Lateralization of infant holding by mothers: A longitudinal evaluation of variations over the first 12 weeks

Abstract

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. The maternal preference to hold infants on the left rather than right side of the body was examined longitudinally, with attention to four explanations: maternal monitoring of infant state, maternal handedness, infant proximity to the mother's heartbeat, and preferred infant head position. The side and site of holding were measured over the first twelve weeks of the lives of 24 infants. Information about group and individual consistency in holding side allowed novel evaluation of the theories. A strong bias to hold on the left dropped below significance when the infants were aged twelve weeks and was limited to specific holding positions. Findings were generally consistent with the monitoring hypothesis, and little support was found for the three alternative explanations. Permanent repository link

Atypical maternal cradling laterality in an impoverished South African population

“…They interpret this as a left eye-right brain advantage in processing social-emotional information that helps mothers to optimally monitor their infants, especially under threatening conditions. Human studies consistently report a 60-80% maternal left cradling preference independent of handedness, also supported by evidence of engaging the emotionally attuned right brain Todd & Banerjee, 2016). Considering these animal and human findings, our finding of a two-thirds non-left cradling bias in Khayalitsha mothers who breast feed appears paradoxical.…”

“…domestic violence) reasons we either did not measure or failed to detect, felt subjectively less able to cope with their infant's needs and demands than leftcradlers in our sample (Cooper et al, 2009;Reissland et al, 2009) To minimize this subjective distress, no-preference mothers may tend to intermittently disengage emotionally from their infants by adopting a partial right-cradling preference, circumventing the emotional right brain (Rosenblum & Andrews, 1994;Todd & Banerjee, 2016). Being less attuned to their child's needs, nopreference mothers are thus likely also to invest less psychological, behavioural and material resources in nurturing individual offspring needs (Rosenblum & Andrews, 1994;Todd & Banerjee, 2016). In view of the negativity bias for infant emotion mentioned above, this may only apply when the infant is feeling positive emotions.…”

“…All mothers in the parent study whose infants were aged 15 weeks or less during the study period were eligible for inclusion. This age limit was used because cradling laterality becomes biased to the dominant hand side as infant size and weight become significant factors (Todd & Banerjee, 2016). Informed consent was obtained from all mothers who agreed to participate in this sub-studythere were no refusals.…”

“…However, only one of these is empirically well supported: that left cradling is related to the fact that the left visual/aural/tactile field subserves the emotionally more sensitive right brain Swain, Lorberbaum, Kose, & Strathearn, 2007). Diverse evidence consistently links left cradling to the right brain's enhanced capacity for emotional processing (Fleva & Khan, 2015;Todd & Banerjee, 2016). When mothers were asked to hold a pillow to their chest they displayed no laterality bias until they were asked to imagine the pillow to be an infant, after which a left bias emerged (Weiland & Sperber, 1970).…”

Birth practices: Maternal‐neonate separation as a source of toxic stress

“…During maturation, the connection time gets longer. It has been shown that mothers hold their babies more on the left side (laterality; Todd & Banerjee, 2016), recent evidence suggest this supports the right brain development described by Schore (2001). Mothers in harsh and stressful environments do not show left laterality (Morgan, Hunt, Sieratzki, Woll, & Tomlinson, 2018)!…”