Evaluation of Hemispheric Lateralisation & Split Brain Research

Question 1

What are the 2 strengths?

Answer 1

1. Domestic chicken example

2. Sperry’s research support

Question 2

Sperry’s research support

Answer 2

Sperry’s research supports the conclusion that the left hemisphere is more responsible for verbal and analytical tasks, whereas the right hemisphere is better at spatial and musical tasks. This has strengthened the understanding of how the brain works.

Sperry’s procedure was closely controlled. Patients were given eye patches, and images were flashed up for a very brief time (fractions of a second), meaning there was no possibility of looking over and using the other visual field. This strengthens the internal validity of the studies.

Question 3

Domestic chicken example

Answer 3

It is assumed that the main advantage of brain lateralisation is that it increases neural processing capacity (the ability to perform multiple tasks simultaneously). Rogers et al. (2004) found that in a domestic chicken, brain lateralisation is associated with an enhanced ability to perform two tasks simultaneously (finding food and being vigilant for predators). Using only one hemisphere to engage in a task leaves the other hemisphere free to engage in other functions. This provides evidence for the advantages of brain lateralisation and demonstrates how it can enhance brain efficiency in cognitive tasks.

Question 4

What are the 2 weaknesses?

Answer 4

1. Idiographic

2. Patient disproves Sperry’s research

Question 5

Idiographic

Answer 5

However, because this research was carried out on animals, it is impossible to conclude the same of humans. Unfortunately, much of the research into lateralisation is flawed because the split-brain procedure is rarely carried out now, meaning patients are difficult to come by. Such studies often include very few participants, and often the research takes an idiographic approach. Therefore, any conclusions drawn are representative only of those individuals who had a confounding physical disorder that made the procedure necessary. This is problematic as such results cannot be generalised to the wider population.

Question 6

Patient disproves Sperry’s research

Answer 6

Finally, it could be argued that language may not be restricted to the left hemisphere. Turk et al. (2002) discovered a patient who suffered damage to the left hemisphere but developed the capacity to speak in the right hemisphere, eventually leading to the ability to speak about the information presented to either side of the brain. This suggests that perhaps lateralisation is not fixed and that the brain can adapt following damage to certain areas.