Hand use for grasping in a bimanual task: evidence for different roles?

Healthy adults favor stable left/right hand choices over performance at an unconstrained reach-to-grasp task

Reach-to-grasp actions are fundamental to the daily activities of human life, but few methods exist to assess individuals' reaching and grasping actions in unconstrained environments. The Block Building Task (BBT) provides an opportunity to directly observe and quantify these actions, including left/right hand choices. Here we sought to investigate the motor and non-motor causes of left/right hand choices, and optimize the design of the BBT, by manipulating motor and non-motor difficulty in the BBT's unconstrained reach-to-grasp task. We hypothesized that greater motor and non-motor (e.g. cognitive/perceptual) difficulty would drive increased usage of the dominant hand. To test this hypothesis, we modulated block size (large vs. small) to influence motor difficulty, and model complexity (10 vs. 5 blocks per model) to influence non-motor difficulty, in healthy adults (n = 57). Our data revealed that increased motor and non-motor difficulty led to lower task performance (slower task speed), but participants only increased use of their dominant hand only under the most difficult combination of conditions: in other words, participants allowed their performance to degrade before changing hand choices, even though participants were instructed only to optimize performance. These results demonstrate that hand choices during reach-to grasp actions are more stable than motor performance in healthy right-handed adults, but tasks with multifaceted difficulties can drive individuals to rely more on their dominant hand.

Hand differences in aiming task: A complementary spatial approach and analysis of dynamic brain networks with EEG

Left and right-hand exhibit differences in the execution of movements. Particularly, it has been shown that manual goal-directed aiming is more accurate with the right hand than with the left, which has been explained through the shorter time spent by the right hand in the feedback phase (FB). This explanation makes sense for the temporal aspects of the task; however, there is a lack of explanations for the spatial aspects. The present study hypothesizes that the right hand is more associated with the FB, while the left hand is more strongly associated with the pre-programming phase (PP). In addition, the present study aims to investigate differences between hands in functional brain connectivity (FBC). We hypothesize an increase in FBC of the right hand compared to the left hand. Twenty-two participants performed 20 trials of the goal-directed aiming task with both hands. Overall, the results confirm the study's hypotheses. Although the right hand stopped far from the target at the PP, it exhibited a lower final position error than the left hand. These findings imply that during the FB, the right hand compensates for the higher error observed in the PP, using the visual feedback to approach the target more closely than the left hand. Conversely, the left hand displayed a lower error at the PP than the right. Also, the right hand displayed greater FBC within and between brain hemispheres. This heightened connectivity in the right hand might be associated with inhibitory mechanisms between hemispheres.

Roles of Handedness and Hemispheric Lateralization: Implications for Rehabilitation of the Central and Peripheral Nervous Systems: A Rapid Review

IMPORTANCE

Handedness and motor asymmetry are important features of occupational performance. With an increased understanding of the basic neural mechanisms surrounding handedness, clinicians will be better able to implement targeted, evidence-based neurorehabilitation interventions to promote functional independence.

OBJECTIVE

To review the basic neural mechanisms behind handedness and their implications for central and peripheral nervous system injury.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant published literature obtained via MEDLINE.

FINDINGS

Handedness, along with performance asymmetries observed between the dominant and nondominant hands, may be due to hemispheric specializations for motor control. These specializations contribute to predictable motor control deficits that are dependent on which hemisphere or limb has been affected. Clinical practice recommendations for occupational therapists and other rehabilitation specialists are presented.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

It is vital that occupational therapists and other rehabilitation specialists consider handedness and hemispheric lateralization during evaluation and treatment. With an increased understanding of the basic neural mechanisms surrounding handedness, clinicians will be better able to implement targeted, evidence-based neurorehabilitation interventions to promote functional independence. Plain-Language Summary: The goal of this narrative review is to increase clinicians' understanding of the basic neural mechanisms related to handedness (the tendency to select one hand over the other for specific tasks) and their implications for central and peripheral nervous system injury and rehabilitation. An enhanced understanding of these mechanisms may allow clinicians to better tailor neurorehabilitation interventions to address motor deficits and promote functional independence.

Patient Outcomes After Peripheral Nerve Injury Depend on Bimanual Dexterity and Preserved Use of the Affected Hand

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how peripheral nerve injury affects human performance, behavior, and life. Hand use choices are important for rehabilitation after unilateral impairment, but rarely measured, and are not changed by the normal course of rehabilitation and daily life.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the relationship between hand use (L/R choices), motor performance, and patient-centered outcomes.

METHODS

Participants (n = 48) with unilateral peripheral nerve injury were assessed for hand use via Block Building Task, Motor Activity Log, and Edinburgh Handedness Inventory; dexterity (separately for each hand) via Nine-Hole Peg Test, Jebsen Taylor Hand Function Test, and a precision drawing task; patient-centered outcomes via surveys of disability, activity participation, and health-related quality of life; and injury-related factors including injury cause and affected nerve. Factor Analysis of Mixed Data was used to explore relationships between these variables. The data were analyzed under 2 approaches: comparing dominant hand (DH) versus non-dominant hand (NH), or affected versus unaffected hand.

RESULTS

The data were best explained by 5 dimensions. Good patient outcomes were associated with NH performance, DH performance (separately and secondarily to NH performance), and preserved function and use of the affected hand; whereas poor patient outcomes were associated with preserved but unused function of the affected hand.

CONCLUSION

After unilateral peripheral nerve injury, hand function, hand usage, and patient life arise from a complex interaction of many factors. To optimize rehabilitation after unilateral impairment, new rehabilitation methods are needed to promote performance and use with the NH, as well as the injured hand.

Blind people can actively manipulate virtual objects with a novel tactile device

Frequently in rehabilitation, visually impaired persons are passive agents of exercises with fixed environmental constraints. In fact, a printed tactile map, i.e. a particular picture with a specific spatial arrangement, can usually not be edited. Interaction with map content, instead, facilitates the learning of spatial skills because it exploits mental imagery, manipulation and strategic planning simultaneously. However, it has rarely been applied to maps, mainly because of technological limitations. This study aims to understand if visually impaired people can autonomously build objects that are completely virtual. Specifically, we investigated if a group of twelve blind persons, with a wide age range, could exploit mental imagery to interact with virtual content and actively manipulate it by means of a haptic device. The device is mouse-shaped and designed to jointly perceive, with one finger only, local tactile height and inclination cues of arbitrary scalar fields. Spatial information can be mentally constructed by integrating local tactile cues, given by the device, with global proprioceptive cues, given by hand and arm motion. The experiment consisted of a bi-manual task, in which one hand explored some basic virtual objects and the other hand acted on a keyboard to change the position of one object in real-time. The goal was to merge basic objects into more complex objects, like a puzzle. The experiment spanned different resolutions of the tactile information. We measured task accuracy, efficiency, usability and execution time. The average accuracy in solving the puzzle was 90.5%. Importantly, accuracy was linearly predicted by efficiency, measured as the number of moves needed to solve the task. Subjective parameters linked to usability and spatial resolutions did not predict accuracy; gender modulated the execution time, with men being faster than women. Overall, we show that building purely virtual tactile objects is possible in absence of vision and that the process is measurable and achievable in partial autonomy. Introducing virtual tactile graphics in rehabilitation protocols could facilitate the stimulation of mental imagery, a basic element for the ability to orient in space. The behavioural variable introduced in the current study can be calculated after each trial and therefore could be used to automatically measure and tailor protocols to specific user needs. In perspective, our experimental setup can inspire remote rehabilitation scenarios for visually impaired people.

