Enhancing the ecological validity of tests of lateralization and hemispheric interaction: Evidence from fixated displays of letters or symbols of varying complexity

Both experiments found that 3-item displays were processed faster and more accurately than displays of 5 items, suggesting they are relatively simple. Accuracy to the simple tasks showed left-hemisphere lateralization in the lexical task, right-hemisphere lateralization in the spatial task, a cost of hemispheric interaction compared to the advantaged hemisphere, and a benefit of hemispheric interaction compared to the less-advantaged hemisphere, suggesting that the contributions of the less-advantaged hemisphere interfere with processing, and that the advantaged hemisphere controls the lion's share. In contrast, 5-item displays for physical match in both experiments showed a significant benefit to accuracy of hemispheric interaction compared to the left hemisphere, an insignificant benefit compared to the right hemisphere, no lateralization, no cost of hemispheric interaction, and a consequence to performance that was more costly to the hemisphere that had been advantaged in simple tasks, suggesting that the advantaged hemisphere relinquishes control as tasks become more complex and complementary processing results from both increased collaboration and decreased lateralization between the hemispheres. The findings expand upon behavioural evidence, converge with imaging evidence, and suggest future directions for brain mapping.