Sensitivity to laterality as a function of handedness

This study tested the hypothesis that left-handed individuals are more aware than right-handed individuals of others' handedness. 18 left-handed and 18 right-handed college students were shown a drawing of 8 children at a party. Seven children held objects in the left hand, while one held an object in the right hand. After 2 1/2 min. the drawing was removed and subjects answered 15 questions about its contents. Included were 2 questions asking how many children were holding something in the right or left hand. Compared with right-handed subjects, left-handed subjects reported significantly more children holding something in the left hand and significantly fewer holding something in the right hand. The two groups did not differ on any other questions.     

Property in nonhuman primates

Property is rare in most nonhuman primates, most likely because their lifestyles are not conducive to it. Nonetheless, just because these species do not frequently maintain property does not mean that they lack the propensity to do so. Primates show respect for possession, as well as behaviors related to property, such as irrational decision making regarding property (e.g., the endowment effect) and barter. The limiting factor in species other than humans is likely the lack of social and institutional controls for maintaining property. By comparing primates and humans, we gain a better understanding of how human property concepts have evolved.     

Bilateral tachistoscopic perception, handedness, and laterality.

Right-handed, familial left-handed, and nonfamilial left-handed males and females reported high- or low-imagery words which were located to the left and right of fixation in bilateral tachistoscopic displays. On each trial, an arrowhead appeared in the center of the display. The arrowhead pointed to either the left or the right half-field, indicating the order of report. Right-handers reported more accurately from the right half-field, and familial left-handers reported more accurately from the left half-field. The order of report results showed that right-handers were similar to nonfamilial left-handers; for left half-field presentation, both groups were more accurate when the arrowhead pointed to the left than when it pointed to the right (i.e., first report was more accurate than second report). There was a main effect of word imagery, but this factor did not interact with visual half-field. Thus, there was no evidence that representations of high-imagery words are lateralized differently than representations of low-imagery words. The results are discussed with respect to lateralization of memory for verbal material.     

On inequity aversion in nonhuman primates

P. G. Roma, A. Silberberg, A. M. Ruggiero, and S. J. Suomi (2006) noted that the results S. F. Brosnan and F. B. M. de Waal (2003) attributed to inequity aversion could also be explained as a frustration effect. Roma et al. redressed this confound by designing a procedure that could have supported either of these interpretations. Nevertheless, they found that only a frustration effect accounted for both their data and those of Brosnan and de Waal (2003). The criticisms Brosnan and de Waal (2006) offered of Roma et al. ignored the fact that Brosnan and de Waal's (2003) research design was not capable of offering an unequivocal demonstration of inequity aversion. This conclusion holds no matter what the claimed inadequacies of Roma et al.'s procedures might have been. Caution is urged in inferring the existence of inequity aversion in nonhuman primates.     

Theory of mind in nonhuman primates

Since the BBS article in which Premack and Woodruff (1978) asked "Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?," it has been repeatedly claimed that there is observational and experimental evidence that apes have mental state concepts, such as "want" and "know." Unlike research on the development of theory of mind in childhood, however, no substantial progress has been made through this work with nonhuman primates. A survey of empirical studies of imitation, self-recognition, social relationships, deception, role-taking, and perspective-taking suggests that in every case where nonhuman primate behavior has been interpreted as a sign of theory of mind, it could instead have occurred by chance or as a product of nonmentalistic processes such as associative learning or inferences based on nonmental categories. Arguments to the effect that, in spite of this, the theory of mind hypothesis should be accepted because it is more parsimonious than alternatives or because it is supported by convergent evidence are not compelling. Such arguments are based on unsupportable assumptions about the role of parsimony in science and either ignore the requirement that convergent evidence proceed from independent assumptions, or fail to show that it supports the theory of mind hypothesis over nonmentalist alternatives. Progress in research on theory of mind requires experimental procedures that can distinguish the theory of mind hypothesis from nonmentalist alternatives. A procedure that may have this potential is proposed. It uses conditional discrimination training and transfer tests to determine whether chimpanzees have the concept "see." Commentators are invited to identify flaws in the procedure and to suggest alternatives.     

