Walker and Ceci (1983) pose a number of interesting and potentially important criticisms and alternative explanations regarding the laterality finding and hypothesis of Dawson and Schell (1982). The present evaluation finds each of the criticisms and alternative explanations to be inadequate. We then distinguish between two alternative interpretations of the Dawson and Schell hypothesis, one based on inherent functional properties of the two hemispheres and the other based on the notion that each hemisphere is a partially independent pool of processing resources. Walker and Ceci's fundamental objection seems to apply only to the first interpretation.