Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tachistoscopic Viewing and Dichotic Listening

  • Protocol
  • First Online:
Lateralized Brain Functions

Part of the book series: Neuromethods ((NM,volume 122))

Abstract

While advanced neuroimaging methods such as fMRI provide a reliable way to determine individual lateralization of function, these methods are costly and not readily available to every scientist interested in investigating functional hemispheric asymmetries in humans. Behavioral methods of testing humans provide cheaper and easily administered alternatives to fMRI scans and are still widely used in lateralization research today. In the following chapter, two key methods will be reviewed: divided visual field paradigms based on tachistoscopic viewing and the dichotic listening task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Protocol
USD 49.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Baxendale S (2009) The Wada test. Curr Opin Neurol 22:185–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Davidson RJ (1988) EEG measures of cerebral asymmetry: conceptual and methodological issues. Int J Neurosci 39:71–89

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rossion B, Dricot L, Devolder A, Bodart JM, Crommelinck M, De Gelder B, Zoontjes R (2000) Hemispheric asymmetries for whole-based and part-based face processing in the human fusiform gyrus. J Cogn Neurosci 12:793–802

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Westerhausen R, Kompus K, Hugdahl K (2014) Mapping hemispheric symmetries, relative asymmetries, and absolute asymmetries underlying the auditory laterality effect. Neuroimage 84:962–970

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Volkmann AW (1859) Das Tachistoskop. Berichte über die Verhandlungen der Königlich Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Mathematisch-Physische Classe 11:90–98

    Google Scholar 

  6. Poffenberger A (1912) Reaction time to retinal stimulation with special reference to the time lost in conduction through nervous centers. Arch Psychol 23:1–73

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gazzaniga MS, Bogen JE, Sperry RW (1962) Some functional effects of sectioning the cerebral commissures in man. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 48:1765–1769

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Hausmann M, Güntürkün O (2000) Steroid fluctuations modify functional cerebral asymmetries: the hypothesis of progesterone-mediated interhemispheric decoupling. Neuropsychologia 38:1362–1374

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gazzaniga MS (2005) Forty-five years of split-brain research and still going strong. Nat Rev Neurosci 6:653–659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bourne VJ (2006) The divided visual field paradigm: methodological considerations. Laterality 11:373–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Van der Haegen L, Cai Q, Seurinck R, Brysbaert M (2011) Further fMRI validation of the visual half field technique as an indicator of language laterality: a large-group analysis. Neuropsychologia 49:2879–2888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Godnig EC (2003) The tachistoscope: its history and uses. J Behav Optom 14:39–42

    Google Scholar 

  13. Correia S (2011) Tachistoscopic presentation. In: Kreutzer J, DeLuca J, Caplan B (eds) Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 2461–2463

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Benschop R (1998) What is a tachistoscope? Historical explorations of an instrument. Sci Context 11:23–50

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bryden PJ, Brown SG, Roy EA (2011) Can an observational method of assessing hand preference be used to predict language lateralisation? Laterality 16:707–721

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Godard O, Fiori N (2012) Sex and hemispheric differences in facial invariants extraction. Laterality 17:202–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kavé G, Gavrieli R, Mashal N (2014) Stronger left-hemisphere lateralization in older versus younger adults while processing conventional metaphors. Laterality 19:705–717

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lam M, Collinson SL, Sim K, Mackay CE, James AC, Crow TJ (2012) Asymmetry of lexico-semantic processing in schizophrenia changes with disease progression. Schizophr Res 134:125–130

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Elze T, Tanner TG (2012) Temporal properties of liquid crystal displays: implications for vision science experiments. PLoS One 7:e44048

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Ghodrati M, Morris AP, Price NS (2015) The (un)suitability of modern liquid crystal displays (LCDs) for vision research. Front Psychol 6:303

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Plant RR, Hammond N, Whitehouse T (2003) How choice of mouse may affect response timing in psychological studies. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 35:276–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ocklenburg S, Arning L, Gerding WM, Epplen JT, Güntürkün O, Beste C (2013) FOXP2 variation modulates functional hemispheric asymmetries for speech perception. Brain Lang 126:279–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Selpien H, Siebert C, Genc E, Beste C, Faustmann PM, Güntürkün O, Ocklenburg S (2015) Left dominance for language perception starts in the extrastriate cortex: an ERP and sLORETA study. Behav Brain Res 291:325–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Walsh A, McDowall J, Grimshaw GM (2010) Hemispheric specialization for emotional word processing is a function of SSRI responsiveness. Brain Cogn 74:332–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jordan TR, Patching GR, Milner AD (1998) Central fixations are inadequately controlled by instructions alone: implications for studying cerebral asymmetry. Q J Exp Psychol A 51:371–391

