AO3

• Sperry’s work prompted a theoretical and philosophical debate about the degree of communication between the two hemispheres in everyday functioning and the nature of consciousness.
• Strength of methodology - patients made use of highly specialised and standardised procedures, presenting images to 1 visual field. Participants were asked to stare at a 'fixation point' whilst one eye was blindfolded. The image was displayed for 1/10 of a second so the eye could not move to other visual field.
• Weakness of methodology - Sperry used split-brain patients as his sample which is an unrepresentative population. It may be that these people are different from normal individuals because they have had their corpus callosum cut.
• Theoretical basis - some theorists believe we are all in 'two minds' and the hemispheres are very functionally different and represent a form of duality in th brain. Others believe the hemispheres are integrated and work together in everyday tasks.
• Researchers have urged caution in their widespread acceptance: generalising from such a small and unusual sample of people (11 ppts who had a history of epileptic seizures) can be difficult.
• It oversimplifies the functional distinction between the left and right hemispheres. Although the ‘verbal’ and ‘non-verbal’ labels can be usefully applied to summarise the differences between the two hemispheres, modern neuroscientists would contend that the actual distinction is less clear-cut than this: many of the behaviours typically associated with one hemisphere can be performed by the other when the situation requires it (plasticity).
• This suggests that information from both hemispheres is being processed simultaneously and communicated across the corpus callosum.