Dichotic listening performance and writing posture in right- and left-handers

Right-handers and left-handers with the inverted (IN) and noninverted (NI) writing posture were tested on a dichotic consonant-vowel listening task and on two motor tasks (hand strength and speed of tapping). The results failed to show the differences between IN and NI right-handers reported by S. M. Tapley and M. P. Bryden (1983, Neuropsychologia, 21, 129-138) and there were no significant handedness x writing posture x ear interactions. A significant interaction between dichotic listening performance and writing posture was found; NI right-handers and IN left-handers had more correct responses and fewer intrusions than IN right-handers and NI left-handers. Left-handers and right-handers were found to have a right ear advantage (REA) in the dichotic listening task but left-handers had relatively smaller left/right differences in all of the performance measures. Sample characteristics suggest that there are more IN male right-handers than IN female right-handers.     

Asymmetrical drawing patterns on the temples by left-handers

Twenty-three Japanese genuine left-handers were selected by a Laterality Quotient scale and asked to draw the letter S on their own temples and foreheads. The way they drew on the temples showed an asymmetry that was the mirror reversal of that of right-handers, as found in a previous study. Left-handers drew a reversed letter S on their right temple much more often than on the left temple, whereas right-handers drew them in reverse more often on the left temple. They also drew it in reverse on the forehead irrespective of their handedness.     

Space–valence associations depend on handedness: evidence from a bimanual output task

Past studies have suggested important links between valence and perception and action in physical space. The present study aimed to test the associations between emotional valance for words or faces and manual responses in left- and right-handers. We employed a divided output (bimanual) reaction time paradigm in which participants had to discriminate emotional valance of words or faces presented on the center of the screen. The results revealed that right-handers were faster when responding to positive words or faces with their right hand and to negative words or faces with the left hand, whereas left-handers showed the opposite pattern. These results suggest that the association between space and valence depends on handedness, providing further evidence for the body-specificity hypothesis.     

Phonological processing of words in right- and left-handers

It is commonly accepted that phonology is the exclusive domain of the left hemisphere. However, this pattern of lateralization, which posits a right visual field advantage, has been questioned by several studies. In fact, certain factors such as characteristics of the stimuli and subjects' handedness can modulate the right visual field advantage. Thus, the goal of this study was to compare the hemispheric dynamics of right-handers and left-handers during a divided visual field presentation of words that varied in terms of their phonological transparency. For non-transparent words, the left hemisphere seems more competent in both handedness groups. With regard to transparent words, the right hemisphere of both groups also appears competent. Surprisingly, left-handers achieved optimal processing with a functionally isolated left hemisphere, whereas right-handers needed the participation of both hemispheres. The pattern of performance cannot be fully explained by either the callosal or the direct access model.     

Handedness and Reach-to-Place Kinematics in Adults: Left-Handers Are Not Reversed Right-Handers

The primary goal of this study was to examine the relations between limb control and handedness in adults. Participants were categorized as left or right handed for analyses using the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory. Three-dimensional recordings were made of each arm on two reach-to-place tasks: adults reached to a ball and placed it into the opening of a toy (fitting task), or reached to a Cheerio inside a cup, which they placed on a designated mark after each trial (cup task). We hypothesized that limb control and handedness were related, and we predicted that we would observe side differences favoring the dominant limb based on the dynamic dominance hypothesis of motor lateralization. Specifically, we predicted that the dominant limb would be straighter and smoother on both tasks compared with the nondominant limb (i.e., right arm in right-handers and left arm in left-handers). Our results only partially supported these predictions for right-handers, but not for left-handers. When differences between hands were observed, the right hand was favored regardless of handedness group. Our findings suggest that left-handers are not reversed right-handers when compared on interlimb kinematics for reach-to-place tasks, and reaffirm that task selection is critical when evaluating manual asymmetries.     

