Hand Preference in a Normal Population

Ellis, Simon J.; Ellis, Peter; Marshall, Eileen

doi:10.1016/s0010-9452(88)80025-x

Cited by 71 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a concern for twin studies on handedness is that twins might not be representative of the general population. Many studies since 1920s suggested that twins had a higher incidence of left-handedness than their singleton counterparts (Dahlberg, 1926;Davis and Annett, 1994;Sicotte et al, 1999;Williams et al, 1992), though some others failed to replicate the finding (Ellis et al, 1988;Medland et al, 2003;Morley and Caffrey, 1994). A postulated explanation was that twins might have increased intra-uterine crowding or at greater risk for the perinatal morbidities that were associated with an increased probability of left-handedness (Coren, 1994b;Coren and Halpern, 1991;Williams et al, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A School-based Twin Study of Handedness among Adolescents in Taiwan

Kuo

Lin

et al. 2005

Behav Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate whether twinning might influence handedness and the relative contribution of genetic and environmental factors to handedness in a total of 321 pairs of twins, 36 same-sex sib-pairs, and 1020 singletons, aged 12-16 and systematically recruited from the junior high schools in Taipei. Twins' zygosity was determined by a combination of DNA typing and physical similarity. The direction and consistency of handedness in twins did not differ from that seen in singletons. Compared with the full model containing additive genes (A), shared (C), and non-shared (E) environment, both AE and CE models had equivalently acceptable fit. The contribution from additive genes in the AE model was estimated to be 16% (directional) to 13% (consistent) for the continuous handedness and 34-10% for the categorical one, whereas the corresponding contribution from shared environment in the CE model was 14-14% and 32-11%, respectively. Handedness in adolescents appears to be not influenced by twinning and not substantially heritable, whereas environmental factors, especially those not shared between siblings, are the most important ones for explaining individual variations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A School-based Twin Study of Handedness among Adolescents in Taiwan

Kuo

Lin

et al. 2005

Behav Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ELLIS et al, 1988). Although manual asymmetries in humans are well documented, the issue of whether homologous patterns of cerebral lateralization exist in nonhuman primates remains largely unresolved (for a review, see WARD & HOPKINS, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multi-task assessment of hand lateralization in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Anderson

Degiorgio²,

Lamarque³

et al. 1996

Primates

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Eight tasks were presented to ten tufted capuchin monkeys and hand preferences were recorded for each subject on each task. The strength of hand preferences varied accross tasks. Although no significant population-level left-or right-hand bias emerged for any of the tasks, there was a tendency toward greater left-hand use in a task requiring the use of probing tools. The data also confirm that simple reaching is of limited value as a measure of hand preference. Hand preferences in capuchin monkeys appear to be determined by a number of individual, species, and environmental factors.

show abstract

“…However, twins and singletons are seldom assessed using the same handedness criteria, recruited in the same manner, or matched for age and sex (McManus, 1980). Several of the more recent studies have found no differences in the prevalence of left-handedness between twins and singletons (Ellis et al, 1988;Medland et al, 2003;Morley & Caffrey, 1994).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Handedness in Twins: Joint Analysis of Data From 35 Samples

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S imultaneous analysis of handedness data from 35 samples of twins (with a combined sample size of 21,127 twin pairs) found a small but significant additive genetic effect accounting for 25.47% of the variance (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.69-29.51%). No common environmental influences were detected (C = 0.00; 95% CI 0.00-7.67%), with the majority of the variance, 74.53%, explained by factors unique to the . No significant heterogeneity was observed within studies that used similar methods to assess handedness, or across studies that used different methods. At an individual level the majority of studies had insufficient power to reject a purely unique environmental model due to insufficient power to detect familial aggregation. This lack of power is seldom mentioned within studies, and has contributed to the misconception that twin studies of handedness are not informative.The etiology and neurological implications of lefthandedness have been the subject of debate for over a century. The first twin study comparing the handedness of monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins was published 81 years ago (Siemens, 1924); since this time there have been 34 published studies on 35 samples. However, there has been little consistency of results. The area has become one of the most controversial in laterality with the proposal of special twin effects, (such as differential right-shifts effects or mirror imaging effects; Annett, 2002;Newman, 1928) and questions raised regarding the suitability of the twin method for studying handedness and laterality in general (Nagylaki & Levy, 1973).Comparison of results across studies is complicated by differences in methodology. Handedness can be assessed as either hand preference or hand skill; two separate but related traits. Hand preference is typically a directional measure. In its simplest form it is assessed by asking 'are you left or right handed?', or 'which hand do you write with?' In its more complex form, hand preference is assessed by asking (or asking the participant to demonstrate) which hand is preferred for a range of items. Handedness questionnaires range in length from four (Coren, 1993) to 55 items (Healey et al., 1986), the number of response choices ranging from two to five, with the responses resulting either in a handedness score/quotient or a grouping classification. The diverse methods of assessing hand preference and the number of questionnaires available within the literature in part reflects the lack of a gold standard and conceptual differences regarding the evolution and nature of handedness.In contrast, hand skill is typically a quantitative measure of the degree of motor dominance of one hand over the over. Common tests of hand skill involve measuring the time taken to move a series of pegs on a specially designed board (Annett, 1985), or counting the number of circles that can be dotted with a pen in 20 seconds (Tapley & Bryden, 1985). Typically, the task(s) is performed with each hand and a dominance or lambda score is calculated expressing the di...

show abstract

Hand Preference in a Normal Population

Cited by 71 publications

References 28 publications

A School-based Twin Study of Handedness among Adolescents in Taiwan

A School-based Twin Study of Handedness among Adolescents in Taiwan

A multi-task assessment of hand lateralization in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Handedness in Twins: Joint Analysis of Data From 35 Samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About