Healthy adults favor stable left/right hand choices over performance at an unconstrained reach-to-grasp task

Reach-to-grasp actions are fundamental to the daily activities of human life, but few methods exist to assess individuals' reaching and grasping actions in unconstrained environments. The Block Building Task (BBT) provides an opportunity to directly observe and quantify these actions, including left/right hand choices. Here we sought to investigate the motor and non-motor causes of left/right hand choices, and optimize the design of the BBT, by manipulating motor and non-motor difficulty in the BBT's unconstrained reach-to-grasp task We hypothesized that greater motor and non-motor (e.g. cognitive/perceptual) difficulty would drive increased usage of the dominant hand. To test this hypothesis, we modulated block size (large vs. small) to influence motor difficulty, and model complexity (10 vs. 5 blocks per model) to influence non-motor difficulty, in healthy adults (n=57). We hypothesized that healthy adults with high non-dominant hand performance in a precision drawing task should be more likely to use their non-dominant hand in the BBT. Our data revealed that increased motor and non-motor difficulty led to lower task performance (slower speed), but participants only increased use of their dominant hand only under the most difficult combination of conditions: in other words, participants allowed their performance to degrade before changing hand choices, even though participants were instructed only to optimize performance. These results demonstrate that hand choices during reach-to grasp actions are more stable than motor performance in healthy right-handed adults, but tasks with multifaceted difficulties can drive individuals to rely more on their dominant hand.

Statements and Declarations

Dr. Philip and Washington University in St. Louis have a licensing agreement with PlatformSTL to commercialize the iPad app used in this study.

Tradeoffs of estimating reaction time with absolute and relative thresholds

Measuring the duration of cognitive processing with reaction time is fundamental to several subfields of psychology. Many methods exist for estimating movement initiation when measuring reaction time, but there is an incomplete understanding of their relative performance. The purpose of the present study was to identify and compare the tradeoffs of 19 estimates of movement initiation across two experiments. We focused our investigation on estimating movement initiation on each trial with filtered kinematic and kinetic data. Nine of the estimates involved absolute thresholds (e.g., acceleration 1000 back to 200 mm/s2, micro push-button switch), and the remaining ten estimates used relative thresholds (e.g., force extrapolation, 5% of maximum velocity). The criteria were the duration of reaction time, immunity to the movement amplitude, responsiveness to visual feedback during movement execution, reliability, and the number of manually corrected trials (efficacy). The three best overall estimates, in descending order, were yank extrapolation, force extrapolation, and acceleration 1000 to 200 mm/s2. The sensitive micro push-button switch, which was the simplest estimate, had a decent overall score, but it was a late estimate of movement initiation. The relative thresholds based on kinematics had the six worst overall scores. An issue with the relative kinematic thresholds was that they were biased by the movement amplitude. In summary, we recommend measuring reaction time on each trial with one of the three best overall estimates of movement initiation. Future research should continue to refine existing estimates while also exploring new ones.

Sex differences in the neural underpinnings of unimanual and bimanual control in adults

While many of the movements we make throughout our day involve just one upper limb, most daily movements require a certain degree of coordination between both upper limbs. Historically, sex differences in eye-hand coordination have been observed. As well, there are demonstrated sex-specific differences in hemisphere symmetry, interhemispheric connectivity, and motor cortex organization. While it has been suggested that these anatomical differences may underlie sex-related differences in performance, sex differences in the functional neural correlate underlying bimanual performance have not been explicitly investigated. In the current study we tested the hypothesis that the functional connectivity underlying bimanual movement control differed depending on the sex of an individual. Participants underwent MRI scanning to acquire anatomical and functional brain images. During the functional runs, participants performed unimanual and bimanual coordination tasks using two button boxes. The tasks included pressing the buttons in time to an auditory cue with either their left or their right hand individually (unimanual), or with both hands simultaneously (bimanual). The bimanual task was further divided into either an in-phase (mirror/symmetrical) or anti-phase (parallel/asymmetrical) condition. Participants were provided with extensive training to ensure task comprehension, and performance error rates were found to be equivalent between men and women. A generalized psychophysiological interaction (gPPI) analysis was implemented to examine how functional connectivity in each condition was modulated by sex. In support of our hypothesis, women and men demonstrated differences in the neural correlates underlying unimanual and bimanual movements. In line with previous literature, functional connectivity patterns showed sex-related differences for right- vs left-hand movements. Sex-specific functional connectivity during bimanual movements was not a sum of the functional connectivity underlying right- and left-hand unimanual movements. Further, women generally showed greater interhemispheric functional connectivity across all conditions compared to men and had greater connectivity between task-related cortical areas, while men had greater connectivity involving the cerebellum. Sex differences in brain connectivity were associated with both unimanual and bimanual movement control. Not only do these findings provide novel insight into the fundamentals of how the brain controls bimanual movements in both women and men, they also present potential clinical implications on how bimanual movement training used in rehabilitation can best be tailored to the needs of individuals.

Validity of Novel Outcome Measures for Hand Function Performance After Stroke Using Egocentric Video

BACKGROUND

Evaluating upper limb (UL) interventions after stroke calls for outcome measures that describe impact on daily life in the community. UL use ratio has been used to quantify the performance domain of UL function, but generally focuses on arm use only. A hand use ratio could provide additional information about UL function after stroke. Additionally, a ratio based on the role of the more-affected hand in bilateral activities (stabilizer or manipulator) may also reflect hand function recovery. Egocentric video is a novel modality that can record both dynamic and static hand use and hand roles at home after stroke.

OBJECTIVE

To validate hand use and hand role ratios from egocentric video against standardized clinical UL assessments.

METHODS

Twenty-four stroke survivors recorded daily tasks in a home simulation laboratory and their daily routines at home using egocentric cameras. Spearman's correlation was used to compare the ratios with the Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Motor Activity Log-30 (MAL, Amount of Use (AoU), and Quality of Movement (QoM)).

RESULTS

Hand use ratio significantly correlated with the FMA-UE (0.60, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.81), ARAT (0.44, CI: 0.04, 0.72), MAL-AoU (0.80, CI: 0.59, 0.91), and MAL-QoM (0.79, CI: 0.57, 0.91). Hand role ratio had no significant correlations with the assessments.

CONCLUSION

Hand use ratio automatically extracted from egocentric video, but not hand role ratio, was found to be a valid measure of hand function performance in our sample. Further investigation is necessary to interpret hand role information.

Handedness did not affect motor skill acquisition by the dominant hand or interlimb transfer to the non-dominant hand regardless of task complexity level

Patients undergoing unilateral orthopedic or neurological rehabilitation have different levels of impairments in the right- or left-dominant hand. However, how handedness and the complexity of the motor task affect motor skill acquisition and its interlimb transfer remains unknown. In the present study, participants performed finger key presses on a numeric keypad at 4 levels of sequence complexities with each hand in a randomized order. Furthermore, they also performed motor sequence practice with the dominant hand to determine its effect on accuracy, reaction time, and movement time. The NASA-TLX at the end of each block of both testing and practice was used to confirm participants' mental workload related to sequence complexity. Both right- and left-handed participants performed the motor sequence task with faster RT when using their right hand. Although participants had increasing RT with increasing sequence complexity, this association was unrelated to handedness. Motor sequence practice produced motor skill acquisition and interlimb transfer indicated by a decreased RT, however, these changes were independent of handedness. Higher sequence complexity was still associated with longer RT after the practice, moreover, both right- and left-handed participants' RT increased with the same magnitude with the increase in sequence complexity. Similar behavioral pattern was observed in MT as in RT. Overall, our RT results may indicate left-hemisphere specialization for motor sequencing tasks, however, neuroimaging studies are needed to support these findings. On the other hand, handedness did not affect motor skill acquisition by the dominant hand or interlimb transfer to the non-dominant hand regardless of task complexity level.