Encouraging pointing with the right hand,but not the left hand,gives right-handed 3-year-olds a linguistic advantage

Previous research has shown a strong positive association between right-handed gesturing and vocabulary development. However, the causal nature of this relationship remains unclear. In the current study, we tested whether gesturing with the right hand enhances linguistic processing in the left hemisphere, which is contralateral to the right hand. We manipulated the gesture hand children used in pointing tasks to test whether it would affect their performance. In either a linguistic task (verb learning) or a non-linguistic control task (memory), 131 typically developing right-handed 3-year-olds were encouraged to use either their right hand or left hand to respond. While encouraging children to use a specific hand to indicate their responses had no effect on memory performance, encouraging children to use the right hand to respond, compared to the left hand, significantly improved their verb learning performance. This study is the first to show that manipulating the hand with which children are encouraged to gesture gives them a linguistic advantage. Language lateralization in healthy right-handed children typically involves a dominant left hemisphere. Producing right-handed gestures may therefore lead to increased activation in the left hemisphere which may, in turn, facilitate forming and accessing lexical representations. It is important to note that this study manipulated gesture handedness among right-handers and does therefore not support the practice of encouraging children to become right-handed in manual activities.

Research Highlights

• Right-handed 3-year-olds were instructed to point to indicate their answers exclusively with their right or left hand in either a memory or verb learning task.
• Right-handed pointing was associated with improved verb generalization performance, but not improved memory performance.
• Thus, gesturing with the right hand, compared to the left hand, gives right-handed 3-year-olds an advantage in a linguistic but not a non-linguistic task.
• Right-handed pointing might lead to increased activation in the left hemisphere and facilitate forming and accessing lexical representations.

     

Auditory space perception in left- and right-handers

Several studies have shown that handedness has an impact on visual spatial abilities. Here we investigated the effect of laterality on auditory space perception. Participants (33 right-handers, 20 left-handers) completed two tasks of sound localization. In a dark, anechoic, and sound-proof room, sound stimuli (broadband noise) were presented via 21 loudspeakers mounted horizontally (from 80° on the left to 80° on the right). Participants had to localize the target either by using a swivel hand-pointer or by head-pointing. Individual lateral preferences of eye, ear, hand, and foot were obtained using a questionnaire. With both pointing methods, participants showed a bias in sound localization that was to the side contralateral to the preferred hand, an effect that was unrelated to their overall precision. This partially parallels findings in the visual modality as left-handers typically have a more rightward bias in visual line bisection compared with right-handers. Despite the differences in neural processing of auditory and visual spatial information these findings show similar effects of lateral preference on auditory and visual spatial perception. This suggests that supramodal neural processes are involved in the mechanisms generating laterality in space perception.     

Apraxia in a patient with atypical cerebral dominance

Liepmann postulated that the left hemisphere of right-handed persons contains the "movement formulas" that control purposeful skilled movements of the limbs on both sides of the body. Accordingly, in right-handers apraxia should follow damage to the left hemisphere, whereas right hemisphere damage should not lead to apraxia. Although this is generally true, we recently examined a right-handed man who after a right hemispheric stroke became aphasic and apraxic with his nonparalyzed right hand. Our observations suggest that the right hemisphere of this right-handed man made a critical contribution to the planning and execution of skilled movements. This case provides evidence that right-handers should not be considered a homogeneous group in terms of cerebral motor dominance and that contrary to Liepmann's postulate, hemispheric dominance for the control of skilled movements does not entirely determine handedness.     

An investigation of immune system disorder as a "marker" for anomalous dominance

Geschwind and Galaburda (1987) proposed that immune disorder (ID) susceptibility, along with left handedness and familial sinistrality (FS), is a "marker" for anomalous dominance. The theory predicts lesser left lateralization for language processes, lessened left hemisphere abilities, and enhanced right hemisphere abilities. We assessed language laterality (dichotic consonant vowel task) and performances on spatial and verbal tasks. Subjects were 128 college students. The factors of handedness, sex, FS, and immune disorder history (negative or positive) were perfectly counterbalanced. Left-handers were significantly less lateralized for language and scored lower than right-handers on the spatial tasks. Females scored lower on mental rotation than males, but performed comparably to males on the spatial relations task. The only effect of ID was by way of interaction with FS on both spatial tasks--subjects who were either negative or positive on both FS and ID status factors scored significantly higher than subjects negative for one but positive for the other factor. A speculative explanatory model for this interaction was proposed. The model incorporates the notion that FS and ID factors are comparably correlated, but in opposite directions, with hormonal factors implicated by other research as relevant for spatial ability differences. Finally, no support for the "anomalous dominance" hypothesis predictions was found.     

