Abstract
Orenstein and Meighan failed to control, or in any way monitor, the subjects’ point of fixation. Ample evidence attests to the importance of insuring the intended fixation in bilateral presentation studies of half-field word recognition differences. When fixation control is insured, right, not left, visual field superiority obtains. Orenstein and Meighan’s experiment offers no evidence against the “lateral dominance” hypothesis regarding visual half-field recognition performance differences.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ellis, H. D., & Shepherd, J. W. Recognition of abstract and concrete words presented in left and right visual fields. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974, 103, 1035–1036.
Gill, K. M., & McKeever, W. F. Word length, exposure time, and word length/exposure time interaction effects on bilateral word recognitions. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1974, 4, 173–175.
Heron, W. Perception as a function of retinal locus and attention. American Journal of Psychology, 1957, 70, 38–48.
Hines, D. Bilateral tachistoscopic recognitions of verbal and nonverbal stimuli. Cortex, 1972, 8, 315–322.
Hines, D. Independent functioning of the two cerebral hemispheres for recognizing bilaterally presented tachistoscopic visual half-field stimuli. Cortex, 1975, 11, 132–143.
Kerschner, J. A., & Gwan-Rong Jeng, A. Dual functional hemispheric asymmetry in visual perception: Effects of ocular dominance and postexposural processes. Neuropsvchologia, 1972, 10, 437–445.
Klein, D., Moscovitch, M., & Vigna, C. Attentional mechanisms and perceptual asymmetries in tachistoscopic recognition of words and faces. Neuropsychologia, 1976, 14, 55–66.
Mackavey, W., Curcio, F., & Rosen, J. Tachistoscopic word recognition performance under conditions of simultaneous bilateral presentation. Neuropsychologia, 1975, 13, 27–33.
Mckeever, W. F. Lateral word recognition effects of unilateral and bilateral presentation, asynchrony of bilateral presentation, and forced order of report. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 23, 410–416.
Mckeever, W. F., & Huling, M. D. Lateral dominance in tachistoscopic word recognition performances obtained with simultaneous bilateral input. Neuropsychologia, 1971, 9, 15–20. (a)
Mckeever, W. F., & Huling, M. D. Bilateral tachistoscopic word recognition as a function of hemisphere stimulated and interhemispheric transfer time. Neuropsychologia, 1971, 9, 281–288. (b)
Mckeever, W. F., Suberi, M., & Van Deventer, A. D. Fixation control in tachistoscopic studies of laterality effects: Comments and data relevant to Hines’ experiment. Cortex, 1972, 8, 473–479.
Olson, M. E. Laterality differences in tachistoscopic word recognition in normal and delayed readers in elementary school. Neuropsychologia, 1973, 11, 343–350.
Orenstein, H. B., & Meighan, W. B. Recognition of bilaterally presented words varying in concreteness and frequency: Lateral dominance or sequential processing? Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1976, 7, 179–180.
Paivo, A. Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1971.
White, M. J. Laterality differences in perception: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 72, 387–405.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mckeever, W.F. On Orenstein’s and Meighan’s finding of left visual field recognition superiority for bilaterally presented words. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 8, 85–86 (1976). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335087
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335087