Biosignal processing methods to explore the effects of side-dominance on patterns of bi- and unilateral standing stability in healthy young adults

We examined the effects of side-dominance on the laterality of standing stability using ground reaction force, motion capture (MoCap), and EMG data in healthy young adults. We recruited participants with strong right (n = 15) and left (n = 9) hand and leg dominance (side-dominance). They stood on one or two legs on a pair of synchronized force platforms for 50 s with 60 s rest between three randomized stance trials. In addition to 23 CoP-related variables, we also computed six MoCap variables representing each lower-limb joint motion time series. Moreover, 39 time- and frequency-domain features of EMG data from five muscles in three muscle groups were analyzed. Data from the multitude of biosignals converged and revealed concordant patterns: no differences occurred between left- and right-side dominant participants in kinetic, kinematic, or EMG outcomes during bipedal stance. Regarding single leg stance, larger knee but lower ankle joint kinematic values appeared in left vs right-sided participants during non-dominant stance. Left-vs right-sided participants also had lower medial gastrocnemius EMG activation during non-dominant stance. While right-side dominant participants always produced larger values for kinematic data of ankle joint and medial gastrocnemius EMG activation during non-dominant vs dominant unilateral stance, this pattern was the opposite for left-sided participants, showing larger values when standing on their dominant vs non-dominant leg, i.e., participants had a more stable balance when standing on their right leg. Our results suggest that side-dominance affects biomechanical and neuromuscular control strategies during unilateral standing.

Failure to Compensate: Patients With Nerve Injury Use Their Injured Dominant Hand, Even When Their Nondominant Is More Dexterous

OBJECTIVE

To identify how individuals respond to unilateral upper extremity peripheral nerve injury via compensation (increased use of the nondominant hand). We hypothesized that injury to the dominant hand would have a greater effect on hand use (left vs right choices). We also hypothesized that compensation would not depend on current (postinjury) nondominant hand performance because many patients undergo rehabilitation that is not designed to alter hand use.

DESIGN

Observational survey, single-arm.

SETTINGS

Academic research institution and referral center.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 48 adults (N=48) with unilateral upper extremity peripheral nerve injury. Another 14 declined participation. Referred sample, including all eligible patients from 16 months at 1 nerve injury clinic and 1 hand therapy clinic.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Hand use (% of actions with each hand) via Block Building Task. Dexterity via Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function.

RESULTS

Participants preferred their dominant hand regardless of whether it was injured: hand usage (dominant/nondominant) did not differ from typical adults, regardless of injured side (P>.07), even though most participants (77%) were more dexterous with their uninjured nondominant hand (mean asymmetry index, -0.16±0.25). The Block Building Task was sensitive to hand dominance (P=2 × 10-4) and moderately correlated with Motor Activity Log amount scores (r2=0.33, P<.0001). Compensation was associated only with dominant hand dexterity (P=3.9 × 10-3), not on nondominant hand dexterity, rehabilitation, or other patient and/or injury factors (P>.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with peripheral nerve injury with dominant hand injury do not compensate with their unaffected nondominant hand, even if it is more dexterous. For the subset of patients unlikely to recover function with the injured hand, they could benefit from rehabilitation that encourages compensation with the nondominant hand.

Examining the Mechanisms of Internal and External Focus of Attention With Donders' Subtractive Method

The goal of the current study was to measure the processing demands on the stages of information processing with internal and external foci of attention. Participants completed simple and two-choice reaction time tasks with internal and external foci of attention. Donders' subtraction method was used to isolate the cumulative duration of stages unique to simple and choice reaction time tasks. Mean reaction time was comparable with internal and external foci of attention in simple and two-choice reaction time tasks. These results suggest that processing demands were comparable with internal and external foci of attention. We hypothesize that there was not a processing advantage for an external focus in simple reaction time because the required movements had low movement complexity.

Promoting Executive Function Skills in Preschoolers Using a Play-Based Program

In recent years, play has been shown to be a powerful means to enhance learning and brain development. It is also known that through play children enhance their executive function (EF) skills. Furthermore, well-developed EF in preschoolers has been shown to be an important predictor for later academic and life success. Armed with this information a program, Building Brains and Futures (BBF), for developing EF through play was designed for 3–5-year-old. The program consisted of 10 simple, fun, and interactive games selected to enhance various facets of EF. The 10 games included were: dimensional change card sort, lips and ears, block building, musical freeze, opposites, pretend play, red light/green light, shared project, Simon says, and wait for it. The program was implemented with a group of children shown to have challenges with respect to kindergarten readiness. The approach was first, to build adult capability by sharing knowledge of brain development, EF, and the importance of play with educators, caregivers, and parents. Second, to build skills in delivering the program in the school setting. Children engaged with the program of games for a minimum of 6 weeks. Their performance on a battery of direct measures of EF, language, and motor skills, were recorded before and after the program. The results showed improvement in all three domains. In addition, adopters of the BBF program reported it was easily and successfully integrated into their existing preschool curricula. The importance of intentional adult directed play in building developmental learning, including EF, is discussed.

Neuromuscular Fatigue in Unimanual Handgrip Does Not Completely Affect Simultaneous Bimanual Handgrip

Simultaneous bimanual movements are not merely the sum of two unimanual movements. Here, we considered the unimanual/bimanual motor system as comprising three components: unimanual-specific, bimanual-specific, and overlapping (mobilized during both unimanual and bimanual movements). If the force-generating system controlling the same limb differs between unimanual and bimanual movements, unimanual exercise would be expected to fatigue the unimanual-specific and overlapping parts in the force-generating system but not the bimanual-specific part. Therefore, we predicted that the decrease in bimanual force generation induced by unimanual neuromuscular fatigue would be smaller than the decrease in unimanual force generation. Sixteen healthy right-handed adults performed unimanual and bimanual maximal handgrip measurements before and after a submaximal fatiguing handgrip task. In the fatigue task, participants were instructed to maintain unimanual handgrip force at 50% of their maximal handgrip force until the time to task failure. Each participant performed this task in a left-hand fatigue (LF) condition and a right-hand fatigue (RF) condition, in a random order. Although the degree of neuromuscular fatigue was comparable in both conditions, as expected, the decrease in bimanual right handgrip force was significantly smaller than those during unimanual right performance in the RF condition, but not in the LF condition. These results indicate that for the right-hand, neuromuscular fatigue in unimanual handgrip does not completely affect simultaneous bimanual handgrip. Regarding the underlying mechanisms, we propose that although neuromuscular fatigue caused by unimanual handgrip reduces the motor output of unimanual-specific and overlapping parts in the force-generating system, when simultaneous bimanual handgrip is performed, the overlapping part (which is partially fatigued) and the bimanual-specific part (which is not yet fatigued) generate motor output, thus decreasing the force reduction.

