Experimental disentangling of spatial-compatibility and interhemispheric-relay effects in simple reaction time (Poffenberger paradigm)

The relationship between neural processing efficiency during inter-hemispheric transfer, alcohol consumption, and sleep quality in college students: an ERP study

Objective: To examine relationships between sleep, alcohol consumption, and a physiological and behavioral marker of cognitive function in college students. College students are in a high risk category for high alcohol consumption and poor sleep quality, two unhealthful behaviors which can lead to poor mental health outcomes and compromised academic performance. Participants: Thirty college students from a large midwestern institution. Methods: Participants performed an interhemispheric transfer task while their electroencephalography was recorded for later examination of event-related potentials. They were also administered the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, and the Alcohol Timeline Follow-Back. Results: Results demonstrate that increased alcohol consumption is associated with poor right-to-left interhemispheric transfer performance, and increased frontal P1 ERP amplitudes to neuro-ipsilateral targets requiring an interhemispheric-transfer. Conclusions: These findings assist in furthering explorations into the impacts of unhealthy behaviors in college students and underlying markers of simple cognitive and behavioral function.

Does CUD measure interhemispheric transfer time? The allocation of attention influences the Poffenberger effect

A simple reaction time (SRT) difference between responses to visual stimuli presented ipsilaterally and contralaterally to the responding hand, known as the Poffenberger effect or the crossed-uncrossed difference (CUD), has been commonly interpreted as a measure of interhemispheric transfer time (IHTT). However, the validity of this interpretation, and the measure's reliability have been debated. The present study aimed at obtaining reliable evidence of the influence of spatial attention on the CUD, which would provide an argument against the classical structural interpretation of CUD. To meet the high statistical power requirements, over 100 thousand SRTs in total were collected from 12 participants. The task had three stimulus presentation conditions differing in the degree of stimulus location uncertainty: blocked (no uncertainty), randomized (full uncertainty), and mixed (25% uncertainty). The results showed robust effects of location uncertainty, proving spatial attention's contribution to the CUD. Further, we observed a strong visual-field asymmetry reflecting the right hemisphere specialization in target detection and spatial reorienting. Lastly, despite exceptional reliability of the component SRT measures, the CUD reliability was still too low to justify using this measure as an index of individual differences.

Callosal Sensitivity to Short-Range Stimulus Orientation and Long-Range Stimulus Context Orientation: Tachistoscopic Evidence

To study local-global relationships in interhemispheric interactions, tachistoscopically presented pairs of lines (1.15 degrees) were compared for their relative orientation by 48 neurotypical adults. Orientations of line stimuli (local aspect of the task) were vertical, horizontal, forward slash or backslash, as were those of the interstimulus axes. The latter created a global context that could influence line discrimination. Stimulus pairs were presented within a field (not requiring callosal participation for line orientation comparison) or one on each side of the visual field meridian (requiring callosal participation). The primary purpose of the design was to determine whether local or global violations of stimulus "homotopy" across the meridian would impose costs of interhemispheric integration. The rationale for this expectation is that the fiber projection of the corpus callosum is highly symmetric across the midsagittal plane (i.e., homotopic). The expected "callosal homotopy" effect was significantly upheld as a whole but broke down or became extravagant in certain specific conditions, with specific costs of interhemispheric integration varying from null to a highly significant 20-ms as a function of interactions of interstimulus and stimulus orientations. The corpus callosum seems to be particularly sensitive to local stimulus orientation in interaction with long-range stimulus context orientation.

