Individual Differences in Hemispheric Specialization

402 Pages·1987·23.71 MB·English

by  A. Glass (auth.), A. Glass (eds.)

Individual Differences in
Hemispheric Specialization
NATO ASI Series
Advanced Science Institutes Series
A series presenting the results of activities sponsored by the NATO Science Committee,
which aims at the dissemination of advanced scientific and technological knowledge,
with a view to strengthening links between scientific communities.
The series is 'published by an international board of publishers in conjunction with the
NATO Scientific Affairs Division
A Life Sciences Plenum Publishing Corporation
B Physics New York and London
C Mathematical D. Reidel Publishing Company
and Physical Sciences Dordrecht, Boston, and Lancaster
D Behavioral and Social Sciences Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
E Engineering and The Hague, Boston, Dordrecht, and Lancaster
Materials Sciences
F Computer and Systems Sciences Springer-Verlag
G Ecological Sciences Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, London,
H Cell Biology Paris, and Tokyo
Recent Volumes in this Series
Volume 127-The Organization of Cell Metabolism
edited by G. Rickey Welch and James S. Clegg
Volume 128-Perspectives in Biotechnology
edited by J. M. Cardoso Duarte, L. J. Archer, A. T. Bull,
and G. Holt
Volume 129-Cellular and Humoral Components of Cerebrospinal Fluid in
Multiple Sclerosis
edited by A. Lowenthal and J. Raus
Volume 130-lndividual Differences in Hemispheric Specialization
edited by A. Glass
Volume 131-Fat Production and Consumption:
Technologies and Nutritional Implications
edited by C. Galli and E. Fedeli
Volume 132-Biomechanics of Cell Division
edited by Nuri Akkas
Volume 133-Membrane Receptors, Dynamics, and Energetics
edited by K. W. A. Wirtz
Series A: Life Sciences
Individual Differences in
Hemispheric Specialization
Edited by
A. Glass
The Medical School
University of Birmingham
Birmingham, United Kingdom
Plenum Press
New York and London
Published in cooperation with NATO Scientific Affairs Division
Proceedings of a NATO Advanced Research Workshop on
Individual Differences in Hemispheric Specialization,
held October 15- 19, 1984,
In Maratea, Italy
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Individual Differences in Hemispheric
Specialization (1984: Maratea, Italy)
Individual differences in hemispheric specialization.
(NATO ASI series. Series A, Life sciences; v. 130)
"Proceedings of a NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Individual Dif-
ferences in Hemispheric Specialization, held October 15-19, 1984, in Maratea,
Italy"-T.p. verso.
"Published in cooperation with NATO Scientific Affairs Division."
Includes bibliographies and index.
1. Cerebral dominance-Congresses. 2. Laterality-Congresses. 3. Individ-
uality-Congresses. I. Glass, A. (Alan) II. North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
Scientific Affairs Division. III. Title. IV. Serles. [ DNLM: 1. Dominance, Cerebral
- congresses. 2. Individuality-congresses. WL 335 N279i 1984)
QP385.5.N37 1984 152 87-14055
ISBN 978-1-4684-7901-0 ISBN 978-1-4684-7899-0 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4684-7899-0
@ 1987 Plenum Press, New York
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1s t edition 1987
A Division of Plenum Publishing Corporation
233 Spring Street, New York, N.Y. 10013
All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,
recording, or otherwise, without written permiSSion from the Publisher
PREFACE
This volume originates from a NATO Advanced Research Workshop held in
Maratea. Italy from 8th-15th October 198~. Aims and contributions are
described at greater length in the Introduction and the following
chapters. It is hoped that this volume will provide a critical overview
of hemispheric specialization in relation to individual differences, but
one that is not intended to be comprehensive. Three contributions on
this theme are made by authors who were invited to the Workshop but were
unable to participate in it.
The volume contains a critical appraisal of the differentially
specialized functions of left and right human cerebral hemispheres in
verbal and visuospatial domains respectively (formerly cerebral
dominance). in relation to individual variation due. for example. to
gender and handedness.
Critical cross-comparison of several methods of assessing hemispheric
specialization such as perceptual/behavioral. clinical/neurological.
electrophysiological and "real time" methods of assessment of cerebral
orientation have been made. Individual differences have been considered
in relation to statistical concepts in the assessment of cerebral
lateralization. Some emphasis has been placed on the application of
these methods and concepts to psychopathology.
It is a consensus of the views expressed at the meeting (since
considered and matured) and the different methods of investigation of
cerebral orientation represented. that hemispheric specialization has
re-emerged in the guise not of an absolute structural model of cerebral
dominance. but as a dynamic process modulating the utilization by
hemispherically differential strategies. activation and arousal of a
relative structural specialization. The model must eventually
incorporate a regional intrahemispheric specificity of function.