Hand preference for unimanual and bimanual tasks: Evidence from questionnaires and preferential reaching

The current research compared hand selection in a preferential reaching paradigm with unimanual (i.e., pick-up cup) and bimanual (pick-up cup and pour from pitcher) tasks. In addition, relationships between self-report, questionnaire-based hand preference (unimanual and bimanual) and patterns of hand selection were assessed. Data offer support for a division of labour between the hands in at the midline; however, bimanual selection otherwise reflects consideration of object proximity (i.e., location) and comfort (i.e., biomechanical constraints). When grasping cups in right space, the right-hand was used to stabilize the cup and left-hand to mobilize the pitcher, whereas the opposite pattern was observed in left-space. Unimanual hand selection was also driven by object location. Subsequent analyses revealed a relationship between unimanual measures, but not bimanual measures of hand preference. Overall, findings support the notion that questionnaire data are associated with hand preference for grasping to a certain extent; however, use of a comprehensive battery of assessments is recommended when assessing and/or predicting handedness.

Exploring the Interaction Between Handedness and Body Parts Ownership by Means of the Implicit Association Test

The experience of owning a body is built upon the integration of exteroceptive, interoceptive, and proprioceptive signals. Recently, it has been suggested that motor signals could be particularly important in producing the feeling of body part ownership. One thus may hypothesize that the strength of this feeling may not be spatially uniform; rather, it could vary as a function of the degree by which different body parts are involved in motor behavior. Given that our dominant hand plays a leading role in our motor behavior, we hypothesized that it could be more strongly associated with one’s self compared to its non-dominant counterpart. To explore whether this possible asymmetry manifests as a stronger implicit association of the right hand (vs left hand) with the self, we administered the Implicit Association Test to a group of 70 healthy individuals. To control whether this asymmetric association is human-body specific, we further tested whether a similar asymmetry characterizes the association between a right (vs left) animal body part with the concept of self, in an independent sample of subjects (N = 70, 140 subjects total). Our results revealed a linear relationship between the magnitude of the implicit association between the right hand with the self and the subject’s handedness. In detail, the strength of this association increased as a function of hand preference. Critically, the handedness score did not predict the association of the right-animal body part with the self. These findings suggest that, in healthy individuals, the dominant and non-dominant hands are differently perceived at an implicit level as belonging to the self. We argue that such asymmetry may stem from the different roles that the two hands play in our adaptive motor behavior.

Preferential Reaching and End-State Comfort: How Task Demands Influence Motor Planning

Various factors (e.g., hand preference, object properties) constrain reach-to-grasp in hemispace. With object use, end-state comfort (ESC) has been shown to supersede the preferential use of one hand at the midline. To assess how location, size, and orientation of objects (dowel, mallet, cup) influence preferred-hand use and ESC (N = 50; M_age = 20.83), three preferential reaching tasks were implemented. Object location influenced hand selection in all tasks, along with size (cups) and orientation (mallets). Object location and orientation influenced ESC, but only with dowels and mallets. When oriented away from the preferred hand in hemispace, there was a higher occurrence of non-preferred hand use to facilitate ESC. Overall, findings add to understanding of ESC and preferential reaching with varying task demands.

An evaluation of visuospatial skills using hands-on tasks

Several tests of mental rotation ability have been used to investigate its development and the origins of sex differences. One of the most used tests is the mental rotation test (MRT) by Vandenberg and Kuse. A limitation of the MRT is that it is a pen-and-paper test with 2D images of 3D objects. This is a challenge to the ecological validity of the MRT because mental rotation typically involves physical 3D objects that are also physically manipulated. The purpose of the present study was to compare mental rotation ability as evaluated by the MRT to three new tasks with physical objects (toy bricks) that were physically manipulated. The different tasks allowed us to vary the processing demands on mental rotation while standardizing other aspects of the tasks. Fifty-nine females and twenty-eight males completed the LMR and HMR conditions (low- and high-mental rotation demands, respectively) of the brick building task (BBT), a visual search task, and the MRT. As demands on mental rotation for the BBT increased, performance decreased and a sex difference, with males outperforming females, increased. There were correlations between all tasks, but they were larger between the versions of the BBT with the MRT. The results suggest that spatial skill is an assembly of interrelated subskills and that the sex difference is sensitive to the demands on mental rotation and dimensionality crossing. The benefits of the BBT are that it is ecologically valid, avoids dimensionality crossing, and the demands on mental rotation can be manipulated.

The probability of choosing both hands depends on an interaction between motor capacity and limb-specific control in chronic stroke

A goal of rehabilitation after stroke is to promote pre-stroke levels of arm use for every day, frequently bimanual, functional activities. We reasoned that, after a stroke, the choice to use one or both hands for bimanual tasks might depend not only on residual motor capacity, but also the specialized demands imposed by the task on the paretic hand. To capture spontaneous, task-specific choices, we covertly observed 50 pre-stroke right-handed chronic stroke survivors (25 each of left, LHD, and right-hemisphere damage, RHD) and 11 age-similar control adults and recorded their hand use strategies for two pairs of bimanual tasks with distinct demands: one with greater precision requirements (photo-album tasks), and another with greater stabilization requirements (letter-envelope tasks). The primary outcome was the choice to use one or both hands. Logistic regression was used to test the two hypotheses that the probability of choosing a bimanual strategy would be greater in those with less severe motor impairment and also in those with LHD. When collapsed across the four tasks, we found support for these hypotheses. Notably, however, the influence of these factors on bimanual choice varied based on task demands. For the photo-album pair, the probability of a bimanual strategy was greater for those with LHD compared to RHD, regardless of the degree of motor impairment. For the letter-envelope pair, we found a significant interaction between impairment and side of lesion in determining the likelihood of choosing both hands. Therefore, the manner in which side of lesion moderates the effect of impairment on hand use depends on the task.

Shifts of the point-of-change can be attributed to a lower mechanical cost of motor execution

In a previous study on hand selection in a sequential reaching task, the authors showed a shift of the point-of-change (POC) to the left of the midline. This implies that participants conducted a number of contralateral reaches with their dominant, right hand. Contralateral movements have longer planning and execution times and a lower precision. In the current study, we asked whether lower mechanical costs of motor execution or lower cognitive costs of motor planning compensated for these disadvantages. Theories on hemispheric differences postulate lower mechanical costs in the dominant hemisphere and lower cognitive costs in the left hemisphere (independent of handedness). In right-handed participants, both factors act agonistically to reduce the total cost of right-handed reaches. To distinguish between the cost factors, we had left- and right-hand-dominant participants execute a sequential, unimanual reaching task. Results showed a left-shift of the POC in the right-handed and a right-shift in the left-handed group. Both shifts were similar in magnitude. These findings indicate that only the mechanical cost of motor execution compensates for the disadvantages of the contralateral reaches, while the cognitive cost of motor planning is irrelevant for the POC shift.

On the Neurocircuitry of Grasping: The influence of action intent on kinematic asymmetries in reach-to-grasp actions

Evidence from electrophysiology suggests that nonhuman primates produce reach-to-grasp movements based on their functional end goal rather than on the biomechanical requirements of the movement. However, the invasiveness of direct-electrical stimulation and single-neuron recording largely precludes analogous investigations in humans. In this review, we present behavioural evidence in the form of kinematic analyses suggesting that the cortical circuits responsible for reach-to-grasp actions in humans are organized in a similar fashion. Grasp-to-eat movements are produced with significantly smaller and more precise maximum grip apertures (MGAs) than are grasp-to-place movements directed toward the same objects, despite near identical mechanical requirements of the two subsequent (i.e., grasp-to-eat and grasp-to-place) movements. Furthermore, the fact that this distinction is limited to right-handed movements suggests that the system governing reach-to-grasp movements is asymmetric. We contend that this asymmetry may be responsible, at least in part, for the preponderance of right-hand dominance among the global population.

