Abstract
Previous studies have shown that letter repetitions are detected more rapidly when presented bilaterally (one letter in each visual field) than when presented unilaterally (both in the same field) when subjects have to report matches independently of case or font (e.g., Aa). This pattern of results is referred to as a bilateral field advantage. Here, we present evidence of an opposite pattern of results for detecting repeated items when they are physically identical. In our repetition detection paradigm, subjects indicated whether there was a repetition of any two of four presented items, one in each quadrant of the visual field. Stimulus classes tested included letters, color, size, orientation, and motion paths. The subjects were significantly faster at detecting unilateral versus bilateral repetitions for four out of the five stimuli classes tested, with a trend in the same direction for the fifth. This unilateral field advantage suggests that low-level processes group physically identical items more efficiently within hemifields than across.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abel, P. L., O’Brien, B. J., & Olavarria, J. F. (2000). Organization of callosal linkages in visual area V2 of macaque monkey. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 428, 278–293.
Banich, M. T. (1998a). Integration of information between the cerebral hemispheres. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 32–37.
Banich, M. T. (1998b). The missing link: The role of interhemispheric interaction in attentional processing. Brain & Cognition, 36, 128–157.
Banich, M. T., & Belger, A. (1990). Interhemispheric interaction: How do the hemispheres divide and conquer a task? Cortex, 26, 77–94.
Belger, A., & Banich, M. T. (1992). Interhemispheric interaction affected by computational complexity. Neuropsychologia, 30, 923–929.
Cavanagh, J. P., & Parkman, J. M.. (1972). Search processes for detecting repeated items in a visual display. Perception & Psychophysics, 11, 43–45.
Clarke, S., & Miklossy, J. (1990). Occipital cortex in man: Organization of callosal connections, related myelo- and cytoarchitecture, and putative boundaries of functional visual areas. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 298, 188–214.
DeYoe, E. A., Carman, G. J., Bandettini, P., Glickman, S., Wieser, J., Cox, R., et al. (1996). Mapping striate and extrastriate visual areas in human cerebral cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93, 2382–2386.
Engel, S. A., Glover, G. H., & Wandell, B. A. (1997). Retinotopic organization in the human visual cortex and spatial precision of functional MRI. Cerebral Cortex, 7, 181–192.
Huk, A. C., Dougherty, R. F., & Heeger, D. J. (2002). Retinotopy and functional subdivisions of human areas MT and MST. Journal of Neuroscience, 22, 7195–7205.
Intriligator, J., & Cavanagh, P. (2001). The spatial resolution of visual attention. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 171–216.
Jeeves, M. A. (1969). A comparison of interhemispheric transmission times in acallosals and normals. Psychonomic Science, 16, 245–246.
Jeeves, M. A., & Dixon, N. F. (1970). Hemispheric differences in response rates to visual stimulus. Psychonomic Science, 20, 249–251.
Kennedy, H., & Dehay, C. (1988). Functional implications of the anatomical organization of the callosal projections of visual areas V1 and V2 in the macaque monkey. Behavioural Brain Research, 29, 225–236.
Lavidor, M., &, Ellis, M. W. (2003). Interhemispheric integration of letter stimuli presented foveally or extra-foveally. Cortex, 39, 69–83.
Lavidor, M., & Walsh, V. (2004). The nature of the foveal representation. National Review of Neuroscience, 5, 729–735.
Lines, C. R., Rugg, M. D., & Milner, A. D. (1984). The effect of stimulus intensity on visual evoked potential estimates of interhemispheric transfer time. Experimental Brain Research, 57, 89–98.
Ludwig, T. E., Jeeves, M. A., Norman, W. D., &, DeWitt, R. (1993). The bilateral field advantage on a letter-matching task. Cortex, 29, 691–713.
Pillow, J., & Rubin, N. (2002). Perceptual completion across the ver tical meridian and the role of the early visual cortex. Neuron, 33, 805–813.
Polat, U. (1999). Functional architecture of long-range perceptual interactions. Spatial Vision, 12, 143–162.
Polat, U., & Sagi, D. (1993). Lateral interactions between spatial channels: Suppression and facilitation revealed by lateral masking experiments. Vision Research, 33, 993–999.
Tootell, R. B. H., Mendola, J. D., Hadjikhani, N. K., Liu, A. K., & Dale, A. M., (1998). The representation of the ipsilateral visual field in human cerebral cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95, 818–824.
Ungerleider, L. G., & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D. J. Ingle, M. A. Goodale, & R. J. W. Mansfield (Eds.), Analysis of visual behavior (pp. 549–586). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Weissman, D. H., & Banich, M. T. (2000). The cerebral hemispheres cooperate to perform complex but not simple tasks. Neuropsychology, 14, 41–59.
Weissman, D. H., Banich, M. T., & Puente, E. I. (2000). An unbalanced distribution of inputs across the hemispheres facilitates interhemispheric interaction. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 6, 313–321.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by a Nation Science Foundation graduate fellowship to S.J.B.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Butcher, S.J., Cavanagh, P. A unilateral field advantage for detecting repeated elements. Perception & Psychophysics 70, 714–724 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.4.714
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.4.714