Cashmore Lisa, Uomini Natalie, Chapelain Amandine
Centre for the Archaeology of Human Origins (CAHO), Archaeology, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BF, UK.
J Anthropol Sci. 2008;86:7-35.
Population-level right-handedness is a defining characteristic of humans. Despite extensive research, we still do not know the conditions or timing of its emergence in human evolution. We present a review of research into the origins of handedness, based on fossil and archaeological data for hand preference and great ape hand-use. The data show that skeletal asymmetries in arm and hand bones supporting a rightsided dominance were present at least in the genus Homo, although data are more robust for Neanderthals. The evidence from tool-use, production, and cave art confirms that right-hand preference was established in Neanderthals and was maintained until the present. The great apes can provide real-life models for testing the conditions that facilitate or enhance hand preference at both the individual and group levels. The database on great ape hand-use indicates that they do exhibit hand preferences, especially in complex tasks. However, their preferences vary between tasks, and while group-level biases have occasionally been reported, no human-like handedness bias has been found. We discuss the methodological problems encountered in these approaches. Shared problems include a lack of agreed terminology both within and between disciplines, small sample sizes, interpretation biases and a failure to replicate experiments. In general, there is a paucity of fossil material, with poor preservation hampering traditional metric methods. The archaeological data are often founded on unreliable methods. The primate database is plagued by the use of measures that could be inappropriate for revealing hand preference, and by methodological inconsistencies between studies. We emphasise the need to standardise the methods to allow between studies and species comparisons. We propose that when referring to "handedness" it is more appropriate to use the terms "hand preference" and "hand use", to avoid confusion with each discipline's own definition of handedness.
群体层面的右利手是人类的一个决定性特征。尽管进行了广泛研究,但我们仍然不知道其在人类进化中出现的条件或时间。我们基于关于用手偏好的化石和考古数据以及大猩猩的用手情况,对用手习惯起源的研究进行了综述。数据表明,支持右侧优势的手臂和手部骨骼的不对称性至少在人属中就已存在,不过尼安德特人的数据更为确凿。来自工具使用、制作和洞穴艺术的证据证实,右利手在尼安德特人中已经确立,并一直延续至今。大猩猩可以提供现实生活中的模型,用于测试在个体和群体层面促进或增强用手偏好的条件。关于大猩猩用手情况的数据库表明,它们确实表现出用手偏好,尤其是在复杂任务中。然而,它们的偏好因任务而异,虽然偶尔有关于群体层面偏差的报道,但尚未发现类似人类的利手偏差。我们讨论了这些方法中遇到的方法学问题。共同的问题包括学科内部和学科之间缺乏统一的术语、样本量小、解释偏差以及无法重复实验。总体而言,化石材料匮乏,保存不佳妨碍了传统的测量方法。考古数据往往基于不可靠的方法。灵长类动物数据库存在使用可能不适用于揭示用手偏好的测量方法以及研究之间方法不一致的问题。我们强调需要规范方法,以便进行不同研究和物种之间的比较。我们建议,在提及“利手”时,使用“用手偏好”和“用手情况”这两个术语更为合适,以避免与各学科自己对利手的定义产生混淆。