Quantifying the face inversion effect in nonhuman primates: a phylogenetic meta-analysis

Animal Cognition - Face recognition is important for primate social cognition, enabling rapid discrimination between faces and objects. In humans, face recognition is characterized by certain...     

Sex and handedness differences in EEG measures of hemispheric specialization

EEG alpha asymmetry was studied in 90 normal adults: right-handed, left-handed, and ambidextrous, male and female. Recordings were made from homologous central, parietal, and occipital leads, referenced to vertex, while subjects engaged in writing, speaking, reading, listening to speech, singing, and block design construction. These data confirm our previous findings that alpha asymmetry is task-dependent and extend them to a broader range of tasks, subjects, and leads. Among right-handers significant differences were found between the language tasks and the musical and spatial tasks: the $\text{R}\text{L}$ alpha ratio is higher in the language tasks. In addition, significant ordering of $\text{R}\text{L}$ alpha ratios was found among the language tasks themselves: WRITE å SPEAK > READ > LISTEN. No one “verbal” task can be considered representative of all language behaviors. Task differences in asymmetry were greater at the central than at the parietal leads, and no differences were found at the occiput. Differences among the handedness groups were found in $\text{R}\text{L}$ alpha ratio in specific tasks, in the relationship among tasks, and in alpha power level. Non-right-handers showed less task-dependent asymmetry. On some measures ambidexters appear to be a distinct group, not simply representing the middle range of a left-handed/right-handed continuum. Reversal of the “expected” right-handed pattern (SPEAK $\text{R}\text{L}$ ratio > BLOCKS $\text{R}\text{L}$ ratio) was seen in 10% of right-handers, and in 36% of left-handers, particularly among left-handed females (46%), suggesting a possible sex difference among non-right-handers. No sex difference was found among right-handers on any task with any measure at any lead.     

Primacy and recency effects in nonhuman primates.

The reports of primacy and recency memory effects in nonhuman primates have been criticized because they have all used an initiating response. That is, the presentation of the to-be-remembered list of items was always contingent on a response being initiated by the nonhuman primate. It has been argued that this initiating response improves performance for early items in the list, resulting in the occurrence of the primacy effect, independent of any memory processing mechanism. This criticism was addressed in the present study by not using an initiating response prior to the presentation of the list. Nevertheless, both a primacy and a recency effect were observed in all 6 rhesus monkeys evaluated using a serial probe recognition task. Thus, the results are similar to those for humans, in that both primacy and recency effects can be obtained in nonhuman primates. A brief literature review is included, and it is proposed that the primacy and recency effects observed in humans, nonhuman primates, and infraprimates can be explained within the context of the configural-association theory.     

Irrational choice behavior in human and nonhuman primates

Choice behavior in humans has motivated a large body of research with a focus on whether decisions can be considered to be rational. In general, humans prefer having choice, as do a number of other species that have been tested, even though having increased choice does not necessarily yield a positive outcome. Humans have been found to choose an option more often only because the opportunity to select it was diminishing, an example of a deviation from economic rationality. Here we extend this paradigm to nonhuman primates in an effort to understand the mechanisms underlying this finding. In this study, we presented two groups of laboratory monkeys, capuchins (Cebus apella) and rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), as well as human subjects, with a computerized task in which subjects were presented with two differently colored icons. When the subject selected an icon, differing numbers of food pellets were dispensed (or points were assigned), making each icon correspond to a certain level of risk (one icon yielded 1 or 4 pellets/points and the other yielded 2 or 3). Initially, both options remained constantly available and we established choice preference scores for each subject. Then, we assessed preference patterns once the options were not continuously available. Specifically, choosing one icon would cause the other to shrink in size on the screen and eventually disappear if never selected. Selecting it would restore it to its full size. As predicted, humans shifted their risk preferences in the diminishing options phase, choosing to click on both icons more equally in order to keep both options available. At the group level, capuchin monkeys showed this pattern as well, but there was a great deal of individual variability in both capuchins and macaques. The present work suggests that there is some degree of continuity between human and nonhuman primates in the desire to have choice simply for the sake of having choice.     