Dual-task performance of speech and motor skill: verb generation facilitates grasping behaviour

Pronouncing nouns or verbs while grasping distinctly alters movement. Changes in hand speed and final position occur according to the meaning of the words spoken. These results are typically found when executing a single movement paired with a single word. For example, pronouncing the word 'fast' increased the speed of the hand when reaching to grasp. Our objective was to compare how verb and noun fluency tasks interact with grasping behaviour in a grasp-to-construct task. Because previous imaging research shows that verb and noun production activates distinct neural areas, we reasoned that grasping outcomes would differ according to the category of word produced by participants. Specifically, we hypothesized that verb pronunciation would distinctly affect grasping behaviour compared to producing nouns. We recruited 38 young adults who performed a grasp-to-construct task and two different verbal fluency tasks. Participants completed each task (grasp, verb fluency, and noun fluency) separately as control conditions, and the grasping and each speaking task simultaneously for dual-task conditions. We found that during the dual-task condition, when generating nouns and grasping, participants made significantly more grasping errors (inaccurate grasps) compared to the control and verb dual-task conditions. Moreover, our results revealed a relationship between the number of verbs generated and grasping performance. Participants who generated more verbs were faster and more accurate during the motor component of the dual-task condition. This relationship was not observed when nouns were produced, indicating a unique relationship between verb production and functional grasping. The result is a facilitation effect, diminishing the negative outcome on motor control associated with increased cognitive load (as observed during noun pronunciation).

The left cerebral hemisphere may be dominant for the control of bimanual symmetric reach-to-grasp movements

Previous research has established that the left cerebral hemisphere is dominant for the control of continuous bimanual movements. The lateralisation of motor control for discrete bimanual movements, in contrast, is underexplored. The purpose of the current study was to investigate which (if either) hemisphere is dominant for discrete bimanual movements. Twenty-one participants made bimanual reach-to-grasp movements towards pieces of candy. Participants grasped the candy to either place it in their mouths (grasp-to-eat) or in a receptacle near their mouths (grasp-to-place). Research has shown smaller maximum grip apertures (MGAs) for unimanual grasp-to-eat movements than unimanual grasp-to-place movements when controlled by the left hemisphere. In Experiment 1, participants made bimanual symmetric movements where both hands made grasp-to-eat or grasp-to-place movements. We hypothesised that a left hemisphere dominance for bimanual movements would cause smaller MGAs in both hands during bimanual grasp-to-eat movements compared to those in bimanual grasp-to-place movements. The results revealed that MGAs were indeed smaller for bimanual grasp-to-eat movements than grasp-to-place movements. This supports that the left hemisphere may be dominant for the control of bimanual symmetric movements, which agrees with studies on continuous bimanual movements. In Experiment 2, participants made bimanual asymmetric movements where one hand made a grasp-to-eat movement while the other hand made a grasp-to-place movement. The results failed to support the potential predictions of left hemisphere dominance, right hemisphere dominance, or contralateral control.

Pre-crastination and procrastination effects occur in a reach-to-grasp task

How do we decide which object to pick up when faced with two alternatives? Imagine one object is near, but needs to be carried a long distance, and the other object is far, but needs to be carried a short distance. You might predict that participants would favour the far object that needs to be carried a short distance. In other words, they would procrastinate and delay picking up an object to minimise physical effort. In actuality, participants prefer to carry the near object a long distance, which is called pre-crastination. Pre-crastination may be preferred to procrastination because picking up the first object hastens completion of the first goal of the task and, subsequently, decreases cognitive load. The goal of the current study was to further investigate the mechanisms of the pre-crastination effect. This was done by converting the primarily walking task used in the first study on pre-crastination to a reach-to-grasp task. This change enabled the measurement of the duration of information processing (i.e., reaction time) when participants decided which object to move. Surprisingly, participants exhibited a range of behaviours: about 40% pre-crastinated, 40% procrastinated, and 20% neither pre-crastinated nor procrastinated. We suggest that scaling the task down from a walking task to a reach-to-grasp task altered the physical effort, cognitive load, and the interaction between these task demands. This enabled some participants to pre-crastinate and others to procrastinate. There was an intriguing relationship between the duration of information processing and the behaviour of participants: participants with the shortest reaction time had the strongest tendency to pre-crastinate, and participants with the longest reaction time had the strongest tendency to procrastinate. These findings fit with the automatic pre-crastination response hypothesis; that the "decision" to pre-crastinate is automatic. This automaticity caused the short durations of information processing for participants who pre-crastinated. Participants who procrastinated had to, first, inhibit the automatic response to pre-crastinate, which caused long durations of information processing.

The home handedness questionnaire: pilot data from preschoolers

While handedness questionnaires are widely used in adults, there is no comparable measure designed specifically for children. The current study developed the Home Handedness Questionnaire (HHQ), a new measure for preschoolers administered by parents using common household items. The HHQ has two scales that distinguish action types typically combined on other measures: actions performed with only the right or left hand (i.e., unimanual, such as holding a toothbrush), and actions performed with one hand holding the object for the other hand's action (i.e., role-differentiated bimanual manipulation or RDBM, such as unscrewing a lid from a jar). The HHQ was able to detect right preference, left preference, and no preference for unimanual and RDBM actions in a proof of concept study in 3-year-olds (N = 64). The HHQ identified a majority of children as right-handed, but was also sensitive to variability in direction across skill types. Approximately one-quarter of children in the sample had mixed preferences for the two types of manual skills, suggesting that for a subgroup of children, hand use patterns may still be undergoing change. Suggestions for refining the HHQ are discussed. Overall, the HHQ is a promising multidimensional parent-led tool for assessing preschool handedness.

Effects of side-dominance on knee joint proprioceptive target-matching asymmetries

AIMS

Right- and left-side-dominant individuals reveal target-matching asymmetries between joints of the dominant and non-dominant upper limbs. However, it is unclear if such asymmetries are also present in lower limb's joints. We hypothesized that right-side-dominant participants perform knee joint target-matching tasks more accurately with their non-dominant leg compared to left-side-dominant participants.

METHODS

Participants performed position sense tasks using each leg by moving each limb separately and passively on an isokinetic dynamometer.

RESULTS

Side-dominance affected (p < 0.05) knee joint absolute position errors only in the non-dominant leg but not in the dominant leg: right-side-dominant participants produced less absolute position errors (2.82° ± 0.72°) with the non-dominant leg compared to left-side-dominant young participants (3.54° ± 0.33°).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, right-side-dominant participants tend to perform a target-matching task more accurately with the non-dominant leg compared to left-side-dominant participants. Our results extend the literature by showing that right-hemisphere specialization under proprioceptive target-matching tasks may be not evident at the lower limb joints.

Hear speech, change your reach: changes in the left-hand grasp-to-eat action during speech processing

Research has shown that the kinematic characteristics of right-hand movements change when executed during both speech production and processing. Despite the variety of prehension and manual actions used to examine this relationship, the literature has yet to examine potential movement effects using an action with a distinct kinematic signature: the hand-to-mouth (grasp-to-eat) action. In this study, participants performed grasp-to-eat and grasp-to-place actions in (a) a quiet environment and (b) while processing speech. Results during the quiet condition replicated the previous findings; consistently smaller grasp-to-eat (compared to grasp-to-place), maximum grip apertures appeared only when using the right hand. Interestingly, in the listen condition, smaller maximum grip apertures in the grasp-to-eat movement appeared in both the right and left hands, despite the fact that participants were right-handed. This paper addresses these results in relation with similar behaviour observed in children, and discusses implications for functional lateralization and neural organization.

