Subcortical Transfer of Cognitive Information in Subjects With Complete Forebrain Commissurotomy
Open accessAbstract
Three complete commissurotomy subjects were tested for the ability to integrate cognitive information presented for a prolonged duration to opposite visual hemi-fields. A sample stimulus was projected to one hemi-field and a three-choice array to the other, with one choice related to the sample on an abstract or concrete basis. All subjects performed the non-verbal matching task at well above chance level, with scores comparable to those attained when the task was performed completely within one or the other hemisphere. Transfer was equally successful in the two directions, though the pathway originating in the right and terminating in the left hemisphere may be more sensitive to affective components of the stimulus. The information relayed subcortically is neither verbal nor imagic in nature, but appears to correspond to contextual or connotative associates of the stimulus. The results are discussed in terms of a cognitive system common to the two hemispheres and involving associational networks but not lateralized functions such as language and complex visuospatial processes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Although it has been proposed that callosotomy patients have the ability to transfer abstract information sub-cortically, there is substantial data to the contrary.
“Although it has been proposed that callosotomy patients have the ability to transfer abstract information sub-cortically (Cronin-Golomb, 1986;Sergent, 1990), there is substantial data to the contrary (Corballis, 1994;Seymour et al., 1994;Kingstone and Gazzaniga, 1995).”
From Collaboration between the hemispheres of a callosotomy patient: Emerging right hemisphere speech and the left hemisphere interpreter (1996) · cites this paper as Cronin-Golomb, 1986
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 36
- Authors
- Cronin-Golomb, A.
- Venue
- Cortex
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1986-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 499-519
- ISSN
- 0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2063098008
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 1.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- erratum (1987-06-01)
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Cortex (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (5 T32 GM07737, T32GM007737)
- National Center for Research Resources (RR 07003)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Spatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- commissurotomy, interhemispheric transfer, hemispheric integration, visual hemifield, hemispheric lateralization, associational networks
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Association, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Diencephalon, Dominance, Cerebral, Epilepsy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neural Pathways, Reading, Telencephalon, Visual Perception
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review