Handedness in a virtual haptic environment: Assessments from kinematic behavior and modeling

This study evaluated hand asymmetries in performance of a dexterous, controlled task under haptic feedback. Participants punctured a virtual membrane with a pushing or pulling movement, using the left or right hand. For pulling movements, the dominant (right) hand exhibited faster average stopping latency and shorter skidding distance. When the kinematic data were fit to a three-phase model previously applied to this task (Klatzky et al., 2013), the right hand exhibited faster force decay attributable to biomechanical factors. Analyses of the aggregated performance measures and model parameters showed that the left and right hands are associated with two different distributions, supporting handedness effects. Furthermore, while the majority of participants expressed right-hand dominance, which was consistent with their self-reported hand preferences, others showed partial or no dominance. This approach could potentially be extended to quantify and differentiate individuals with difficulties in manual behavior due to abnormal motor control (e.g., dyspraxia), progressive deterioration (e.g., Parkinson's syndrome) or improvement (neural regrowth after transplant).     

Evaluation of some tasks used for specifying handedness and footedness

Healthy men (n = 42) and women (n = 45) who were right-handed and men (n = 21) and women (n = 20) who were left-handed were studied. Men's mean age was 21.1 +/- 3.5 yr. and women's 20.7 +/- 3.1 yr. These students in various faculties reported they were right- or left-handed. Then their hand and foot preferences (handedness and footedness) were ascertained by asking each of the subjects to perform 11 tasks for handedness and 9 tasks for footedness. A discriminate function analysis test showed that each of the 11 tasks used for assessing their self-reported handedness was significant, but, of the 9 tasks used for assessing self-reported footedness, only 7 were significant. Strength of the hand or foot played no role in reports of handedness or footedness. A combination of four tasks, such as pulling a door, pushing a door, holding an object, and hammering a nail, on which the maximum number of subjects performed with the right or left hand, depending upon their self-reported handedness, would be ideal for ascertaining handedness. A combination of three tasks, namely, kicking a football, pushing an object with the foot, and stamping on the ground, would be ideal for ascertaining footedness.     

Emotional valence and physical space: limits of interaction

According to the body-specificity hypothesis, people associate positive things with the side of space that corresponds to their dominant hand and negative things with the side corresponding to their nondominant hand. Our aim was to find out whether this association holds also true for a response time study using linguistic stimuli, and whether such an association is activated automatically. Four experiments explored this association using positive and negative words. In Exp. 1, right-handers made a lexical judgment by pressing a left or right key. Attention was not explicitly drawn to the valence of the stimuli. No valence-by-side interaction emerged. In Exp. 2 and 3, right-handers and left-handers made a valence judgment by pressing a left or a right key. A valence-by-side interaction emerged: For positive words, responses were faster when participants responded with their dominant hand, whereas for negative words, responses were faster for the nondominant hand. Exp. 4 required a valence judgment without stating an explicit mapping of valence and side. No valence-by-side interaction emerged. The experiments provide evidence for an association between response side and valence, which, however, does not seem to be activated automatically but rather requires a task with an explicit response mapping to occur.     

Prism adaptation in left-handers

Two experiments with left-handers examined the features of prism adaptation established by previous research with right-handers. Regardless of handedness, (1) rapid adaptation occurs in exposure pointing with developing error in the opposite direction after target achievement, especially with early visual feedback in target pointing; (2) proprioceptive or visual aftereffects are larger, depending on whether visual feedback is available early or late, respectively, in target pointing; (3) the sum of these aftereffects is equal to the total aftereffect for the eye-hand coordination loop; (4) intermanual transfer of visual aftereffects occurs only for the dominant hand; and (5) visual aftereffects are larger in left space when the dominant hand is exposed to leftward displacement. A notable handedness difference is that, while transfer of proprioceptive aftereffects only occurs to the nondominant hand in right-handers, transfer occurs in both directions for left-handers, but regardless of handedness, such transfer only occurs when the exposed hand is tested first after exposure. A discussion then focuses on the implications of these data for a theory of handedness.     

Individual differences in right and left reaction time.

Experiments designed to check the absence of effects for hands and handedness in simple and two-choice reaction time found unexpected individual differences related to stimulus laterality. The majority of subjects responded faster to the stimulus on the left and a substantial minority responded faster to the stimulus on the right in any choice pair. The right index finger was slower than the left index or the middle fingers. Choices tended to be faster between fingers on different hands than on the same hand and same-hand choices were faster with the left hand than the right hand. There were no effects attributable to hand preference or sex.     