Wait wait, don't tell me: Handedness questionnaires do not predict hand preference for grasping

Handedness questionnaires are a common screening tool in psychology and neuroscience, used whenever a participant's performance on a given task may conceivably be affected by their laterality. Two widely-used examples of such questionnaires are the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory and the Waterloo Handedness Questionnaire. Both instruments ask respondents to report their hand preference for performing a variety of common tasks (e.g., throwing a ball, or opening a drawer). Here we combined questions from the two instruments (E-WHQ; 22 questions total) and asked participants to report their preferred hand for each via a five-point scale. The purpose of this study was to determine whether responses on the E-WHQ are accurate, reliable, and/or predictive of hand-preference for a simple grasp-to-construct task. Regarding accuracy, handedness scores were 5% lower when participants used a scrambled response key versus a consistent one. Test-retest reliability of the questionnaire was weak, with any given inventory item eliciting a different response from 34% of respondents upon retesting. Neither was the E-WHQ predictively useful-although both left- and right-handers preferred their dominant hands, E-WHQ score did not correlate with overall percentage of dominant-hand grasps in either group. We conclude that the E-WHQ is unsuited for predicting hand preference for grasping.

Complexity of movement preparation and the spatiotemporal coupling of bimanual reach-to-grasp movements

There is a movement preparation cost for bimanual asymmetric reaching movements compared to bimanual symmetric movements. This is likely caused by the complex spatiotemporal coupling of bimanual asymmetric movements. The spatiotemporal coupling of bimanual reach-to-grasp movements has been investigated, but not the potential movement preparation costs. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationship between movement preparation costs and spatiotemporal coupling of reach-to-grasp movements. Twenty-four participants made unimanual, bimanual symmetric, and bimanual asymmetric reach-to-grasp movements in four-choice reaction time tasks. There was a movement preparation cost for bimanual symmetric reach-to-grasp movements compared to unimanual movements, which was not previously seen for reaching movements. Coordinating two symmetric grasps probably caused this bimanual symmetric cost, as we have previously shown that there is no bimanual symmetric cost for reaching movements. It was also surprising that the complexity of movement preparation was comparable for bimanual symmetric and asymmetric reach-to-grasp movements. However, the spatial coupling of bimanual asymmetric movements at movement initiation suggested that they were prepared as bimanual symmetric movements. Online control was then used to modify these symmetric reach-to-grasp movements into asymmetric movements. Preparing bimanual symmetric reach-to-grasp movements in advance instead of asymmetric movements likely prevented a bimanual asymmetric cost.

The Neural Correlates of Grasping in Left-Handers: When Handedness Does Not Matter

Neurophysiological studies showed that in macaques, grasp-related visuomotor transformations are supported by a circuit involving the anterior part of the intraparietal sulcus, the ventral and the dorsal region of the premotor area. In humans, a similar grasp-related circuit has been revealed by means of neuroimaging techniques. However, the majority of "human" studies considered movements performed by right-handers only, leaving open the question of whether the dynamics underlying motor control during grasping is simply reversed in left-handers with respect to right-handers or not. To address this question, a group of left-handed participants has been scanned with functional magnetic resonance imaging while performing a precision grasping task with the left or the right hand. Dynamic causal modeling was used to assess how brain regions of the two hemispheres contribute to grasping execution and whether the intra- and inter-hemispheric connectivity is modulated by the choice of the performing hand. Results showed enhanced inter-hemispheric connectivity between anterior intraparietal and dorsal premotor cortices during grasping execution with the left dominant hand (LDH) (e.g., right hemisphere) compared to the right (e.g., left hemisphere). These findings suggest that that the left hand, although dominant and theoretically more skilled in left handers, might need additional resources in terms of the visuomotor control and on-line monitoring to accomplish a precision grasping movement. The results are discussed in light of theories on the modulation of parieto-frontal networks during the execution of prehensile movements, providing novel evidence supporting the hypothesis of a handedness-independent specialization of the left hemisphere in visuomotor control.

Kinematics of ventrally mediated grasp-to-eat actions: right-hand advantage is dependent on dorsal stream input

Studies have suggested a left-hemisphere specialization for visually guided grasp-to-eat actions by way of task-dependent kinematic asymmetries (i.e., smaller maximum grip apertures for right-handed grasp-to-eat movements than for right-handed grasp-to-place movements or left-handed movements of either type). It is unknown, however, whether this left-hemisphere/right-hand kinematic advantage is reliant on the dorsal "vision-for-action" visual stream. The present study investigates the kinematic differences between grasp-to-eat and grasp-to place actions performance during closed-loop (i.e., dorsally mediated) and open-loop delay (i.e., ventrally mediated) conditions. Twenty-one right-handed adult participants were asked to reach to grasp small food items to (1) eat them, or (2) place them in a container below the mouth. Grasps were performed in both closed-loop and open-loop delay conditions, in separate sessions. We show that participants displayed the right-hand grasp-to-eat kinematic advantage in the closed-loop condition, but not in the open-loop delay condition. As no task-dependent kinematic differences were found in ventrally mediated grasps, we posit that the left-hemisphere/right-hand advantage is dependent on dorsal stream processing.

Comparison of the effects of bilateral and unilateral training after stroke: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The differential effects of bilateral and unilateral training on upper extremity (UE) function remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of bilateral and unilateral training on UE function and activities of daily living (ADL) after stroke.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected for inclusion by two reviewers after searching the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and KoreaMed. Methodological qualities were assessed using the PEDro scale. Effect size was estimated by calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD).

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs of sufficient quality were included in our meta-analysis. The effect size on UE capacity was statistically significant in favor of the Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy (CIMT) groups (SMD [fixed], g: - 0.34; 95% CI: - 0.59-0.08; p = 0.01; I2 = 0%). No other SMDs were significant.

CONCLUSION

The CIMT tasks were more effective than bilateral training with regard to increased UE capacity; however, this result should be cautiously interpreted since the evaluation tools were designed for assessment of unilateral UE function, not bilateral UE function. Further, the effect of the CIMT tasks on UE capacity was not translated into ADL. Considering the disadvantages of CIMT such as fatigue, bilateral training may be more appropriate for improving ADL.

Action properties of object images facilitate visual search

There is mounting evidence that constraints from action can influence the early stages of object selection, even in the absence of any explicit preparation for action. Here, we examined whether action properties of images can influence visual search, and whether such effects were modulated by hand preference. Observers searched for an oddball target among 3 distractors. The search arrays consisted either of images of graspable "handles" ("action-related" stimuli), or images that were otherwise identical to the handles but in which the semicircular fulcrum element was reoriented so that the stimuli no longer looked like graspable objects ("non-action-related" stimuli). In Experiment 1, right-handed observers, who have been shown previously to prefer to use the right hand over the left for manual tasks, were faster to detect targets in action-related versus non-action-related arrays, and showed a response time (reaction time [RT]) advantage for rightward- versus leftward-oriented action-related handles. In Experiment 2, left-handed observers, who have been shown to use the left and right hands relatively equally in manual tasks, were also faster to detect targets in the action-related versus non-action-related arrays, but RTs were equally fast for rightward- and leftward-oriented handle targets. Together, or results suggest that action properties in images, and constraints for action imposed by preferences for manual interaction with objects, can influence attentional selection in the context of visual search. (PsycINFO Database Record

The destination defines the journey: an examination of the kinematics of hand-to-mouth movements