Bilateral tachistoscopic perception,handedness, and laterality: II. Nonverbal stimuli

Thirty-two Subjects were assigned to four groups on the basis of handedness (left or right) and familial sinistrality (absent or present). Their laterality patterns were investigated with a cued order-of-report paradigm. On each trial, Subjects saw a tachistoscopic presentation of two outline drawings of common objects, one drawing on the left of a central fixation point, one on the right. A centered arrowhead appeared with the pictures; the arrowhead pointed either left or right, and its direction indicated the order of report. The results for each group were discussed in terms of asymmetry for rate of processing and rate of decay, and in comparison with our earlier study of word recognition.     

Manual laterality and hitting performance in major league baseball.

Asymmetrical hand function was examined in the context of expert sports performance: hitting in professional baseball. An archival study was conducted to examine the batting performance of all Major League Baseball players from 1871 to 1992, focusing on those who batted left (n = 1,059) to neutralize the game asymmetry. Among them, left-handers (n = 421) were more likely to hit with power and to strike out than right-handers (n = 638). One possible account, based on the idea of hand dominance and an analogy to tennis, is that batting left involves a double-handed forehand for left-handers and a weaker and more reliable double-handed backhand for right-handers. The results are also interpretable in the light of Y. Guiard's (1987) kinematic chain model of a between-hands asymmetrical division of labor, which provides a detailed account of why left batting is optimal for left-handers.     

Harms and deprivation of benefits for nonhuman primates in research

The risks of harm to nonhuman primates, and the absence of benefits for them, are critically important to decisions about nonhuman primate research. Current guidelines for review and practice tend to be permissive for nonhuman primate research as long as minimal welfare requirements are fulfilled and human medical advances are anticipated. This situation is substantially different from human research, in which risks of harms to the individual subject are typically reduced to the extent feasible. A risk threshold is needed for the justification of research on nonhuman primates, comparable to the way risk thresholds are set for vulnerable human subjects who cannot provide informed consent. Much of the laboratory research conducted today has inadequate standards, leading to common physical, psychological, and social harms.     

The organization of conspecific face space in nonhuman primates

Humans and chimpanzees demonstrate numerous cognitive specializations for processing faces, but comparative studies with monkeys suggest that these may be the result of recent evolutionary adaptations. The present study utilized the novel approach of face space, a powerful theoretical framework used to understand the representation of face identity in humans, to further explore species differences in face processing. According to the theory, faces are represented by vectors in a multidimensional space, the centre of which is defined by an average face. Each dimension codes features important for describing a face's identity, and vector length codes the feature's distinctiveness. Chimpanzees and rhesus monkeys discriminated male and female conspecifics’ faces, rated by humans for their distinctiveness, using a computerized task. Multidimensional scaling analyses showed that the organization of face space was similar between humans and chimpanzees. Distinctive faces had the longest vectors and were the easiest for chimpanzees to discriminate. In contrast, distinctiveness did not correlate with the performance of rhesus monkeys. The feature dimensions for each species’ face space were visualized and described using morphing techniques. These results confirm species differences in the perceptual representation of conspecific faces, which are discussed within an evolutionary framework.     

Displacement activities as a behavioral measure of stress in nonhuman primates and human subjects

Traditionally, research on human stress has relied mostly on physiological and psychological measures with a relatively minor emphasis on the behavioral aspects of the phenomenon. Such an approach makes it difficult to develop valid animal models of the human stress syndrome. A promising approach to the study of the behavioral correlates of stress is to analyze those behavior patterns that ethologists have named displacement activities and that, in primates, consist mostly of self-directed behaviors. In both nonhuman primates and human subjects, displacement behavior appears in situations characterized by social tension and is likely to reflect increased autonomic arousal. Pharmacological studies of nonhuman primates have shown that the frequency of occurrence of displacement behavior is increased by anxiogenic compounds and decreased by anxiolytic drugs. Ethological studies of healthy persons and psychiatric patients during interviews have found that increased displacement behavior not only correlates with a subjective feeling state of anxiety and negative affect but also gives more veridical information about the subject's emotional state than verbal statements and facial expression. The measurement of displacement activities may be a useful complement to the physiological and psychological studies aimed at analyzing the correlates and consequences of stress.     

