McFarland K A, Ashton R
Cortex. 1975 Sep;11(3):283-90. doi: 10.1016/s0010-9452(75)80010-4.
Laterality studies have long been plagued by: (1) poor psychological methodology; (2) lack of specification of treatment parameters' and (3) exclusive use of left-hemisphere dependent measures. It was suspected that a recent study by Kinsbourne and Cook (1971) suffered from these faults. The present experimental findings confirm these original suspicions. Both spatial and verbal cognitive tasks were employed and comparisons made with performance during two control conditions. One was a mixed spatial-verbal activity, the other control required S to merely look at a blank card. While left-hand performance was enhanced under the verbal concurrent activities, when compared with performance under control (spatial-verbal) conditions, no other significant enhancement of performance occurred with any other concurrent activity condition. With the "No Activity Specified" control some support for the Kinsbourne study was found. However, the major finding, or implication, of this study was in demonstrating that the methodological problems outlined above cannot be ignored if worthwhile laterality studies are to be performed.
长期以来,偏侧性研究一直受到以下问题的困扰:(1)心理学方法欠佳;(2)未明确治疗参数;(3)仅使用依赖左半球的测量方法。有人怀疑金斯伯恩和库克(1971年)最近的一项研究也存在这些缺陷。目前的实验结果证实了这些最初的怀疑。研究采用了空间和语言认知任务,并与两种对照条件下的表现进行了比较。一种是空间-语言混合活动,另一种对照要求受试者仅看一张空白卡片。虽然在语言同时进行的活动中左手表现有所增强,但与对照(空间-语言)条件下的表现相比,在任何其他同时进行的活动条件下,表现都没有出现其他显著增强。在“未指定活动”对照中,发现了对金斯伯恩研究的一些支持。然而,这项研究的主要发现或启示在于表明,如果要进行有价值的偏侧性研究,上述方法学问题不容忽视。