Abstract
Lateralized words varying in size were postexposurally masked using checkerboards of 2, 4, or 8 cycles per degree. In errors, main effects were found for size, visual field, and spatial frequency. Although the expected right visual field advantage in recognition was found, and the differential effectiveness of the spatial-frequency masks was supported, there was no visual field × frequency interaction. In reaction time, a size × visual field interaction was found, but it was opposite to the effect typically claimed for size as an input variable. It is concluded that views of hemispheric differences that stress process type are likely to have more explanatory value than those stressing spatial frequency.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barnes, S., & Burke, R. S. (1988). What is Apple-Psych? Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 20, 150–154.
Boles, D. B. (1983). Hemispheric interaction in visual field asymmetry. Cortex, 19, 99–114.
Boles, D. B. (1987). Reaction time asymmetry through bilateral vs. unilateral stimulus presentation. Brain & Cognition, 6, 321–333.
Boles, D. B. (1990). What bilateral displays do. Brain & Cognition, 12, 205–228.
Boles, D. B. (1991). Factor analysis and the cerebral hemispheres: Pilot study and parietal functions. Neuropsychologia, 29, 59–91.
Boles, D. B. (1992). Factor analysis and the cerebral hemispheres: Temporal, occipital, and frontal functions. Neuropsychologia, 30, 963–988.
Boles, D. B. (in press). Parameters of the bilateral effect. In F. L. Kitterle (Ed.), Hemispheric transfer: Data and theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Boles, D. B., & Morelli, M. L. (1988). Hemispheric sensitivity to spatial frequencies. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 26, 552–555.
Christman, S. (1989). Perceptual characteristics in visual laterality research. Brain & Cognition, 11, 238–257.
De Valois, R. L., & De Valois, K. K. (1990). Spatial vision. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fendrich, R., & Gazzaniga, M. (1990). Hemispheric processing of spatial frequencies in two commissurotomy patients. Neuropsychologia, 28, 657–663.
Hardyck, C. (1991). Shadow and substance: Attentional irrelevancies and perceptual constraints in the hemispheric processing of language stimuli. In F. L. Kitterle (Ed.), Cerebral laterality: Theory and research (pp. 133–153). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kitterle, F. L., Hellige, J. B., & Christman, S. (1992). Visual hemispheric asymmetries depend on which spatial frequencies are task relevant. Brain & Cognition, 20, 308–314.
Osgood, G. (1988). Generalizing the Apple-Psych system. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 20, 155–157.
Peterzell, D. H., Harvey, L. O., Jr., & Hardyck, C. D. (1989). Spatial frequencies and the cerebral hemispheres: Contrast sensitivity, visible persistence, and letter classification. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 443–455.
Sergent, J. (1982). Theoretical and methodological consequences of variations in exposure duration in visual laterality studies. Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 451–461.
Sergent, J. (1985). Influence of task and input factors on hemispheric involvement in face processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 846–861.
Sergent, J., & Hellige, J. B. (1986). Role of input factors in visual-field asymmetries. Brain & Cognition, 5, 200–222.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Boles, D.B., Rashid, R. Spatial frequency masking of lateralized word recognition. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 31, 563–565 (1993). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03337354
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03337354