New variations of intrahemispheric and interhemispheric processing indexed by the dimond paradigm

We report 2 experiments designed to demonstrate that unilateral tachistoscopic stimulation would yield a response time (RT) advantage over bilateral stimulation in a simple experiment, whereas the opposite pattern would occur in a complex version of the same task, as predicted by the intrahemispheric resource limitation model of Banich and colleagues. Experiment 1 was a go/no-go task in which participants had to press a key when two shapes (circles or squares) were identical on the computer screen. A unilateral field advantage was obtained that was accentuated in several task conditions that yielded overall longer RTs, mostly in the bilateral condition. Experiment 2 was similar but required a more complex judgment: The go trials were to 2 stimuli identical on 1 dimension (shape or color) but not both or neither. The RTs were significantly and substantially longer than in Experiment 1 and exhibited a nonsignificant bilateral field advantage, which differed significantly from the unilateral field advantage obtained in Experiment 1. These results support the intrahemispheric resource limitation model of Banich and colleagues. However, several within-experiment effects are in direct opposition to this model and are best explained as limitations of commissural relay of perceptual information.

Interhemispheric integration in visual search

The search task of Luck, Hillyard, Mangun and Gazzaniga (1989) was optimised to test for the presence of a bilateral field advantage in the visual search capabilities of normal subjects. The modified design used geometrically regular arrays of 2, 4 or 8 items restricted to hemifields delineated by the vertical or horizontal meridian; the target, if present, appeared at one of two fixed positions per quadrant at an eccentricity of 11 deg. Group and individual performance data were analysed in terms of the slope of response time against display-size functions (‘RT slope’). Averaging performance across all conditions save display mode (bilateral vs. unilateral) revealed a significant bilateral advantage in the form of a 21% increase in apparent item scanning speed for target detection; in the absence of a target, bilateral displays gave a 5% increase in speed that was not significant. Factor analysis by ANOVA confirmed this main effect of display mode, and also revealed several higher order interactions with display geometry, indicating that the bilateral advantage was masked at certain target positions by a crowding-like effect.

In a numerical model of search efficiency (i.e. RT slope), bilateral advantage was parameterised by an interhemispheric ‘transfer factor’ (T) that governs the strength of the ipsilateral representation of distractors, and modifies the level of intrahemispheric competition with the target. The factor T was found to be higher in superior field than inferior field; this result held for the modelled data of each individual subject, as well as the group, representing a uniform tendency for the bilateral advantage to be more prominent in inferior field. In fact statistical analysis and modelling of search efficiency showed that the geometrical display factors (target polar and quadrantic location, and associated crowding effects) were all remarkably consistent across subjects. Greater variability was inferred within a fixed, decisional component of response time, with individual subjects capable of opposite hemifield biases.

The results are interpretable by a guided search model of spatial attention – a first, parallel stage guiding selection by a second, serial stage – with the proviso that the first stage is relatively insular within each hemisphere. The bilateral advantage in search efficiency can then be attributed to a relative gain in target weight within the initial parallel stage, owing to a reduction in distractor competition mediated specifically by intrahemispheric circuitry. In the absence of a target there is no effective guidance, and hence no basis for a bilateral advantage to enhance search efficiency; the equivalence of scanning speed for the two display modes (bilateral and unilateral) implies a unitary second-stage process mediated via efficient interhemispheric integration.

The role of task history in simple reaction time to lateralized light flashes

In lateralized simple reaction time (SRT) tasks with unimanual responses, reaction times (RTs) are faster with ipsilateral (uncrossed) than with contralateral (crossed) response hand-target hemifield combinations. The difference between crossed and uncrossed responses (CUD) is typically interpreted to reflect callosal transfer time. Indeed, split brain patients have much longer CUDs than control subjects. However, while many studies have supported the hypothesis that the CUD reflects callosal transmission time, a few studies have suggested that the CUD may be affected by non-anatomical factors. We investigated the nature of these inconsistent results in two experiments. In the first, we asked half of our subjects to cross their arms while performing the task. The CUD was not affected by arms crossing, supporting the anatomical model of the CUD. In the second experiment, however, all subjects were asked to cross their arms in half of the trials. In this experiment, arms crossing significantly affected the CUD, thus showing that spatial attention modulates the CUD. These latter results cannot be readily explained by a simple callosal relay interpretation of the CUD. Rather, the CUD seems to reflect a mix of anatomical and non-anatomical factors produced by task history. Thus, the seemingly inconsistent results of previous studies can be reconciled by taking into account differences in task history across studies.