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bourne VJ, Hole GJ (2006) Lateralized repetition priming for familiar faces: evidence for asymmetric interhemispheric cooperation. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove) 59:1117–1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Marzi CA, Berlucchi G (1977) Right visual field superiority for accuracy of recognition of famous faces in normals. Neuropsychologia 15:751–756

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Meyer AM, Federmeier KD (2008) The divided visual world paradigm: eye tracking reveals hemispheric asymmetries in lexical ambiguity resolution. Brain Res 1222:166–183

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Lange JJ, Wijers AA, Mulder LJ, Mulder G (1999) ERP effects of spatial attention and display search with unilateral and bilateral stimulus displays. Biol Psychol 50:203–233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Purves D, Augustine GJ, Fitzpatrick D (2001) Types of eye movements and their functions. In: Purves D, Augustine GJ, Fitzpatrick D, Katz LC, LaMantia AS, McNamara JO, & Williams SM (eds.) Neuroscience, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lindell AK, Nicholls ME (2003) Cortical representation of the fovea: implications for visual half-field research. Cortex 39:111–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Saban-Bezalel R, Mashal N (2015) Hemispheric processing of idioms and irony in adults with and without pervasive developmental disorder. J Autism Dev Disord 45(11):3496–3508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Falkenberg HK, Rubin GS, Bex PJ (2007) Acuity, crowding, reading and fixation stability. Vision Res 47:126–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Prete G, Laeng B, Fabri M, Foschi N, Tommasi L (2015) Right hemisphere or valence hypothesis, or both? The processing of hybrid faces in the intact and callosotomized brain. Neuropsychologia 68:94–106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ellis AW (2004) Length, formats, neighbours, hemispheres, and the processing of words presented laterally or at fixation. Brain Lang 88:355–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Gold R, Faust M, Ben-Artzi E (2012) Metaphors and verbal creativity: the role of the right hemisphere. Laterality 17:602–614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Tressoldi PE (1987) Visual hemispace differences reflect hemisphere asymmetries. Neuropsychologia 25:625–636

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Verosky SC, Turk-Browne NB (2012) Representations of facial identity in the left hemisphere require right hemisphere processing. J Cogn Neurosci 24:1006–1017

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Beaton AA, Fouquet NC, Maycock NC, Platt E, Payne LS, Derrett A (2012) Processing emotion from the eyes: a divided visual field and ERP study. Laterality 17:486–514

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Jończyk R (2015) Hemispheric asymmetry of emotion words in a non-native mind: a divided visual field study. Laterality 20:326–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Holtgraves T, Felton A (2011) Hemispheric asymmetry in the processing of negative and positive words: a divided field study. Cogn Emot 25:691–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Mashal N, Itkes O (2014) The effects of emotional valence on hemispheric processing of metaphoric word pairs. Laterality 19:511–521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Jones B, Anuza T (1982) Effects of sex, handedness, stimulus and visual field on “mental rotation”. Cortex 18:501–514

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Michałowski B, Króliczak G (2015) Sinistrals are rarely “right”: evidence from tool-affordance processing in visual half-field paradigms. Front Hum Neurosci 9:166

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Leuthold H (2011) The Simon effect in cognitive electrophysiology: a short review. Acta Psychol (Amst) 136:203–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Ocklenburg S, Güntürkün O, Beste C (2011) Lateralized neural mechanisms underlying the modulation of response inhibition processes. Neuroimage 55:1771–1778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Leehey S, Carey S, Diamond R, Cahn A (1978) Upright and inverted faces: the right hemisphere knows the difference. Cortex 14:411–419

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Brysbaert M, d'Ydewalle G (1990) Tachistoscopic presentation of verbal stimuli for assessing cerebral dominance: reliability data and some practical recommendations. Neuropsychologia 28:443–455

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Voyer D (1998) On the reliability and validity of noninvasive laterality measures. Brain Cogn 36:209–236

