire. Cluster analysis of the new questionnaire revealed three distinct groups (left-, mixed- & right-handed). The new test showed a strong association with other measures of lateral preference and hand performance. Scores on the test were also related to the sex of the respondent and the hand preference of their parents. The FLANDERS provides a measure of skilled hand preference that is easy to administer and understand and should be useful for experimenters wanting to screen for hand preference.