Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 Feb 1;71(2):310-36.
doi: 10.1006/brln.1999.2268.

Right and left hemisphere cooperation for drawing predictive and coherence inferences during normal story comprehension

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Right and left hemisphere cooperation for drawing predictive and coherence inferences during normal story comprehension

M J Beeman et al. Brain Lang. .

Abstract

In three experiments, healthy young participants listened to stories promoting inferences and named inference-related test words presented to the right visual field-Left Hemisphere (rvf-LH) or to the left visual field-Right Hemisphere (lvf-RH). Participants showed priming for predictive inferences only for target words presented to the lvf-RH; in contrast, they showed priming for coherence inferences only for target words presented to the rvf-LH. These results, plus the fact that patients with RH brain damage have difficulty drawing coherence inferences and do not show inference-related priming, suggest that information capable of supporting predictive inferences is more likely to be initially activated in the RH than the LH, but following coherence breaks these concepts (now coherence inferences) are completed in the LH. These results are consistent with the theory that the RH engages in relatively coarse semantic coding, which aids full comprehension of discourse.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG. 1
FIG. 1
Participants’ mean priming (Unrelated-Inference-related latencies) for test words presented to the lvf-RH and rvf-LH at five test points: Test point (1) from Experiment 1; (2) and (3) from Experiment 3; (4) from combined data of Experiments 1 and 2; and (5) from Experiment 2. Test points (1) and (2) assessed inference-related activation at points when inferences would be considered predictive, test point (3) assessed activation during the transition from predictive to coherence inferences, and Coherence point (4) and Resolution point (5) assessed inference-related activation at points when inferences were necessary for coherence: “The shuttle sat on the ground in the distance (1), waiting for the signal to be given (2). After a huge roar (3) and a bright flash, the shuttle disappeared into space (4), leaving clouds of smoke in its wake (5), and the audience cheered.”

References

    1. Abdullaev YG, Posner MI. Time course of activating brain areas in generating verbal associations. Psychological Science. 1997;8:56–59.
    1. Allport A. Selection for action: Some behavioral and neurophysiological considerations of attention and action. In: Heuer H, Sanders AF, editors. Perspectives on perception and action. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1987. pp. 395–415.
    1. Baggett P. Memory for explicit and implicit information in picture stories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1975;14:538–548.
    1. Banich MT, Karol DL. The sum of the parts does not equal the whole: Evidence from bihemispheric processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1992;18:562–577. - PubMed
    1. Banich MT, Nicholas CD. Integration of processing between the hemispheres in word recognition. In: Beeman M, Chiarello C, editors. Getting it right: The cognitive neuroscience of right hemisphere language comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1998. pp. 51–78.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources