The Intricate Web of Asymmetric Processing of Social Stimuli in Humans

Artistic turns: laterality in paintings of kisses and embraces

Many lateral biases exist in human behavior, often implicit and not deliberated. Romantic kissing and embracing received experimental attention in the last three decades. We investigated laterality in paintings depicting these social interactions using two methodologies to assess whether painters depicted such biases and whether these biases could be due to observers' aesthetic preferences or painters' ability in portraying naturalistic interactions. In Study 1, we inspected about 190,000 artworks available online to classify leftward and rightward biases in romantic kisses and embraces. The comparison of 103 paintings depicting clearly lateralized interactions revealed a significant rightward bias in romantic kissing (66%) and a trend toward a leftward bias (62%) for embraces, aligning with naturalistic studies of human interactions. In Study 2, 128 participants expressed their aesthetic preference between the paintings selected in Study 1 and their vertically mirrored versions. A preference for the original paintings over their mirrored versions emerged, especially when presented in the upper portion of the screen, but no significant preference for the typical lateralization of kissing and embracing was found. These findings suggest that artists' alignment with naturalistic biases could be due to familiarity and exposure to asymmetric interactions rather than observers' aesthetic preferences.

Motor-sensory biases are associated with cognitive and social abilities in humans

Across vertebrates, adaptive behaviors, like feeding and avoiding predators, are linked to lateralized brain function. The presence of the behavioral manifestations of these biases are associated with increased task success. Additionally, when an individual's direction of bias aligns with the majority of the population, it is linked to social advantages. However, it remains unclear if behavioral biases in humans correlate with the same advantages. This large-scale study (N = 313-1661, analyses dependent) examines whether the strength and alignment of behavioral biases associate with cognitive and social benefits respectively in humans. To remain aligned with the animal literature, we evaluate motor-sensory biases linked to motor-sequencing and emotion detection to assess lateralization. Results reveal that moderate hand lateralization is positively associated with task success and task success is, in turn, associated with language fluency, possibly representing a cascade effect. Additionally, like other vertebrates, the majority of our human sample possess a 'standard' laterality profile (right hand bias, left visual bias). A 'reversed' profile is rare by comparison, and associates higher self-reported social difficulties and increased rate of autism and/or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. We highlight the importance of employing a comparative theoretical framing to illuminate how and why different laterization profiles associate with diverging social and cognitive phenotypes.

Functional lateralization in social-emotional processing: The influence of sexual orientation and gender identity on cradling preferences

The left-cradling bias (i.e., the motor asymmetry for cradling infants on the left side) has often been associated to the right-hemispheric social-emotional specialization, and it has often been reported to be stronger in females than in males. In this study we explored the effects of sexual orientation and gender identity on this lateral bias by means of a web-based investigation in a sample of adults (485 biological females and 196 biological males) recruited through LGBTQIA+ networks and general university forums. We exploited a cradling imagery task to assess participants' cradling-side preference, and standardized questionnaires to assess participants' homosexuality (Klein Sexual Orientation Grid) and gender nonconformity (Gender Identity/Gender Dysphoria Questionnaire for Adults and Adolescents). Results confirmed the expected left-cradling bias across all sexual orientation groups except for heterosexual males. Importantly, higher homosexuality scores were associated with higher proportions of left cradling in males. These results suggest that sexual orientation can influence cradling preference in males, indicating a complex interaction between biological and psychological factors in the laterality of social-emotional processing. Finally, the left-cradling bias seems to confirm its role as a behavioral proxy of social-emotional functional lateralization in humans.

Handedness as a major determinant of lateral bias in human functional cradling

Studies examining infant cradling have almost uniformly concluded with a general human left-side bias for cradling, indicating that people prefer to hold an infant to the left of their body. Explanations for the notion of the left-side cradling bias have traditionally been searched for in a variety of factors, for example, in terms of maternal heartbeat, genetic factors, in the form of an ear asymmetry where auditory information is perceived faster through the left ear, as a result of a right hemispheric functional specialization for perception of emotions and faces, and in identifying a motor bias of the infant, such as the tendency of newborn infants to lie with the face to the right when placed supine. Interestingly, handedness is generally considered an inadequate explanation for the lateralized cradling bias, despite it being an intuitively plausible one. In this brief review, I put forward the cradler's handedness as the most convincing and elegant determinant of the cradling bias. This explanation is consistent with a developmental cascades' framework where the cradling bias can be understood as the result of a multitude of factors across a range of levels and systems.

No Sex Differences in the Attentional Bias for the Right Side of Human Bodies

Ambiguous silhouettes representing human individuals which perform unimanual actions are interpreted more often as right-handed. Such a preference might reflect a perceptual frequency effect, due to the fact that most social interactions occur with right-handers. As a consequence, observers would preferentially attend to the region in which others’ dominant hand usually falls, thus increasing the efficiency in monitoring both aggressive and communicative acts. Given that men can be more dangerous compared with women, the right-hand bias should be larger when observing male rather than female individuals, and given that aggressive interactions involve men more frequently than women, it should be larger in male rather than female observers. However, previous studies did not specifically test whether: (i) male—compared with female—observers pay more attention to the right side of others (regardless of the observed individuals’ sex), or (ii) observers (regardless of their sex) pay more attention to the right side of male—compared with female—individuals. Therefore, in the present study we used ambiguous human silhouettes rotating about their vertical axis with one arm extended in order to determine whether the rightward bias is larger for male rather than female figures and/or in male rather than female participants. According to our data, the bias toward the right side of human bodies was not significantly associated with either the figure’s or the participant’s sex.