Evolutionary developmental psychology: Contributions from comparative research with nonhuman primates

Evolutionary developmental psychology is a discipline that has the potential to integrate conceptual approaches to the study of behavioral development derived from psychology and biology as well as empirical data from humans and animals. Comparative research with animals, and especially with nonhuman primates, can provide evidence of adaptation in human psychological and behavioral traits by highlighting possible analogies (i.e., similar function, but independent evolution) or homologies (i.e., inheritance from a common ancestor) between human traits and similar traits present in animals. Data from nonhuman primates have played a crucial role in our understanding of infant attachment to the caregiver as a developmental adaptation for survival. Primate and human data are also consistent in suggesting that female interest in infants during the juvenile years may be a developmental adaptation for reproduction that facilitates the acquisition of maternal skills prior to the onset of reproduction.     

Subject knowledge of the Experimenter''s interest in handedness and familial sinistrality variables and laterality test outcomes

We investigated the possible influence of common "demand characteristics" on the results on behavioral language laterality tasks. The demand characteristics were (1) whether Ss were or were not recruited for study according to their handedness, and (2) whether a detailed familial sinistrality inquiry was conducted before or after the tasks. Tasks were the Dichotic Consonant Vowel Task (DCVT) and the Bilateral Object Naming Latency Task (BONLT). Results showed no effect of demand characteristics on the BONLT. On the DCVT, however, prior inquiry regarding familial sinistrality was associated with significantly reduced right ear advantages (REAs). Interactions showed that the greatest reduction in REAs occurred in Ss with left-handedness in their families, who were asked about familial sinistrality prior to the tasks, who took the DCVT after the BONLT, and who were also recruited by handedness. Results, though generally reassuring regarding the robustness of the tasks against these sources of bias, raise some cautions for the DCVT.     

A simple and inexpensive method to measure urinary excretion in nonhuman primates

A simple and inexpensive automated method is described for simultaneous recording of time of day and frequency of urinary excretion. A 24-h event record for eight rhesus monkeys illustrates possible usefulness of the method in determining individual differences, response to environmental factors, and diumal patterns.     

The valence-specific laterality effect in free viewing conditions: The influence of sex, handedness, and response bias

The right hemisphere has often been viewed as having a dominant role in the processing of emotional information. Other evidence indicates that both hemispheres process emotional information but their involvement is valence specific, with the right hemisphere dealing with negative emotions and the left hemisphere preferentially processing positive emotions. This has been found under both restricted (Reuter-Lorenz & Davidson, 1981) and free viewing conditions (Jansari, Tranel, & Adophs, 2000). It remains unclear whether the valence-specific laterality effect is also sex specific or is influenced by the handedness of participants. To explore this issue we repeated Jansari et al.'s free-viewing laterality task with 78 participants. We found a valence-specific laterality effect in women but not men, with women discriminating negative emotional expressions more accurately when the face was presented on the left-hand side and discriminating positive emotions more accurately when those faces were presented on the right-hand side. These results indicate that under free viewing conditions women are more lateralised for the processing of facial emotion than are men. Handedness did not affect the lateralised processing of facial emotion. Finally, participants demonstrated a response bias on control trials, where facial emotion did not differ between the faces. Participants selected the left-hand side more frequently when they believed the expression was negative and the right-hand side more frequently when they believed the expression was positive. This response bias can cause a spurious valence-specific laterality effect which might have contributed to the conflicting findings within the literature.