In addition to the thanks expressed in the Acknowledgements of the
Introduction. I wish to thank Dr. S.R.Butler and Mr D.Symons for
invaluable help in preparing the Index.
A.Glass
v
CONTENTS
Introduction ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1
DEFINING THE ISSUES
Individual Differences in Hemispheric Specialization: Sources
and Measurement............................................. 17
S. J. Segalowit z
Cerebral Laterality: Rube Goldberg at the Bauhaus? ••••••••••••••• 31
John C. Marshall
Implications of the Right Shift Theory of Handedness for
Individual Differences in Hemispheric Specialization......... 39
Marian Annett
1's Cerebral Lateralization a Graded or a Discrete
Characteristics?............................................ 51
John C. Marshall
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN CEREBRAL ANATOMICAL ASYMMETRY AND
CIRCULATORY ASYMMETRY
Individual Differences in the Anatomy of the Corpus Callosum:
Sex, Hand Preference, Schizophrenia and Hemisphere
Specialization............................................... 55
Sandra F. Witelson and Debra L. Kigar
Hemispheric Specialization and Regional Cerebral Blood
Flow. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . . • . • • • • • • • • • 93
Ruben C. Gur and Raquel E. Gur
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL ASYMMETRIES
Individual Differences in the Asymmetry of Alpha
Activation.................................................. 103
Stuart Butler and Alan Glass
Age and Sex Related EEG Configurations in Normal
Subjects ••••••••••••••......•••••••••.••......••••..•••••••• 121
Appendices ••••••••••..•...•••••.•••.••••..•••...•..••••.•.•• 134
P. Flor-Heary, Z.J. Koles and J.R. Reddon
vii
Attentional Factors and Individual Differences Reflected
in the EEG. . • • . . • • . . . . • • • . • • • . • • . . . . . • . • • . • . • . . . . • . . • . • • • • 149
William J. Ray
Longitudinal Auditory Evoked Responses and the Development
of Language .•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 169
Dennis L. Molfese and Victoria J. Molfese
Differences between Anhedonic and Control Subjects
in Brain Hemispheric Specialization as Revealed
by Brain Potentials.......................................... 183
Brigitte Rockstroh and Werner Lutzenberger
Hemispheric Differences in Relation to Smoking.................... 195
Thomas Elbert and Niels Birbaumer
Interval Histogram Analysis of EEG Hemispheric
Activity in Schizophrenia ••••••••••••••.••.••••••••••••••.••• 207
Antonio E. Puente and Lelon J. Peacock
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN BEHAVIOURAL INDICES OF
CEREBRAL ORIENTATION
Age and Sex Differences in Lateral Asymmetries
to Visual and Tactile Stimuli................................ 215
Andrew W. Young, Pamela J. Bion and Kathryn H. McWeeny
Estimating Cerebral Asymmetry and Interhemispheric
Transmission Time from Individual Differences in
Bimanual Response to Lateralized Stimuli •••••••••••••••••••• 233
W.N. Schofield
Self-report of Neuropsychological
Dimensions of self-control................................... 267
Thomas R. O'Connell, Don M. Tucker and Thomas B. Scott
Handwriting Posture and Cerebral
Organization .............................••...•.......... 283
A.M. Weber and J.L.Bradshaw
ASYMMETRIES IN PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
Individual Differences in Dynamic Process Asymmetries in the
Normal and Pathological Brain ••.•••.•••..•••.•.•.••.••••••.• 301
John H. Gruzelier
The Evolving of the Homeostatic Brain: Neuropsychological
Evidence ............ ~ .......•..•...........•.•...•......••.• 331
Michael Miran and Esta Miran
An Argument concerning Schizophrenia: the Left Hemisphere
Drains the Swamp............................................ 349
Rue L. Cromwell
Cerebral Laterality & Schizophrenia:
a Review of the Interhemispheric Disconnection
Hypothesis.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . • . . . . . .. • • . . . . . • . 357
John H. Gruzelier
viii
Individual Differences in Cerebral Lateralization:
Homeostatic Brain Functions of
Schizophrenics............................................... 377
Michael Miran and Esta Miran
Cerebral Laterality and Psychopathic
Disorders ••..•................•............•...•....•....... 383
E.A. SeraEetinides
Contributors 399
Index .....•..•.................•..•...•.........•.....•.•..•..... 401
ix
INTRODUCTION
PREAMBLE
The "Think-Tank"
At the outset of the Workshop (of which this volume is the record), it
was pointed out that the Workshop itself was, in current parlance, a sort of
transient "Think-tank", meaning an establishment or institute temporarily
housing the "thinkers"-the participants. It is interesting that this
expression evolved from the term "think-tank" signifying head or cranium.
This quotation can be taken as an example of the earlier meaning:
"• •• a roscoe said: 'Whr-r-rang!' and a lead pill split the ozone past
my noggin... Neon lights exploded inside my think-tank •• Kane Fewster was on
the floor. There was a bullet hole through his think-tank." (Perelman,'
1951).
