Laterality最新文献

ABSTRACTStress exposure and reactivity may show differential associations with handedness, but shallow phenotyping may influence the current knowledge. Importantly, different handedness measures do not necessarily show high correlations with each other and should not be used interchangeably as they may reflect different dimensions of laterality. Here, data on handedness from 599 participants in the population-based, longitudinal Dortmund Vital Study was used to determine various asymmetry indices. Hand preference was assessed with the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI) and the lateral preference inventory (LPI) measuring handedness, footedness, earedness, and eyedness. Hand performance was determined using the pegboard test. In addition, data on several dimensions of stress exposure and reactivity, including hair cortisol, and mental well-being was analysed to determine associations with handedness. All handedness measures correlated significantly with each other, with the strongest correlation between the EHI and the LPI handedness score. The EHI and LPI hand measures resulted in the highest effect sizes and most consistent correlations with stress or mental well-being. In contrast, the pegboard test only showed very little association with the stress and mental well-being measures. This highlights the importance of handedness phenotyping. Including preference measures is recommended to disentangle the link between handedness and mental health.

Bias against left-handers is well-documented and seen in the etymology of "left" and "right" in most languages. The subject of this study, Ehud, lived between the exodus of the Hebrew slaves from Egypt and the establishment of the Israelite kingdom (c1200-1000 BC), at the transition between the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age 1. His left-handedness was crucial to his deliverance of the proto-nation from tyranny, recorded in Judges in the Hebrew Bible. The description of Ehud as left-handed ('iṭṭēr yaḏ-yεmînô) is used once more in the Hebrew Bible, also in Judges, to describe the artillery of Ehud's tribe. The words apparently mean "bound/restricted in the right hand", sometimes interpreted as "ambidextrous". This is unlikely: ambidexterity is uncommon. The artillery used the sling with either hand, but Ehud used his left (śεm'ōl) hand to draw his sword. śεm'ōl, used throughout the Hebrew Bible, means left, without bias or derogatory implications. We suggest that 'iṭṭēr yaḏ-yεmînô was a right-handed bias towards left-handed people, but Ehud's left-handed victory was recognized as significant. Significant enough that (a) the language changed and the biased description was dropped in favour of simple description, and (b) the army changed with the development of left-handed slingers (artillery).

Evidence suggests that language processing in bilinguals is less left-lateralized than in monolinguals. We explored dual-task decrement (DTD) for mono-, bi- and multilinguals in a verbal-motor dual-task paradigm. We expected monolinguals to show greater DTD than bilingual participants, who would show greater DTD than multilingual participants. Fifty right-handed participants (18 monolingual, 16 bilingual, 16 multilingual) completed verbal fluency and manual motor tasks in isolation and concurrently. Tasks were completed twice in isolation (left-handed, right-handed) and twice as dual-tasks (left-handed, right-handed); participants' motor-executing hands served proxy for hemispheric activation. Results supported the hypotheses. Completing dual-tasks incurred greater cost for manual motor tasks than for verbal fluency tasks. Negative cost of performing dual-tasks diminished as number of languages spoken increased; in fact, multilingual individuals demonstrated a dual-task advantage in both tasks when using the right hand, strongest in the verbal task. Dual-tasking had the greatest negative impact on verbal fluency of monolingual participants when the motor task was completed with the right hand; for bi- and multi-lingual participants, the greatest negative impact on verbal fluency was seen when the motor task was completed with the left hand. Results provide support for the bi-lateralization of language function in bi- and multilingual individuals.

Laterality indices (LIs) quantify the left-right asymmetry of brain and behavioural variables and provide a measure that is statistically convenient and seemingly easy to interpret. Substantial variability in how structural and functional asymmetries are recorded, calculated, and reported, however, suggest little agreement on the conditions required for its valid assessment. The present study aimed for consensus on general aspects in this context of laterality research, and more specifically within a particular method or technique (i.e., dichotic listening, visual half-field technique, performance asymmetries, preference bias reports, electrophysiological recording, functional MRI, structural MRI, and functional transcranial Doppler sonography). Experts in laterality research were invited to participate in an online Delphi survey to evaluate consensus and stimulate discussion. In Round 0, 106 experts generated 453 statements on what they considered good practice in their field of expertise. Statements were organised into a 295-statement survey that the experts then were asked, in Round 1, to independently assess for importance and support, which further reduced the survey to 241 statements that were presented again to the experts in Round 2. Based on the Round 2 input, we present a set of critically reviewed key recommendations to record, assess, and report laterality research for various methods.