Hand Preference in India

The degree of asymmetric handedness was measured by a 22-item hand preference questionnaire in a sample of 442 Indian subjects. Factor analysis of the data for right-handers yielded four item-clusters: Gross activities, skilled activities (general), skilled activities (specific), and activities subject to social pressure. Identical analysis for left-handers yielded three item-clusters: Activities that are executed with difficulty, with ease, and with greater frequency. The degree of asymmetric handedness in right-handers was positively (high) correlated with an index of social pressure against left-hand use, especially for the items, writing and eating. The correlation was negative (moderate) in left-handers, however, who had preferred the right hand for eating purposes.     

Asymmetries in processing horizontal and vertical dimensions

The aim of this study was to determine whether the referential term on the horizontal dimension corresponds to the dominant hand and whether the referential term on the vertical dimension is independent of handedness. In order to verify the hypothesis, right-handers, left-handers, and ambidextrous subjects were required to verify and falsify statements including the words ABOVE and BELOW and the words LEFT and RIGHT. The results showed that right-handers were faster in verifying and falsifying the statements containing the term RIGHT, whereas left handers were faster in verifying and falsifying those containing the term LEFT. Ambidextrous subjects, however, showed no sign of asymmetry in the positional judgments of stimuli along the horizontal dimension. By contrast, right-handers, left-handers, and ambidextrous subjects were equally faster in verifying and falsifying the statements containing the term ABOVE than the statements containing the term BELOW. The relation between the positive term on the horizontal dimension and the dominant hand can be explained by the fact that, in the absence of any asymmetries in the physical world, the dominant hand can furnish a natural reference direction for judgments related to this dimension.     

Left-handers and right-handers compared on a motor task

Finger-tapping performance of 45 subjects of each sex and handedness combination, for a total of 180, was compared. Performance measures were speed (mean intertap interval) and regularity (standard deviation of intertap interval). Males tapped faster but not more regularly than females. The between-hand differences in performance were smaller for both measures in left-handers. When absolute magnitudes of between hand differences were compared, females showed smaller differences in regularity of tapping than males. Speed and regularity of tapping were statistically independent; both measures discriminated well between the preferred and nonpreferred hand of both handedness groups, but the differences in speed were more marked than the differences in regularity. Data on the performance of children on the same task are included for comparative purposes.     

The Simon effect and handedness: evidence for a dominant-hand attentional bias in spatial coding

In two experiments, the relation between handedness and the size of the Simon effect in each visual hemifield was investigated. Experiment 1 showed that the Simon effect was larger in the right visual hemifield in right-handers and in the left visual hemifield in left-handers, whereas ambidextrous individuals showed a symmetric Simon effect. In Experiment 2, participants performed the same Simon task as in Experiment 1, but with their hands crossed. The right- and left-handed groups showed a reversed pattern of results with respect to Experiment 1. We explained this phenomenon as a part of a more general account in which perception and action are embedded in a perception-for-action system. In this system, an attentional bias originating from the field of operation of the dominant hand would be at the basis of the relationship between the asymmetry of the Simon effect and handedness.     

Is handedness just response bias?

Although most people prefer to use the right hand for unimanual tasks, it is unknown whether handedness arises from response bias. Whether it does is a question inspired by signal detection theory. We drew on the framework of signal detection theory to assess bias and sensitivity in hand choice by asking right-handers to choose between two tasks—one performed with the left hand, and one performed with the right. For some participants, the left-hand task stayed constant while the right-hand task was varied. For other participants, the right-hand stayed constant while the left-hand task was varied. We reasoned that if hand preference only reflected bias, participants would choose the generally preferred hand to the same degree, regardless of whether its task was constant or varied. Our participants followed this strategy only to some extent, suggesting that bias and sensitivity both contribute to hand preference.     

A mixed-handed advantage in episodic memory: A possible role of interhemispheric interaction

Recent behavioral and brain imaging data indicate that performance on explicit tests of episodic memory is associated with interaction between the left and right cerebral hemispheres, in contrast with the unihemispheric basis for implicit tests of memory. In the present work, individual differences in strength of personal handedness were used as markers for differences in hemispheric communication, with mixed-handers inferred to have increased interhemispheric interaction relative to strong right-handers. In Experiment 1, memory for words was assessed via recall or word fragment completion. In Experiment 2, memory for real-world events was assessed via recall. Results supported the hypothesis, in that mixed-handers displayed better episodic memory in comparison with strong right-handers.