Long-train electrical stimulation of the motor and premotor cortices of nonhuman primates can produce either hand-to-mouth or grasp-to-inspect movements, depending on the precise location of stimulation. Furthermore, single-neuron recording studies identify discrete neuronal populations in the inferior parietal and ventral premotor cortices that respond uniquely to either grasp-to-eat or grasp-to-place movements, despite their identical mechanistic requirements. These studies demonstrate that the macaque motor cortex is organized around producing functional, goal-oriented movements, rather than simply fulfilling muscular prerequisites of action. In humans, right-handed hand-to-mouth movements have a unique kinematic signature; smaller maximum grip apertures are produced when grasping to eat than when grasping to place identical targets. This is evidence that the motor cortex in humans is also organized around producing functional movements. However, in both macaques and humans, grasp-to-eat/hand-to-mouth movements have always been elicited using edible targets and have (necessarily) been paired with mouth movement. It is therefore unknown whether the kinematic distinction is a natural result of grasping food and/or is simply attributable to concurrent opening of the mouth while grasping. In experiment 1, we used goal-differentiated grasping tasks, directed toward edible and inedible targets, to show that the unique kinematic signature is present even with inedible targets. In experiment 2, we used the same goal-differentiated grasping tasks, either coupled with or divorced from an open-mouth movement, to show that the signature is not attributable merely to a planned opening of the mouth during the grasp. These results are discussed in relation to the role of hand-to-mouth movements in human development, independently of grasp-to-eat behavior.

A philosophical approach to the concept of handedness: The phenomenology of lived experience in left- and right-handers

This paper provides a philosophical evaluation of the concept of handedness prevalent but largely unspoken in the scientific literature. This literature defines handedness as the preference or ability to use one hand rather than the other across a range of common activities. Using the philosophical discipline of phenomenology, I articulate and critique this conceptualization of handedness. Phenomenology shows defining a concept of handedness by focusing on hand use leads to a right hand biased concept. I argue further that a phenomenological model based in spatial orientation rather than hand use provides a more inclusive concept of handedness.

Hand and Grasp Selection in a Preferential Reaching Task: The Effects of Object Location, Orientation, and Task Intention

As numerous movement options are available in reaching and grasping, of particular interest are what factors influence an individual's choice of action. In the current study a preferential reaching task was used to assess the propensity for right handers to select their preferred hand and grasp a coffee mug by the handle in both independent and joint action object manipulation contexts. Mug location (right-space, midline, and left-space) and handle orientation (toward, away, to left, and to right of the participant) varied in four tasks that differed as a function of intention: (1) pick-up (unimanual, independent); (2) pick-up and pour (bimanual, independent); (3) pick-up and pass (unimanual, joint action); and (4) pick-up, pour and pass (bimanual, joint action). In line with previous reports, a right-hand preference for unimanual tasks was observed. Furthermore, extending existing literature to a preferential reaching task, role differentiation between the hands in bimanual tasks (i.e., preferred hand mobilizing, non-preferred hand stabilizing) was displayed. Finally, right-hand selection was greatest in right space, albeit lower in bimanual tasks compared to what is typically reported in unimanual tasks. Findings are attributed to the desire to maximize biomechanical efficiency in reaching. Grasp postures were also observed to reflect consideration of efficiency. More specifically, within independent object manipulation (pick-up; pick-up and pour) participants only grasped the mug by the handle when it afforded a comfortable posture. Furthermore, in joint action (pick-up and pass; pick-up, pour and pass), the confederate was only offered the handle if the intended action of the confederate was similar or required less effort than that of the participant. Together, findings from the current study add to our knowledge of hand and grasp selection in unimanual and bimanual object manipulation, within the context of both independent and joint action tasks.

Assessing Visuospatial Abilities in Healthy Aging: A Novel Visuomotor Task

This study examined the efficacy of a novel reaching-and-grasping task in determining visuospatial abilities across adulthood. The task required male and female young (18–25 years) and older adults (60–82 years) to replicate a series of complex models by locating and retrieving the appropriate building blocks from an array. The task allows visuospatial complexity to be manipulated independently from the visuomotor demands. Mental rotation and spatial visualization abilities were assessed. The results showed that the time taken to complete the tasks increased with increased mental rotation complexity. Patterns of hand use were also influenced by the complexity of the models being constructed with right hand use being greater for the less complex models. In addition, although older adults consistently performed the visuomotor tasks slower than the younger adults, their performance was comparable when expressed as the percent change in task demands. This is suggestive that spatial abilities are preserved in older adults. Given the ecologically validity, the described task is an excellent candidate for investigating: (1) developmental; (2) sex-based; and (3) pathology-based differences in spatial abilities in the visuomotor domain.

The influence of M. P. Bryden's work on lateralization of motor skill: Is the preferred hand selected for and better at tasks requiring a high degree of skill?

One question of interest to Dr M. P. Bryden was how skilled motor behaviour, task complexity, and the degree of handedness are linked. His research suggested that there would be dissociation between hand preference and performance for skilled versus unskilled actions. The thought was that "simple" or unskilled tasks such reaching or grasping could be performed equally well by either hand, and thus either could be selected. Skilled tasks such as fine manipulation would be performed best by the preferred hand and thus it would be selected more frequently. Over the past two decades, researchers have attempted to determine whether such a definition of skilled action best encapsulates the specialization of the preferred hand. The current paper will review M. P. Bryden's research on skilled motor behaviour, as well as more recent work, and explore the question of whether the preferred hand is actually superior and preferred for actions requiring manipulation.

The contributions of vision and haptics to reaching and grasping

This review aims to provide a comprehensive outlook on the sensory (visual and haptic) contributions to reaching and grasping. The focus is on studies in developing children, normal, and neuropsychological populations, and in sensory-deprived individuals. Studies have suggested a right-hand/left-hemisphere specialization for visually guided grasping and a left-hand/right-hemisphere specialization for haptically guided object recognition. This poses the interesting possibility that when vision is not available and grasping relies heavily on the haptic system, there is an advantage to use the left hand. We review the evidence for this possibility and dissect the unique contributions of the visual and haptic systems to grasping. We ultimately discuss how the integration of these two sensory modalities shape hand preference.

Manual preferences for visually- and haptically-guided grasping

Studies have shown that individuals exhibit a right-hand preference for grasping during visually-guided tasks. Recently, we have found that when vision is occluded right-hand preference decreases dramatically. It remains unknown however, if this decrease is a result of visual occlusion or the effects of relying only on haptic feedback. Therefore, in the present study, we sought to explore the contributions of vision and haptics (separately and in conjunction) to hand preference for grasping. Right- and left-handed individuals were tested on a block building task under four different visual and haptic conditions: 1) vision/normal haptic feedback (V/H), 2) no vision/normal haptic feedback (NV/H), 3) vision/constrained haptic feedback (V/Constrained-H), and 4) no vision/constrained haptic feedback (NV/Constrained-H). Vision was occluded using a blindfold and haptic feedback was constrained by asking participants to wear textured gloves. Right-handed individuals displayed a right-hand preference when vision was available (V/H and V/Constrained-H groups), but this preference was much greater when haptic feedback was constrained (V/Constrained-H group). When vision was occluded and haptic feedback was used to complete the task (NV/H) no hand preference was found. Finally hand preference was similar between the V/H and the NV/Constrained-H groups. For left-handed individuals, no differences in hand use were found between the different sensory groups, but the NV/H group showed a clear left-hand preference for haptically-guided grasping. The results suggest that haptics plays an important role in hand preference for grasping. Furthermore, they support a left-hand/right-hemisphere specialization for haptically-guided grasping (regardless of handedness) and a right-hand/left-hemisphere specialization for visually-guided grasping (at least in right-handed individuals).

