The effects of skill demands and object position on the distribution of preferred hand reaches

Mamolo, Carla; Roy, Éric; Bryden, Pamela J.; Rohr, Linda E.

doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.02.041

Cited by 52 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, it was hypothesized that the simple task did not require a great deal of skill and so would afford individuals the use of their nonpreferred hand, particularly in left hemispace. Other researchers have noted task effects on hand preference (see e.g., Cornwell, Harris, & Fitzgerald, 1991, Mamolo, Roy, Bryden, & Rohr, 2004). Yet, the current work failed to find a significant effect of task difficulty on the expression of hand preference.…”

Section: Task Effectsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Preferential reaching across regions of hemispace in adults and children

Bryden

Roy

2006

Dev. Psychobiol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the current study was to examine hand selection during reaching in children utilizing a developmental version of the preferential reaching paradigm (Bryden, Pryde, & Roy, 2000). A cross-sectional sample of eighty right-handed participants (ranging in age from 3 to 20 years) were asked to reach to objects located in different regions of hemispace. Each participant was asked to carry out two different actions, varying in degree of complexity, on the objects while the experimenter observed, which hand was used to perform each of the tasks. A repeated-measures ANOVA revealed that reaching towards the midline and ipsilateral positions in hemispace resulted in significantly more preferred hand reaches than reaching towards contralateral hemispace, regardless of age and task. With respect to age group effects, it was found that the 6 and 7 year olds and the 9 and 10 year olds relied heavily on their preferred hand to perform the task, indicating that hand selection in these children was driven primarily by motor dominance. In comparison, the youngest children and adults used their nonpreferred hand more frequently in contralateral space, indicating that object proximity cues or a hemispheric bias was driving hand selection. The implications of these findings for understanding hand preference and skill were discussed in terms of motor dominance versus spatial reasoning theory of hand selection in unimanual reaching.

show abstract

Section: Task Effectsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Preferential reaching across regions of hemispace in adults and children

Bryden

Roy

2006

Dev. Psychobiol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our data confirmed a trend for the dominant (right) arm to reach to left targets more than the nondominant (left) limb reached to right targets. Previous research has reported that the distribution of reaches is asymmetric across the workspace such that right-handed subjects prefer dominant reaches to targets located in the middle of the workspace and to targets just left of the body midline Bryden et al 2000;Gabbard and Helbig 2004;Mamolo et al 2004;Peters 1995). To the best of our knowledge, however, the current study is the first to show that the dominant limb reaches into contralateral space more than the nondominant arm even when only the visual representation of the hand (i.e., the cursor) moves across the body midline while the hand does not.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, a repeated-measures ANOVA on the arcsine-transformed values revealed a significant effect of target location on dominant reaches [F (2,18) ϭ 42.935, P Ͻ 0.001 (see Fig. 2 Previous work has also shown that the tendency for people to reach each limb to its own hemispace is asymmetric such that people reach the dominant limb to targets in the nondominant (left) space more often than they reach the nondominant limb to targets in the dominant (right) space Bryden et al 2000;Gabbard and Helbig 2004;Mamolo et al 2004Mamolo et al , 2006Peters, 1995). Figure 2 shows that our participants displayed a similar pattern.…”

Section: Limb Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…By combining the results of studies on limb selection with results from studies on limb performance, one might conclude that the two factors are, in fact, related. For example, it has been shown repeatedly that right-handed subjects tend to reach the nondominant limb to targets on the left side of the workspace and the dominant limb to targets located on the right side (Bryden et al 2000;Bryden and Roy 2006;Gabbard and Helbig 2004;Gonzalez and Goodale 2009;Mamolo et al 2004Mamolo et al , 2006Peters 1995). In addition, studies of interlimb motor performance have shown that reaches to the ipsilateral workspace often show advantages in reaction time, peak velocity, duration, final position accuracy, and movement trajectory relative to contralateral reaches (Carey et al 1996;Carson et al 1992Carson et al , 1993Chua et al 1992;van Der Staak 1975;Elliott et al 1993;Fisk and Goodale 1985;Ingum and Bjorklund 1994;Prablanc et al 1979).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hemispheric differences in the control of limb dynamics: a link between arm performance asymmetries and arm selection patterns

Coelho

Przybyla

Yadav

et al. 2013

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coelho CJ, Przybyla A, Yadav V, Sainburg RL. Hemispheric differences in the control of limb dynamics: a link between arm performance asymmetries and arm selection patterns. J Neurophysiol 109: 825-838, 2013. First published November 14, 2012 doi:10.1152/jn.00885.2012.-Human handedness has been described and measured from two perspectives: handedness inventories rate hand preferences, whereas other tests examine motor performance asymmetries. These two measurement approaches reflect a major controversy in a literature that defines handedness as either a preference or an asymmetry in sensorimotor processing. Over the past decade, our laboratory has developed a model of handedness based on lateralization of neural processes. This model attributes distinct control processes to each hemisphere, which in turn lead to observable interlimb sensorimotor performance asymmetries. We now hypothesize that arm preference, or choice, may depend on the interaction between sensorimotor performance asymmetries and the given task. The purpose of this study is to examine whether arm selection is linked to interlimb performance asymmetries during reaching. Right-handed subjects made choice and nonchoice reaches to each of eight targets (d ϭ 3.5 cm) arranged radially (r ϭ 13 cm) around a midline starting position. We displaced each cursor (one associated with each hand) 30 cm to the midline start circle to ensure that there were no hemispace-related geometric, mechanical, or perceptual biases to use either arm for the two midline targets. The three targets on each side of the midline received mostly reaches from the ipsilateral arm, a tendency previously described as a "hemispace bias." However, the midline targets, which were equidistant from each hand, received more dominant arm reaches. Dominant arm hand paths to these targets were straighter and more accurately directed. Inverse dynamics analyses revealed a more proficient dominant arm strategy that exploited intersegmental dynamics to a greater extent than did the nondominant arm. These findings suggest that sensorimotor asymmetries in dynamic coordination might explain limb choices. We discuss the implications of these results for theories of action selection, models of handedness, and models of neural lateralization.

show abstract

“…Task demand or skill demand is another variable that may have effect on limb selection (Bryden et al, 2003;Mamolo et al, 2004;Fagard, 2004, 2006;Hill and Khanem, 2009). For instance, using an object or even presenting it (pantomime) can lead to more recalling of the preferred hand in contralateral hemispace; while in lifting an object this does not occur (Mamolo et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%