MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046688386 · doi:10.2466/pms.2000.91.1.273

Right to Left Hemispheric Shift in Occipital Electroencephalographic Responses to Repeated Kimura Figures

2000· article· en· W2046688386 on OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Persinger, Carrie-Anne Lalonde

Bibliographic record

VenuePerceptual and Motor Skills · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccipital lobeAudiologyPsychologyLeft and rightRhythmStimulus (psychology)Lateralization of brain functionLateralityCerebral hemisphereNoveltyRight hemisphereElectroencephalographyNeuroscienceAnatomyMedicineCognitive psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gordon and Carmon (1976) reported that repeated presentations of an initially novel stimulus were associated with a transfer of cerebral dominance over time (trials) from the right to the left hemisphere. To test the generalizability of these results the proportions of alpha rhythms over the left and right occipital and parietal lobes were measured following the presentation of recurring and nonrecurring complex visual patterns (the Kimura Figures) to the upper or lower, left or right peripheral visual fields. Analysis showed increased electrical activation (as inferred by attenuated proportions of alpha rhythms) of the left occipital lobe but decreased activation of the right occipital lobe. This shift occurred during repeated presentations of the same stimuli but not during single presentations of different novel stimuli. There was no significant shift in this activity over the parietal lobes. These results are consistent with the reports of other researchers who have found a shift of dominant neuroelectrical activity from the right to the left hemisphere as the novelty of a visuospatial stimulus decreases.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptual and Motor SkillsSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207