Hand preference across the lifespan: effects of end-goal, task nature, and object location

In the present study we investigate age-related changes in hand preference for grasping and the influence of task demands on such preference. Children (2–11), young-adults (17–28) and older-adults (57–90) were examined in a grasp-to-eat and a grasp-to-construct task. The end-goal of these tasks was different (eat vs. construct) as was the nature of the task (unimanual vs. bimanual). In both tasks, ipsilateral and contralateral grasps were analyzed. Results showed a right-hand preference that did not change with age. Across the three age groups, a more robust right-hand preference was observed for the unimanual, grasp-to-eat task. To disentangle if the nature (unimanual) or the end-goal (grasp-to-eat) was the driver of the robust right-hand preference, a follow up experiment was conducted. Young-adult participants completed a unimanual grasp-to-place task. This was contrasted with the unimanual grasp-to-eat task and the bimanual grasp-to-construct task. Rates of hand preference for the grasp-to-eat task remained the highest when compared to the other two grasping tasks. Together, the results demonstrate that hand preference remains stable from childhood to older adulthood, and they suggest that a left hemisphere specialization exists for grasping, particularly when bringing food to the mouth.

Bimanual force control: cooperation and interference?

Three experiments were designed to determine the level of cooperation or interference observed from the forces generated in one limb on the forces exhibited by the contralateral limb when one or both limbs were producing a constant force (Experiment 1), one limb was producing a dynamic force while the other limb was producing a constant force (Experiment 2), and both limbs were producing dynamic force patterns (Experiment 3). The results for both Experiments 1 and 2 showed relatively strong positive time series cross correlations between the left and right limb forces indicating increases or decreases in the forces generated by one limb resulted in corresponding changes in the forces produced by the homologous muscles of the contralateral limb. Experiment 3 required participants to coordinate 1:1 and 1:2 rhythmical bimanual force production tasks when provided Lissajous feedback. The results indicated very effective performance of both bimanual coordination patterns. However, identifiable influences of right limb forces on the left limb force time series were observed in the 1:2 coordination pattern but not in the 1:1 pattern. The results of all three experiments support the notion that neural crosstalk is partially responsible for the stabilities and instabilities associated with bimanual coordination.

Is that graspable? Let your right hand be the judge

A right-hand preference for visually-guided grasping has been shown on numerous accounts. Grasping an object requires the integration of both visual and motor components of visuomotor processing. It has been suggested that the left hemisphere plays an integral role in visuomotor functions. The present study serves to investigate whether the visual processing of graspable objects, without any actual reaching or grasping movements, yields a right-hand (left-hemisphere) advantage. Further, we aim to address whether such an advantage is automatically evoked by motor affordances. Two groups of right-handed participants were asked to categorize objects presented on a computer monitor by responding on a keypad. The first group was asked to categorize visual stimuli as graspable (e.g. apple) or non-graspable (e.g. car). A second group categorized the same stimuli but as nature-made (e.g. apple) or man-made (e.g. car). Reaction times were measured in response to the visually presented stimuli. Results showed a right-hand advantage for graspable objects only when participants were asked to respond to the graspable/non-graspable categorization. When participants were asked to categorize objects as nature-made or man-made, a right-hand advantage for graspable objects did not emerge. The results suggest that motor affordances may not always be automatic and might require conscious representations that are appropriate for object interaction.

Speech in action: degree of hand preference for grasping predicts speech articulation competence in children

Highlights: Degree of lateralization for grasping predicts the maturity of the language production system in young, typically-developing children.

In this report we provide compelling evidence for the relationship between right hand grasp-to-mouth (i.e., feeding) movements and language development. Specifically, we show that children (4–5 years old) who are more right-hand lateralized in picking up small food items for consumption show enhanced differentiation of the “s” and “sh” sounds. This result suggests that left hemisphere control of hand-to-mouth gestures may have provided an evolutionary platform for the development of language. The current investigation presents the exciting possibility that early right hand-to-mouth training could accelerate the development of articulation skills.

Grasping without sight: insights from the congenitally blind

We reach for and grasp different sized objects numerous times per day. Most of these movements are visually-guided, but some are guided by the sense of touch (i.e. haptically-guided), such as reaching for your keys in a bag, or for an object in a dark room. A marked right-hand preference has been reported during visually-guided grasping, particularly for small objects. However, little is known about hand preference for haptically-guided grasping. Recently, a study has shown a reduction in right-hand use in blindfolded individuals, and an absence of hand preference if grasping was preceded by a short haptic experience. These results suggest that vision plays a major role in hand preference for grasping. If this were the case, then one might expect congenitally blind (CB) individuals, who have never had a visual experience, to exhibit no hand preference. Two novel findings emerge from the current study: first, the results showed that contrary to our expectation, CB individuals used their right hand during haptically-guided grasping to the same extent as visually-unimpaired (VU) individuals did during visually-guided grasping. And second, object size affected hand use in an opposite manner for haptically- versus visually-guided grasping. Big objects were more often picked up with the right hand during haptically-guided, but less often during visually-guided grasping. This result highlights the different demands that object features pose on the two sensory systems. Overall the results demonstrate that hand preference for grasping is independent of visual experience, and they suggest a left-hemisphere specialization for the control of grasping that goes beyond sensory modality.

One hand or the other? Effector selection biases in right and left handers

Much debate in the handedness literature has centred on the relative merits of questionnaire-based measures assessing hand preference versus simple movement tasks such as peg moving or finger tapping, assessing hand performance. A third paradigm has grown in popularity, which assesses choices by participants when either hand could be used to execute movements. These newer measures may be useful in predicting possible "reversed" asymmetries in proportions of non-right handed ("adextral") people. In the current studies we examine hand choice in large samples of dextral (right handed) and adextral participants. Unlike in some previous experiments on choice, we found that left handers were as biased towards their dominant hand as were right handers, for grasping during a puzzle-making task (study 1). In a second study, participants had to point to either of two suddenly appearing targets with one hand or the other. In study 2, left handers were not significantly less one handed than their right-handed counterparts as in study 1. In a final study, we used random effects meta analysis to summarise the possible differences in hand choice between left handers and right handers across all hand choice studies published to date. The meta analysis suggests that right handers use their dominant hand 12.5% more than left handers favour their dominant hand (with 95% confidence that the real difference lies between 7% and 18%). These last results suggest that our two experiments reported here may represent statistical Type 2 errors. This mean difference may be related to greater left hemispheric language and praxic laterality in right handers. Nevertheless, more data are needed regarding the precise proportions of left and right handers who favour their preferred hands for different tasks.

Evidence for right-hand feeding biases in a left-handed population

We have recently shown that actions with similar kinematic requirements, but different end-state goals may be supported by distinct neural networks. Specifically, we demonstrated that when right-handed individuals reach-to-grasp food items with intent to eat, they produce smaller maximum grip apertures (MGAs) than when they grasp the same item with intent to place it in a location near the mouth. This effect was restricted to right-handed movements; left-handed movements showed no difference between tasks. The current study investigates whether (and to which side) the effect may be lateralized in left-handed individuals. Twenty-one self-identified left-handed participants grasped food items of three different sizes while grasp kinematics were captured via an Optotrak Certus motion capture array. A main effect of task was identified wherein the grasp-to-eat action generated significantly smaller MGAs than did the grasp-to-place action. Further analysis revealed that similar to the findings in right-handed individuals, this effect was significant only during right-handed movements. Upon further inspection however, we found individual differences in the magnitude and direction of the observed lateralization. These results underscore the evolutionary significance of the grasp-to-eat movement in producing population-level right-handedness in humans as well as highlighting the heterogeneity of the left-handed population.