Split brain research into hemispheric lateralisation

• Strength?

  research is done using highly controlled and standardised procedures.
• EV?

  For example, Sperry investigated one hemispheric field by restricting visual information to one field at a time. An image would be flashed for 1/10th of a second, so participants would not have time to move the eye across the image and spread the information to both sides of the visual field.
• EX?

  This is a strength as it means that findings are accurate as extraneous and confounding variables like the age of participants are controlled. This therefore increases the credibility of the findings making it more likely that psychologists are going to apply it.
• CA?

  However, As a result of split brain patients being so rare, the findings were often based on small samples, and these patients often had other neurological problems which may have acted as a confounding variable. This reduces the usefulness of the findings.
• CON?

  Despite this, it has developed a well-controlled procedure that could be replicated easily increasing its reliability. This increases the internal validity of split brain research into hemispheric lateralisation.
• 2ND STRENGTH?

  it increases neural processing capacity.
• 2ND EV?

  A psychologist found that in a domestic chicken, brain lateralisation is associated with the enhanced ability to perform tasks simultaneously, such as 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.
• 2ND EX?

  This is a strength as it provided evidence for the advantages of brain lateralisation and demonstrates how it can enhance brain efficiency in cognitive tasks. This therefore increases the credibility of the research.
• 2ND CA?

  However, because Roger's research was carried out on animals, it is difficult to conclude the same of humans. Unfortunately, the split brain procedure is rarely carried out now so findings are difficult to generalise to modern society. This decreases the application of the findings.
• 2ND CON?

  Despite this, it increases the usefulness of the theory as it provides evidence to the increase of neural processing capacity. This increases the internal validity of split brain research into hemispheric lateralisation.
• limitation of Sperry's research?

  it is ungeneralisable.
• limitation for EV of Sperry's research?

  Sperry's research was conducted only on participants with epilepsy which impacts the brain in a very unique way, he did not look into the way that a 'normal' unsplit brain functions and therefore his results cannot be generalised to everyone.
• limitation for EX of Sperry's research?

  This is a limitation as you cannot generalise or use the information conducted by Sperry in normal brains, which is much more common. This decreases the credibility of the research.
• limitation for CA of Sperry's research?

  However having this knowledge into the behaviour of split brains allows psychology to develop and an advancement of research into the brain and whether split-brain surgeries are actually helpful, increasing its usefulness.
• limitation of CON for Sperry's research?

  Despite this, the lack of knowledge on how it would work on a normal brain therefore decreasing the application of Sperry's split brain research as it is ungeneralisable. This decreases the internal validity of Sperry's split brain research.