This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Anne L. Foundas, MD
Department of Psychiatry and Neurology Tulane University School of Medicine 1430 Tulane Ave New Orleans, LA 70112-3618

Christiana M. Leonard, PhD; Kenneth M. Heilman, MD
Gainesville, Fla

Arch Neurol. 1995;52(12):1138.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In reply

We appreciate Goldblatt's astute observation regarding the summary of Levy and Reid's¹ findings. Furthermore, we hope to bring Goldblatt back from Matthew Arnold's darkling plain to the planum temporale and pars triangularis. Surely, Goldblatt has not joined the armies of the ignorant, as he noted an error in the text not corrected by the authors. This sentence as written adds to the confusion of the already complex relationship of writing posture to lateralized language functions.

The sentence as cited² should state: They found that right-handed subjects with a noninverted writing posture and left-handed subjects with an inverted writing posture had a right visual field advantage (left hemisphere dominance) on a verbal task, whereas right-handed subjects with an inverted writing posture and left-handed subjects with a noninverted writing posture had a left visual field advantage (right hemisphere dominance).

Simply stated, the inference from these data is that . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?