The original meaning could also be associated with the Workshop. The
theme might be encapsulated by the question: what models of cerebral
organization inside the "think-tank" can be inferred from measures of
individual differences in hemispheric specialization?
Since the earlier usage evolved, much of relevance to the Workshop has
occurred in the Neurosciences and related fields, but it could be argued
that among these, together with a greatly increased knowledge of cerebral
dominance, the development of the computer and the parallel appreciation
that human cognitive processes may be mimicked by it, may have been among
the most relevant. It could be speculated, perhaps, that the extension of
the meaning of "Think-tank" has in some way, symbolised these developments.
Origin of the Workshop
This volume has its or1g1n in a NATO Advanced Research Workshop on
"Individual Differences in Hemispheric Specialization" held in Maratea,
Italy in October, 1984.
The concept of the Workshop, in turn, sprang from a Round Table
entitled "Hemispheric Specialization and Lateral Asymmetries in the EEG"
given under the auspices of the Second European Winter Conference on Brain
Research, in Chamonix, France, in March 1982. The papers emanating from the
Round Table were later published as a Special Issue of Biological Psychology
(Glass, 1984). The earlier Round Table was divided into two sections, one
dealing with normal lateralization of cognitive function and psycho-
physiological studies and the other concerned with EEG asymmetries as signs
of disturbed laterality in psychiatric disorders. Insofar, as the plan of
the Workshop followed that of the Round Table, although it broadened and
extended the plan which the Round Table adopted, the contents of the
Workshop and Round Table correspond. After an initial section in which the
issues are defined, this volume is divided into three sections, dealing with
the normal brain, and corresponding to the first part of the Round Table.
The first of these three sections deals with individual differences in
hemispheric specialization from the viewpoint of cerebral anatomical and
circulatory asymmetries (although the emphasis is upon hemispheric
specialization related to individual differences in the anatomy of the
corpus callosum). The second section covers hemispheric specialization in
respect of electrophysiological asymmetries largely, but not exclusively, in
relation to asymmetries in the EEG alpha rhythm. The third section covers
behavioural indices of cerebral orientation, in respect to lateral
asymmetries in visual and tactile stimuli and divided field studies. The
second part of this volume which covers psychopathological and psychiatric
aspects of individual differences in hemispheric specialization, corresponds
to the second section of the Round Table.
Theme of Workshop
The original theme of the Workshop was to have encompassed the theme of
the Round Table, to include not only EEG alpha and evoked potential (VER,
CNV, event-related potential studies) measures of lateral asymmetry in
relation to hemispheric specialization but also the cross-comparison of
these with other measures of assessment of hemispheric specialization
including imaging asymmetry techniques such as Positron Emission Tomography
(PET) (Raichle, 1985), blood flow studies such as those of Lassen, Ingvar
and Skinhoj (1978) and Gur and Reivich (1980), and Gur and Gur (this volume)
clinical and neurological evidence of lateralization, together with the
behavioural perceptual techniques of dichotic listening (Kimura, 1967) and
divided field studies (Beaumont, 1982). The aim, with a methodological
emphasis was to cross-compare the results of assessment of laterality by
these techniques in individuals in specific clusters such as gender and
handedness groups and in clusters encountered in psychiatry and
psychopathology.
However, valuable such a methodologically based comparison of .different
techniques might be, it would not have had the conceptual value appropriate
for a NATO workshop, so a new theme was evolved. In the formulation of the
new theme much was owed to the insight of my colleague Dr. S. R. Butler who
drew attention to a concept formulated by Segalowitz. The problem of
individual variation in lateralization had been highlighted by Segalowitz
and Bryden (1983) who emphasized the importance of individual differences in
cerebral lateralization for cognitive function. Evidence from brain
imagery, cerebral blood flow patterns of distribution, divided field studies
and dichotic listening studies together with clinical examination of the
effects of lateralized lesions indicated that the pattern of functional
specialization for language was not consistent across individuals. Some of
the differences were correlated with handedness some with gender, although
not to a sufficient extent to account for them all. Thus the same
"ingredients" (i.e. methods of laterality assessment) could be used as for
the earlier formulation of the Workshop theme, but with a significant shift
of emphasis from the purely methodological to that of a fresh but related
concept, that of individual differences in hemispheric specialization. The
concept of individual differences in language lateralization or functional
specialization was broadened to include together with the conventional
cognitive functions of the "left" hemisphere, the cognitive functions of the
"right" hemisphere (Bogen, 1969), encapsulated in the term "hemispheric
specialization", that is, in individual differences in the cognitive
specialization of both cerebral hemispheres, including its variation in
gender and handedness groups among other factors and in effect comparing
different methods of laterality assessment.
Thus, the proposal for the Workshop was redrafted extensively drawing
2