Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40238762›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Handy divisions: Hand-specific specialization of prehensile control in bimanual tasks.

Anvesh Naik, Satyajit Ambike

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Anvesh NaikDepartment of Health and Kinesiology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0484-9998
Satyajit AmbikeDepartment of Health and Kinesiology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0521-860X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When hammering a nail, why do right-handers wield the hammer in the right hand? The complementary dominance theory suggests a somewhat surprising answer. The two hands are specialized for different types of tasks: the dominant for manipulating objects, and the non-dominant for stabilizing objects. Right-handers wield the moving object with their right hand to leverage the skills of both hands. Functional specialization in hand use is often illustrated using examples of object manipulation. However, the complementary dominance theory is supported by wrist kinematics rather than object manipulation data. Therefore, our goal was to determine whether this theory extends to object manipulation. We hypothesized that hand-specific differences will be evident in the kinematics of hand-held objects and in the control of grip forces in right-handed individuals. Right-handed participants held two instrumented objects that were coupled by a spring. They moved one object while stabilizing the other object in various bimanual tasks. They performed motions of varying difficulty by tracking predictable or unpredictable targets. The two hands switched roles (stabilization vs movement) in various experimental blocks. The changing spring length perturbed both objects. We quantified the movement performance by measuring the objects' positions, and grip force control by measuring grip-load coupling in the moving hand and mean grip force in the stabilizing hand. The right hand produced more accurate object movement, along with stronger grip-load coupling, indicating superior predictive control of the right hand. In contrast, the left hand stabilized the object better and exerted a higher grip force, indicating superior impedance control of the left hand. Task difficulty had a weak effect on grip-load coupling during object movement and no effect on mean grip force during object stabilization. These behavioral results demonstrate that complementary dominance extends to object manipulation, though the weak effect of task difficulty on grip characteristics warrants further investigation. Neurophysiological investigations can now examine the hemisphere-specific neural mechanisms underlying these behavioral differences.

Indexed as

Functional LateralityHandHand StrengthPsychomotor PerformanceAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansMaleMovementYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40238762
PMCPMC12002523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.