We present a postnatal evaluation of skull developmental signaling in small African pangolin emphasizing structural, and cognitive trend in ontogeny for assessment of developmental instability, proper identification and classification, forty digitally processed skulls and foramen magnum from different geo-locations were assessed for asymmetry, foramen magnum shape and modularity using geometric and Elliptical Fourier analyses. Multivariate analysis of regression demonstrated low (p < 0.5) but directional fluctuating asymmetry (F₁₅₃₉ = 3.4045, F₈₈₂ = 3.2665, dorsal and ventral views). Allometric trajectories followed rostrocaudal, caudolateral directions; Intercepts for shape/size predictions were parallel. Mahalanobis distances between centroids (2.42) were significant (p < 0.01). The variance-covariance matrix in ontogeny lies between 0.0017 and 0.56. Foramen magnum outline descriptors by incremental harmonics revealed first 4 effective PCs defined 96.98% of shape properties and 3.02% constituted finerdetails. 74.1% accuracy decline after size factor elimination. Modulation PCA of covariance matrix and asymmetry component was 88.38% and 7.48% (PC1 and 2), respectively, the variance % predicted 10.08%. The studied samples confirmed 'handedness' and fluctuating asymmetries. Foramen magnum shape assumed priority over size in ontogeny with profound asymmetry (from the 5th harmonic), suggestive of compensations to lateralization in neural integration modules.

Meta-analyses have shown subtle, group-level asymmetries of spatial attention in adults favouring the left hemispace (pseudoneglect). However, no meta-analysis has synthesized data on children. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of spatial biases in children aged ≤16 years. Databases (PsycINFO, Web of Science & Scopus) and pre-print servers (bioRxiv, medRxiv & PsyArXiv) were searched for studies involving typically developing children with a mean age of ≤16, who were tested using line bisection. Thirty-three datasets, from 31 studies, involving 2101 children, were included. No bias was identified overall, but there was a small leftward bias in a subgroup where all children were aged ≤16. Moderator analysis found symmetrical neglect, with right-handed actions resulting in right-biased bisections, and left-handed actions in left-biased bisections. Bisections were more leftward in studies with a higher percentage of boys relative to girls. Mean age, hand preference, and control group status did not moderate biases, and there was no difference between children aged ≤7 and ≥7 years, although the number of studies in each moderator analysis was small. There was no evidence of small study bias. We conclude that pseudoneglect may be present in children but is dependent on individual characteristics (sex) and/or task demands (hand used).Registration: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/n68fz/).

ABSTRACTStudies have highlighted an association between motor laterality and speech production laterality. It is thought that common demands for sequential processing may underlie this association. However, most studies in this area have relied on relatively small samples and have infrequently explored the reliability of the tools used to assess lateralization. We, therefore, established the validity and reliability of an online battery measuring sequence-based motor laterality and language laterality before exploring the associations between laterality indices on language and motor tasks. The online battery was completed by 621 participants, 52 of whom returned to complete the battery a second time. The three motor tasks included in the battery showed good between-session reliability (r ≥ .78) and were lateralized in concordance with hand preference. The novel measure of speech production laterality was left lateralized at population level as predicted, but reliability was less satisfactory (r = .62). We found no evidence of an association between sequence-based motor laterality and language laterality. Those with a left-hand preference were more strongly lateralized on motor tasks requiring midline crossing; this effect was not observed in right-handers. We conclude that there is little evidence of the co-lateralization of language and sequence-based motor skill on this battery.

The golden snub-nosed monkey (Rhinopithecus roxellana) is a typical arboreal group-living Old World primate. While limb preference has been extensively studied in this species, limb preference consistency has not yet been explored. Here, based on 26 R. roxellana adults, we investigated whether individuals exhibit consistent motor biases in manual- (e.g., unimanual feeding and social grooming) and foot-related (e.g., bipedal locomotion) tasks and whether limb preference consistency is influenced by increased social interactions during social grooming. Results showed no consistency in the direction or strength of limb preference among tasks, except for lateral strength in handedness for unimanual feeding and footedness in the initiation of locomotion. Population-level foot preference was only found among right-handers. Marked lateral bias was found in unimanual feeding, indicating that it may be a sensitive behavioural measure for assessing manual preference, especially for provisioned populations. This study not only improves our understanding of the relationship between hand and foot preference in R. roxellana but also reveals potential differential hemispheric regulation of limb preference and the influence of increased social interaction on handedness consistency.

The symbolism of laterality in images implies that the virtuous figure is represented on the right of the scene whereas the sinful character is depicted on the left. In portraits of male and female characters this has reflected and reinforced stereotypes and inequalities down the ages. Given these premises, we hypothesized that the prototypical representations of Adam and Eve, as a man and a woman conflated with notions of virtue and vice, would show a non-random arrangement. We tested this hypothesis, sampling artistic depictions of the Garden of Eden, from the twelth century to the present day in three separately-collected series of 100, 99, and 142 images respectively. Eve is depicted to Adam's left significantly more often than chance (between 70% and 83%), particularly in pre-1600 artworks. We interpret this asymmetry as reflecting the perceived lesser status of women in relation to men, since the allegorical incipit of humankind. We also provide experimental evidence that this asymmetry, although pervasive, has not been internalized by modern viewers. Cognitive sciences account for this spatial asymmetry in terms of preference for figures placed within the left visual field of the observer, i.e., within the right space of the objective scene.