Elsevier

Brain and Language

Volume 26, Issue 1, September 1985, Pages 146-172
Brain and Language

Hemisphere dynamics in lexical access: Automatic and controlled priming

https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-934X(85)90034-3Get rights and content

Abstract

Hemisphere differences in lexical processing may be due to asymmetry in the organization of lexical information, in procedures used to access the lexicon, or both. Six lateralized lexical decision experiments employed various types of priming to distinguish among these possibilities. In three controlled (high probability) priming experiments, prime words could be used as lexical access clues. Larger priming was obtained for orthographically similar stimuli (BEAK-BEAR) when presented to the left visual field (LVF). Controlled priming based on phonological relatedness (JUICE-MOOSE) was equally effective in either visual field (VF). Semantic similarity (INCH-YARD) produced larger priming for right visual field (RVF) stimuli. These results suggest that the hemispheres may utilize different information to achieve lexical access. Spread of activation through the lexicon was measured in complementary automatic (low probability) priming experiments. Priming was restricted to LVF stimuli for orthographically similar words, while priming for phonologically related stimuli was only obtained in the RVF. Automatic semantic priming was present bilaterally, but was larger in the LVF. These results imply hemisphere differences in lexical organization, with orthographic and semantic relationships available to the right hemisphere, and phonological and semantic relations available to the left hemisphere. Support was obtained for hemisphere asymmetries in both lexical organization and directed lexical processing.

References (50)

  • E. Zaidel

    Reading by the disconnected right hemisphere: An aphasiological perspective

  • E. Zaidel et al.

    Phonological encoding and ideographic reading by the disconnected right hemisphere: Two case studies

    Brain and Language

    (1981)
  • E. Zurif et al.

    Semantic feature representations for normal and aphasic language

    Brain and Language

    (1974)
  • J.R. Anderson

    Language, memory, and thought

    (1976)
  • W.F. Battig et al.

    Category norms of verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms

    Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs

    (1969)
  • J.L. Bradshaw

    Right-hemisphere language: A review of interrelated issues

    Brain and Language

    (1980)
  • A. Caramazza et al.

    Semantic and syntactic processes in aphasia: A review of the literature

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1978)
  • G. Cohen

    Hemispheric differences in a letter classification task

    Perception & Psychophysics

    (1972)
  • G. Cohen et al.

    Individual differences in reading strategies in relation to cerebral asymmetry

  • A.M. Collins et al.

    A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing

    Psychological Review

    (1975)
  • M. Coltheart

    Deep dyslexia: A right-hemisphere hypothesis

  • C. Conrad

    Some factors involved in the recognition of words

  • I. Fischler

    Associative facilitation without expectancy in a lexical decision task

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

    (1977)
  • I. Fischler et al.

    Latency of associative activation in memory

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

    (1978)
  • Cited by (158)

    • List constituency and orthographic and phonological processing: A shift to high familiarity words from low familiarity words

      2014, Neuropsychologia
      Citation Excerpt :

      The commonalities facilitate recognition by global shape if the target is a familiar entry in the mental lexicon. Traditional lateralized presentation has shown facilitation in both hemispheres; however, facilitation is greater to targets in the LVF than RVF in lexical decision to words (Chiarello, 1985; Lavidor and Ellis, 2003) and in repetition priming of a word-stem completion task (Marsolek et al., 1992, 1994), suggesting that the RH prefers orthographic processing. The new procedure also found facilitation in both hemispheres; however, performance to unprimed word strings was faster and more accurate to targets presented with a distractor to the RVF (RH processing of the target) than the LVF (LH processing of the target) (Rutherford and Mathesius, 2012), suggesting the RH has better baseline processing of orthography.

    • Neuropsychology of lexical ambiguity resolution: The contribution of divided visual field studies

      2013, Lexical Ambiguity Resolution: Perspective from Psycholinguistics, Neuropsychology and Artificial Intelligence
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This research is based on the author's doctoral dissertation submitted to the University of California, Berkeley. This study was supported by a National Institute of Mental Health predoctoral fellowship (NRSA 1 F31 MH08705-01), the University of California Chancellor's Fund, and the Association for Women in Science.

    View full text