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Hunter ZR, Brysbaert M (2008) Visual half-field experiments are a good measure of cerebral language dominance if used properly: evidence from fMRI. Neuropsychologia 46:316–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Bruyer R, Brysbaert M (2011) Combining speed and accuracy in cognitive psychology: is the Inverse Efficiency Score (IES) a better dependent variable than the mean Reaction Time (RT) and the Percentage of Errors (PE)? Psychol Belg 51:5–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ocklenburg S, Güntürkün O, Beste C (2012) Hemispheric asymmetries and cognitive flexibility: an ERP and sLORETA study. Brain Cogn 78:148–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ocklenburg S, Ness V, Güntürkün O, Suchan B, Beste C (2013) Response inhibition is modulated by functional cerebral asymmetries for facial expression perception. Front Psychol 4:879

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Smith ER, Chenery HJ, Angwin AJ, Copland DA (2009) Hemispheric contributions to semantic activation: a divided visual field and event-related potential investigation of time-course. Brain Res 1284:125–144

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Küper K, Zimmer HD (2015) ERP evidence for hemispheric asymmetries in exemplar-specific explicit memory access. Brain Res 1625:73–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Anders S, Lotze M, Wildgruber D, Erb M, Grodd W, Birbaumer N (2005) Processing of a simple aversive conditioned stimulus in a divided visual field paradigm: an fMRI study. Exp Brain Res 162:213–219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Sung YW, Someya Y, Eriko Y, Choi SH, Cho ZH, Ogawa S (2011) Involvement of low-level visual areas in hemispheric superiority for face processing. Brain Res 1390:118–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Motz BA, James KH, Busey TA (2012) The Lateralizer: a tool for students to explore the divided brain. Adv Physiol Educ 36:220–225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Hopkins WD (1997) Hemispheric specialization for local and global processing of hierarchical visual stimuli in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Neuropsychologia 35:343–348

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Van Kleeck MH (1989) Hemispheric differences in global versus local processing of hierarchical visual stimuli by normal subjects: new data and a meta-analysis of previous studies. Neuropsychologia 27:1165–1178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Dépy D, Fagot J, Vauclair J (1998) Comparative assessment of distance processing and hemispheric specialization in humans and baboons (Papio papio). Brain Cogn 38:165–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Hugdahl K (2011) Fifty years of dichotic listening research—still going and going and …. Brain Cogn 76:211–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Kimura D (1961) Some effects of temporal-lobe damage on auditory perception. Can J Psychol 15:156–165

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Kimura D (1961) Cerebral dominance and the perception of verbal stimuli. Can J Psychol 15:166–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Shankweiler D, Studdert-Kennedy M (1967) Identification of consonants and vowels presented to left and right ears. Q J Exp Psychol 19:59–63

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Studdert-Kennedy M, Shankweiler D (1970) Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am 48:579–694

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Bryden MP, Munhall K, Allard F (1983) Attentional biases and the right-ear effect in dichotic listening. Brain Lang 18:236–248

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Hugdahl K, Andersson L (1986) The “forced-attention paradigm” in dichotic listening to CV-syllables: a comparison between adults and children. Cortex 22:417–432

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Hugdahl K, Carlsson G, Uvebrant P, Lundervold AJ (1997) Dichotic-listening performance and intracarotid injections of amobarbital in children and adolescents. Preoperative and postoperative comparisons. Arch Neurol 54:1494–1500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Sommer I, Ramsey N, Kahn R, Aleman A, Bouma A (2001) Handedness, language lateralisation and anatomical asymmetry in schizophrenia: meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 178:344–351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Westerhausen R, Hugdahl K (2008) The corpus callosum in dichotic listening studies of hemispheric asymmetry: a review of clinical and experimental evidence. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 32:1044–1054

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Kompus K, Specht K, Ersland L, Juvodden HT, van Wageningen H, Hugdahl K, Westerhausen R (2012) A forced-attention dichotic listening fMRI study on 113 subjects. Brain Lang 121:240–247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Bless JJ, Westerhausen R, Arciuli J, Kompus K, Gudmundsen M, Hugdahl K (2013) “Right on all Occasions?”—On the feasibility of laterality research using a smartphone dichotic listening application. Front Psychol 4:42

