ArticleRoyal Society open science2017
Assessment and analysis of human laterality for manipulation and communication using the Rennes Laterality Questionnaire.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Laterality in Emotional Language Processing in First and Second Language.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Heredity Indexes for Estimating Heritability Using Known and Unknown Family Data Based on the Model of Polygenic Inheritance.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2020Article
- Individual Differences and Hemispheric Asymmetries for Language and Spatial Attention.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite significant scientific advances, the nature of the left-hemispheric systems involved in language (speech and gesture) and manual actions is still unclear. To date, investigations of human laterality focused mainly on non-communication functions. Although gestural laterality data have been published for infants and children, relatively little is known about laterality of human gestural communication. This study investigated human laterality in depth considering non-communication manipulation actions and various gesture types involving hands, feet, face and ears. We constructed an online laterality questionnaire including 60 items related to daily activities. We collected 317 594 item responses by 5904 randomly selected participants. The highest percentages of strong left-lateralized (6.76%) and strong right-lateralized participants (75.19%) were for manipulation actions. The highest percentages of mixed left-lateralized (12.30%) and ambidextrous (50.23%) participants were found for head-related gestures. The highest percentage of mixed right-lateralized participants (55.33%) was found for auditory gestures. Every behavioural category showed a significant population-level right-side bias. More precisely, participants were predominantly right-lateralized for non-communication manual actions, for visual iconic, visual symbolic, visual deictic (with and without speech), tactile and auditory manual gestures as well as for podial and head-related gestures. Our findings support previous studies reporting that humans have left-brain predominance for gestures and complex motor activities such as tool-use. Our study shows that the Rennes Laterality Questionnaire is a useful research instrument to assess and analyse human laterality for both manipulation and communication functions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.