How should “ambidexterity” be estimated?

Fagard, Jacqueline; Chapelain, Amandine; Bonnet, Philippe

doi:10.1080/1357650x.2015.1009089

Cited by 41 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, categorization from the HI also greatly varies between studies. For instance, using the [(R−L)/(R+L+Bim)] formula, we use a cut-off of ±0.30 (Fagard, Chapelain, & Bonnet, 2015;Petkovic, Chokron, & Fagard, 2016). The children with a HI ≥0.3 are considered as right-handed, the children with a HI ≤−0.3 are considered as left-handed, and the children with HI falling between these values are considered as non-lateralized.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How should we test infant handedness?

Fagard

Margules

Lopez

et al. 2016

Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As soon as infants grasp objects, they exhibit some degree of hand preference. Although all studies agree that the number of non-lateralized infants remains high during the first months of life, there is no consensus on the percentage of right- and left-handed infants. Reasons might be the different formulae used to calculate an handedness index, the basis on which handedness categories are distinguished, and the number of trials per session. In this study we aimed to provide a valid method of testing handedness, reliable without being lengthy so as to combine it with other evaluations. We tested 46 infants at 9 and 11 months by giving them 34 trials. We compared the results using 2 of the most used formulae, including the bimanual grasps or not, and considering the first 5, 10, 15, 20, 26, 31, or all 34 trials. The results show that different formulae do not give significantly different results as long as bimanual grasps are included. The number of trials is important: 15 trials are necessary for the reliability of the classification into handedness categories. Giving more trials does not provide substantial additional information.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How should we test infant handedness?

Fagard

Margules

Lopez

et al. 2016

Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Concerning data on sectional MRI images, for sections-1, 66% visualized the section from above (a superior view), Table 1: Demographic data of the survey participants. *True ambidexterity is extremely rare [18,19] Age ( for section-2, 60.2% visualized the section from above (superior), for section-3, 47.6% visualized the section from above (superior), and for section-4, 51.5% visualized the section from above (superior). Obviously, the rest of the participants, visualized these four sections from below (an inferior view).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relation between cerebral dominance and visual analytic skills in Iraqi medical students, a cross sectional analysis

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Cerebral dominance, also known as lateralization of brain functions, is the neurologic phenomenon in which one hemisphere is dominant over the other, and will thereby exercise greater influence over certain functions. The cerebral lateralization of many vertebrates, indicates an evolutionary advantage associated with the cerebral specialization. In humans, the majority of people are of left cerebral dominance. True bilateral cerebral dominance, manifested in ambidexterity, is exceedingly rare.Aims and Objective: To derive a statistical inference between determined parameters of cerebral dominance and the 3-dimensional visual analytic skills. The parameters are: handedness, , gender, and language skills.Materials and Methods: This survey targeted an audience of undergraduate medical students, 103 of them replied and fully completed an electronic-distributed survey. All participants were blinded to the outcome and aims of the study (single-blinded experimental design). The survey was created via Google Forms, and made available online for three days, on the University intranet system. Compiled data resulted in 523 pages. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences, Shodor-Interactivate software, and Microsoft Excel 2016. References of this paper, were retrieved via a detailed systematic review of literature databases, while carrying out critical evaluation of evidence. The databases included: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, OpenGrey, and Google Scholar.Results: Males and females participated in the survey (34 and 69 participants respectively), 91 of participants (88.4%) were right-handed. Mapped participants’ demographics included: age, gender, handedness, siblings’ and parents’ handedness, number of siblings and birth order, and number of spoken languages. The 3D-visual analytic skills, were evaluated via a cross sectional survey and objectively-evaluated via a professional visual IQ testing. Statistics proven that there was no significant correlation between the 3D-visual skills and any of the tested parameters. Significance was considered at a p-value of 0.05 or less.Conclusion: In this sample of 103 tested subjects, all of which were not professional Anatomists. Our tested hypothesis of the presence of potential correlation between handedness (and other parameters of cerebral dominance) with the three-dimensional visual analytic skills, were proven statistically to be non-existent. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences Vol.7(5) 2016 47-52

show abstract

“…For the BbHtest, a laterality index (LI) was calculated as follows: (Number of right hand grasps-Number of left hand grasps)/(Total number of grasps). According to the results of a previous study on the distribution of handedness ( Fagard et al, 2015 ), we categorized the infants as mainly right-handers (LI > +0.30), mainly left-handers (LI < –0.30) and mixed-handed (-0.30 ≥ LI ≤ + 0.30). Overall, 7 infants were found to be mainly right-handers, two to be mainly left-handers (one left-handed in each age group), and three infants were judged as being mixed-handed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Infant manual performance during reaching and grasping for objects moving in depth

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few studies have investigated manual performance in infants when reaching and grasping for objects moving in directions other than across the fronto-parallel plane. The present preliminary study explored object-oriented behavioral strategies and side preference in 8- and 10-month-old infants during reaching and grasping for objects approaching in depth from three positions (midline, and 27° diagonally from the left and right). Effects of task constraint by using objects of three different types and two sizes were further examined for behavioral strategies and hand opening prior to grasping. Additionally, assessments of hand preference by a dedicated handedness test were performed. Regardless of object starting position, the 8-month-old infants predominantly displayed right-handed reaches for objects approaching in depth. In contrast, the older infants showed more varied strategies and performed more ipsilateral reaches in correspondence with the side of the approaching object. Conversely, 10-month-old infants were more successful than the younger infants in grasping the objects, independent of object starting position. The findings regarding infant hand use strategies when reaching and grasping for objects moving in depth are similar to those from earlier studies using objects moving along a horizontal path. Still, initiation times of reaching onset were generally long in the present study, indicating that the object motion paths seemingly affected how the infants perceived the intrinsic properties and spatial locations of the objects, possibly with an effect on motor planning. Findings are further discussed in relation to future investigations of infant reaching and grasping for objects approaching in depth.

show abstract

How should “ambidexterity” be estimated?

Cited by 41 publications

References 61 publications

How should we test infant handedness?

How should we test infant handedness?

The relation between cerebral dominance and visual analytic skills in Iraqi medical students, a cross sectional analysis

Infant manual performance during reaching and grasping for objects moving in depth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About