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Bless JJ, Westerhausen R, von Koss Torkildsen J, Gudmundsen M, Kompus K, Hugdahl K (2015) Laterality across languages: results from a global dichotic listening study using a smartphone application. Laterality 20:434–452

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Hirnstein M, Westerhausen R, Korsnes MS, Hugdahl K (2013) Sex differences in language asymmetry are age-dependent and small: a large-scale, consonant-vowel dichotic listening study with behavioral and fMRI data. Cortex 49:1910–1921

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Westerhausen R, Bless J, Kompus K (2015) Behavioral laterality and aging: the free-recall dichotic-listening right-ear advantage increases with age. Dev Neuropsychol 40:313–327

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Broadbent DE (1954) The role of auditory localization in attention and memory span. J Exp Psychol 47:191–196

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Kimura D (2011) From ear to brain. Brain Cogn 76:214–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Tervaniemi M, Hugdahl K (2003) Lateralization of auditory-cortex functions. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 43:231–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Hugdahl K (ed) (1988) Handbook of dichotic listening: theory, methods, and research. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  81. Bradshaw JL, Burden V, Nettleton NC (1986) Dichotic and dichhaptic techniques. Neuropsychologia 24:79–90

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Bryden MP (1967) An evaluation of some models of laterality. Effects in dichotic listening. Acta Otolaryngol 63:595–604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Bruder GE (1991) Dichotic listening: new developments and applications in clinical research. Ann N Y Acad Sci 620:217–232

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Hiscock M, Kinsbourne M (2011) Attention and the right-ear advantage: what is the connection? Brain Cogn 76:263–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Musiek FE, Weihing J (2011) Perspectives on dichotic listening and the corpus callosum. Brain Cogn 76:225–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Bouma A, Gootjes L (2011) Effects of attention on dichotic listening in elderly and patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type. Brain Cogn 76:286–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Gadea M, Espert R, Salvador A, Martí-Bonmatí L (2011) The sad, the angry, and the asymmetrical brain: dichotic listening studies of negative affect and depression. Brain Cogn 76:294–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Obrzut JE, Mahoney EB (2011) Use of the dichotic listening technique with learning disabilities. Brain Cogn 76:323–331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Niccum N, Speaks C (1991) Interpretation of outcome on dichotic listening tests following stroke. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 13:614–628

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Ocklenburg S, Westerhausen R, Hirnstein M, Hugdahl K (2013) Auditory hallucinations and reduced language lateralization in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of dichotic listening studies. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 19:410–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Hahn C, Neuhaus AH, Pogun S, Dettling M, Kotz SA, Hahn E, Brüne M, Güntürkün O (2011) Smoking reduces language lateralization: a dichotic listening study with control participants and schizophrenia patients. Brain Cogn 76:300–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Hahn C, Pogun S, Güntürkün O (2010) Smoking modulates language lateralization in a sex-specific way. Neuropsychologia 48:3993–4002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Demarest L, Demarest J (1981) The interaction of handedness, familial sinistrality and sex on the performance of a dichotic listening task. Int J Neurosci 14:7–13

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Ocklenburg S, Arning L, Hahn C, Gerding WM, Epplen JT, Güntürkün O, Beste C (2011) Variation in the NMDA receptor 2B subunit gene GRIN2B is associated with differential language lateralization. Behav Brain Res 225:284–289

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Hugdahl K, Løberg EM, Falkenberg LE, Johnsen E, Kompus K, Kroken RA, Nygård M, Westerhausen R, Alptekin K, Ozgören M (2012) Auditory verbal hallucinations in schizophrenia as aberrant lateralized speech perception: evidence from dichotic listening. Schizophr Res 140:59–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Van der Haegen L, Westerhausen R, Hugdahl K, Brysbaert M (2013) Speech dominance is a better predictor of functional brain asymmetry than handedness: a combined fMRI word generation and behavioral dichotic listening study. Neuropsychologia 51:91–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Arciuli J (2011) Manipulation of voice onset time during dichotic listening. Brain Cogn 76:233–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Castro A, Pearson R (2011) Lateralisation of language and emotion in schizotypal personality: evidence from dichotic listening. Pers Individ Dif 51:726–731

