Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Qualitative hemispheric differences for processing trigrams

H Kim1

  • 1Department of Psychotherapy, Taegu University, South Korea.

Brain and Cognition
|March 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Contraceptive methods and utilization in Rhode Island.

Medicine and health, Rhode Island·1998
Same author

Androgens and masculinization of genitalia in the spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta). 1. Urogenital morphology and placental androgen production during fetal life.

Journal of reproduction and fertility·1998
Same author

Clinical significance of clonality in thyroid nodules.

The British journal of surgery·1998
Same author

Effects of nonlamellar-prone lipids on the ATPase activity of SecA bound to model membranes.

The Journal of biological chemistry·1998
Same author

Deletion mapping of chromosome 4q in hepatocellular carcinoma.

International journal of cancer·1998
Same author

Activation of a matrix processing peptidase from the crystalline cytochrome bc1 complex of bovine heart mitochondria.

The Journal of biological chemistry·1998
Same journal

Gelastic dysarthria: Speech-triggered pathological laughter with evidence for a selective pontine gating mechanism.

Brain and cognition·2026
Same journal

Brain correlates of linguistic-cognitive stimulation in neurotypical and Atypical older adult populations: A systematic review.

Brain and cognition·2026
Same journal

Effects of Dieting on Neural Encoding of Preferences for Edible and Non-Edible Rewards: An ERP Study.

Brain and cognition·2026
Same journal

Structural complexity of brain regions in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease.

Brain and cognition·2026
Same journal

Spatial navigation training enhances performance on large-scale and small-scale spatial tasks through different neural mechanisms.

Brain and cognition·2026
Same journal

Unraveling the link between brain injury and enhanced artistic skills.

Brain and cognition·2026
See all related articles

Hemispheric processing of trigrams differs based on whether they are letters or symbols, not just pronounceability. This suggests distinct neural pathways for letter and symbol recognition in each brain hemisphere.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Neuropsychology
  • Visual Perception

Background:

  • The brain's hemispheres specialize in different cognitive functions.
  • Understanding hemispheric differences in visual processing is key to cognitive science.
  • Previous research indicates lateralization for various stimuli, but trigram processing remains less understood.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate qualitative hemispheric differences in processing letter and symbol trigrams.
  • To examine how pronounceability affects visual field differences in trigram error types.
  • To determine if hemispheric processing modes adapt to stimulus type (letters vs. symbols).

Main Methods:

  • Presenting three types of trigrams: pronounceable letters, unpronounceable letters, and non-letter symbols.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analyzing error patterns in trigram recognition directed to each visual field-hemisphere.
  • Comparing visual field differences in error types across different trigram categories.

    • Main Results:

    • Significant visual field differences in error types were observed for all trigram types.
    • Pronounceable and unpronounceable letter trigrams showed similar visual field differences in error types.
    • Letter and non-letter symbol trigrams exhibited opposite patterns of visual field differences in error types.

    Conclusions:

    • Hemispheric processing of trigrams is influenced by whether the stimuli are letters or symbols.
    • Pronounceability does not appear to be the primary factor driving hemispheric differences in trigram processing.
    • The direction of hemispheric processing changes is opposite for the left and right hemispheres, indicating distinct neural adaptations.