The rationalists vs the imaginative/visual types
So what happens to us if we don't use our brain to shuttle information back and forth between the two cerebral hemispheres in a balanced way during the process of thinking and doing things?
If thinking and doing things are not performed in a balanced way, one of two things will happen given enough time:
- A person who regularly keeps information flowing from the R-brain and/or from the sensors to the L-brain will remember a plethora of facts, figures and other patterns, but may not be able to relate well all these patterns to the larger pattern we call reality (known simplistically as L-brain people); and
- A person who regularly keeps information flowing from the L-brain and/or from the sensors to the R-brain will be able to see a larger and more unified picture of reality, but may not be able to find enough words or other patterns in memory to explain the picture clearly to others or to put it into practice (known simplistically as R-brain people).
We call this the biological basis for human behaviour.
Evidence to support the lateralised brain theory
Professor Lesley Rogers of the Centre for Neuroscience and Animal Behaviour at the University of New England is presently the world expert in unlocking the behaviours generated by the L- and R-brains in animals.
In a series of experiments performed in 2003-04 on young chickens (and later monkeys), Lesley found behaviours strongly supporting the lateralisation of the brain theory — the idea that each side of the cerebral hemispheres (closer to the frontal cortex region) have different, possibly opposite, functions in nature.
For instance, Lesley found animals can be trained to perform highly specific pattern-recognition from memory followed by an almost immediate and appropriate action recorded in memory (a task more suited to the L-brain); or animals can be trained as pattern-creation tools where all patterns in the environment are considered unfamiliar (ie. interpreted as predators) with no appropriate behaviour other than the standard immediate instinctive reactions (as required for survival). This is followed by a delayed "appropriate" response as required to think and process the patterns in a more visual way (a task more suited to the R-brain).
In other words, there is a reaction time, or response latency, difference when either the L-brain or R-brain is applied first to a given situation or problem.
For example, when visual stimuli reaching the right eye of a day old chicken is blocked using a piece of cloth, the chicken quickly learned to memorise, recognise and perform highly specific patterns at a high rate of speed (ie. to find food) using the L-side of the brain soon after experiencing positive rewards for the action (eg. feeding on food pellets). Because the chicken quickly (virtually without thinking) saw the benefit of implementing a certain behaviour based on a highly familiar pattern recalled in its memory with the help of the L-brain when a positive reinforcement is given, the animal did not hesitate to perform the action.
On the other hand, should the left eye be covered with the cloth, the R-brain behaved like a pattern-creation centre with a delay factor in implementing an appropriate action beyond the standard instinctual variety. It is almost like the chicken had to react to an unfamiliar pattern and then understand the pattern first before the correct action is performed. Even if the situation is repeated and positive rewards provided for a specific and "appropriate" action, the animal would still react and later delay the performance of the "appropriate" action until it has understood the pattern.
These R-brain delayed and L-brain immediate behaviours have been consistent with other young chickens, and later with monkeys (by observing the animals behaviour on the basis of whether they were naturally L-handed or R-brain, or R-handed or L-brain since the side of the brain controls the opposite hand (1)). In other words, behaviours generated by the L- and R-brain appear to be different and opposite in nature.
Does this translate into humans as well? Well, apparently it does.
According to Dr James "Jim" Donnelly of the Department of Psychology at the University of New England, he has studied the lateralised behaviour displayed by people who were placed in a stressful situation during problem-solving.
In problem-solving tests where the human subjects were placed in a stressful situation such as working out a secret five digit code within a short time frame, Connelly discovered there is a group of people who tend to consistently use the trial-and-error approach (so long as positive feedback is provided) to quickly find a solution. Donnelly calls these people the L-brain types. Because L-brain people can usually reach a solution quickly through the trial-and-error approach (ie. even if they don't know exactly why the solutions work), they tend to be happier, inquisitive, outgoing, risk-takers who are highly optimistic.
On the other hand, the group of people Donnelly classified as R-brain types behaved in the opposite way. They were more cautious and would prefer to take more time to solve problems. Even when they were aware the feedback for indicating an incorrect answer would be positive during the problem-solving process (eg. the use of sound instead of using an electric shock or something that would bring extreme pain), R-brain people would still prefer to take their time.
Why? It is important for R-brain people to visualise the problem and search for the best solution rather than quickly "suggesting" any likely solution and see what the result would be.
Furthermore, should R-brain people be placed under considerable and unrelenting stress to find the solution within a consistently tight deadline, R-brain people are less likely to solve the problem, leading to feelings of anxiety, develop negative thoughts, able to recall those negative thoughts, and in extreme situations result in depression. However, if R-brain people are given ample time to complete the problems set before them by finding the best and highest quality solutions, they are just as contented, relaxed and happy as the L-brain types. (2)
As of 2008, other researchers are investigating this response time latency issue to determine what is happening in the brain and how general human behaviour is formed. They include Dr Don Bradshaw, a professor in neuropsychology from the University of Western Australia, who is thought to be the first to suggest this response time latency possibility in the L- and R-brain as early as 1969 but didn't have the computers to accurately measure the time difference (now thought to be in the milliseconds).
Which is the better approach?
Neither approach is right or wrong. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. But if thinking and the actions we take in life are to be truly effective and quick in the attainment of a quality and potentially unique solution (ie. to recognise/remember the best pattern, to create the best pattern, and to apply the best pattern based on the information provided), there is a need for balance. Otherwise, our potential to think, problem-solve, and act on things quickly and effectively and thus achieve great things in life is substantially reduced.
And more significantly, our behaviours soon become affected by prolonged imbalances in our thinking and how we do things, resulting in the appearance of what psychologists call L-brain and R-brain people in society.
In the next two sections, we shall describe the most common L-brain and R-brain behaviours displayed by human beings as a result of this unbalanced shuttling of information between the two cerebral hemispheres. (3)