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Prete G, Marzoli D, Brancucci A, Fabri M, Foschi N, Tommasi L (2014) The processing of chimeric and dichotic emotional stimuli by connected and disconnected cerebral hemispheres. Behav Brain Res 271:354–364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Wexler BE, Halwes T (1983) Increasing the power of dichotic methods: the fused rhymed words test. Neuropsychologia 21:59–66

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Crosson B, Warren RL (1981) Dichotic ear preference for C-V-C words in Wernicke’s and Broca’s aphasias. Cortex 17:249–258

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. di Stefano M, Salvadori C, Fiaschi E, Viti M (1998) Speech lateralisation in callosal agenesis assessed by the dichotic fused words test. Laterality 3:131–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Hoch L, Tillmann B (2010) Laterality effects for musical structure processing: a dichotic listening study. Neuropsychology 24:661–666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Nelson MD, Wilson RH, Kornhass S (2003) Performance of musicians and nonmusicians on dichotic chords, dichotic CVs, and dichotic digits. J Am Acad Audiol 14:536–544

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Craig JD (1980) A dichotic rhythm task: advantage for the left-handed. Cortex 16:613–620

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Spreen O, Spellacy FJ, Reid JR (1970) The effect of interstimulus interval and intensity on ear asymmetry for nonverbal stimuli in dichotic listening. Neuropsychologia 8:245–250

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Ocklenburg S, Ball A, Wolf CC, Genç E, Güntürkün O (2015) Functional cerebral lateralization and interhemispheric interaction in patients with callosal agenesis. Neuropsychology 29:806–815

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Løberg EM, Jørgensen HA, Hugdahl K (2004) Dichotic listening in schizophrenic patients: effects of previous vs. ongoing auditory hallucinations. Psychiatry Res 128:167–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Bozikas VP, Kosmidis MH, Giannakou M, Kechayas P, Tsotsi S, Kiosseoglou G, Fokas K, Garyfallos G (2014) Controlled shifting of attention in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder through a dichotic listening paradigm. Compr Psychiatry 55:1212–1219

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Hirnstein M, Hugdahl K, Hausmann M (2014) How brain asymmetry relates to performance—a large-scale dichotic listening study. Front Psychol 4:997

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Foundas AL, Corey DM, Hurley MM, Heilman KM (2004) Verbal dichotic listening in developmental stuttering: subgroups with atypical auditory processing. Cogn Behav Neurol 17:224–232

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Conn R, Posey TB (2000) Dichotic listening in college students who report auditory hallucinations. J Abnorm Psychol 109:546–549

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Hugdahl K, Andersson L, Asbjørnsen A, Dalen K (1990) Dichotic listening, forced attention, and brain asymmetry in righthanded and lefthanded children. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 12:539–548

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Jäncke L, Buchanan TW, Lutz K, Shah NJ (2001) Focused and nonfocused attention in verbal and emotional dichotic listening: an FMRI study. Brain Lang 78:349–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Kershner JR (2016) Forced-attention dichotic listening with university students with dyslexia: search for a core deficit. J Learn Disabil 49(3):282–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Obrzut JE, Mondor TA, Uecker A (1993) The influence of attention on the dichotic REA with normal and learning disabled children. Neuropsychologia 31:1411–1416

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Russell NL, Voyer D (2004) Reliability of laterality effects in a dichotic listening task with words and syllables. Brain Cogn 54:266–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Speaks C, Niccum N, Carney E (1982) Statistical properties of responses to dichotic listening with CV nonsense syllables. J Acoust Soc Am 72:1185–1194

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Bayazit O, Oniz A, Hahn C, Güntürkün O, Ozgören M (2009) Dichotic listening revisited: trial-by-trial ERP analyses reveal intra- and interhemispheric differences. Neuropsychologia 47:536–545

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Eichele T, Nordby H, Rimol LM, Hugdahl K (2005) Asymmetry of evoked potential latency to speech sounds predicts the ear advantage in dichotic listening. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 24:405–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Passow S, Westerhausen R, Hugdahl K, Wartenburger I, Heekeren HR, Lindenberger U, Li SC (2014) Electrophysiological correlates of adult age differences in attentional control of auditory processing. Cereb Cortex 24:249–260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Yurgil KA, Golob EJ (2010) Neural activity before and after conscious perception in dichotic listening. Neuropsychologia 48:2952–2958

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Alho K, Salonen J, Rinne T, Medvedev SV, Hugdahl K, Hämäläinen H (2012) Attention-related modulation of auditory-cortex responses to speech sounds during dichotic listening. Brain Res 1442:47–54

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Brancucci A, Penna SD, Babiloni C, Vecchio F, Capotosto P, Rossi D, Franciotti R, Torquati K, Pizzella V, Rossini PM, Romani GL (2008) Neuromagnetic functional coupling during dichotic listening of speech sounds. Hum Brain Mapp 29:253–264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Beaman CP, Bridges AM, Scott SK (2007) From dichotic listening to the irrelevant sound effect: a behavioural and neuroimaging analysis of the processing of unattended speech. Cortex 43:124–134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Hugdahl K, Law I, Kyllingsbaek S, Brønnick K, Gade A, Paulson OB (2000) Effects of attention on dichotic listening: an 15O-PET study. Hum Brain Mapp 10:87–97

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Lipschutz B, Kolinsky R, Damhaut P, Wikler D, Goldman S (2002) Attention-dependent changes of activation and connectivity in dichotic listening. Neuroimage 17:643–656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Dos Santos Sequeira S, Specht K, Moosmann M, Westerhausen R, Hugdahl K (2010) The effects of background noise on dichotic listening to consonant-vowel syllables: an fMRI study. Laterality 15:577–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Van den Noort M, Specht K, Rimol LM, Ersland L, Hugdahl K (2008) A new verbal reports fMRI dichotic listening paradigm for studies of hemispheric asymmetry. Neuroimage 40:902–911

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Westerhausen R, Passow S, Kompus K (2013) Reactive cognitive-control processes in free-report consonant-vowel dichotic listening. Brain Cogn 83:288–296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Güntürkün O, Güntürkün M, Hahn C (2015) Whistled Turkish alters language asymmetries. Curr Biol 25:R706–R708

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  132. Hugdahl K, Westerhausen R, Alho K, Medvedev S, Laine M, Hämäläinen H (2009) Attention and cognitive control: unfolding the dichotic listening story. Scand J Psychol 50:11–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Don M, Starr A (1972) Lateralization performance of squirrel monkey (Samiri sciureus) to binaural click signals. J Neurophysiol 35:493–500

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Tollin DJ, Populin LC, Moore JM, Ruhland JL, Yin TC (2005) Sound-localization performance in the cat: the effect of restraining the head. J Neurophysiol 93:1223–1234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Welch TE, Dent ML (2011) Lateralization of acoustic signals by dichotically listening budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). J Acoust Soc Am 130:2293–2301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Ebert CS Jr, Blanks DA, Patel MR, Coffey CS, Marshall AF, Fitzpatrick DC (2008) Behavioral sensitivity to interaural time differences in the rabbit. Hear Res 235:134–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Moiseff A (1989) Bi-coordinate sound localization by the barn owl. J Comp Physiol A 164:637–644

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Fitch RH, Brown CP, O'Connor K, Tallal P (1993) Functional lateralization for auditory temporal processing in male and female rats. Behav Neurosci 107:844–850

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Fitch RH, Brown CP, Tallal P (1993) Left hemisphere specialization for auditory temporal processing in rats. Ann N Y Acad Sci 682:346–347

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Böye M, Güntürkün O, Vauclair J (2005) Right ear advantage for conspecific calls in adults and subadults, but not infants, California sea lions (Zalophus californianus): hemispheric specialization for communication? Eur J Neurosci 21:1727–1732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Ehret G (1987) Left hemisphere advantage in the mouse brain for recognizing ultrasonic communication calls. Nature 325:249–251

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Biopsychology, Ruhr-University Bochum, Universitätsstr. 150, 44780, Bochum, Germany

    Sebastian Ocklenburg

Authors
  1. Sebastian Ocklenburg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Ocklenburg .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Science and Technology, University of New England, Armidale, Australia

    Lesley J. Rogers

  2. Centre for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Trento, Trento, Italy

    Giorgio Vallortigara

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media LLC

About this protocol

Cite this protocol

Ocklenburg, S. (2017). Tachistoscopic Viewing and Dichotic Listening. In: Rogers, L., Vallortigara, G. (eds) Lateralized Brain Functions. Neuromethods, vol 122. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6725-4_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6725-4_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-6723-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-6725-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Protocols

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation