Bryden M P, Singh M, Steenhuis R E, Clarkson K L
University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Neuropsychologia. 1994 Aug;32(8):991-9. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(94)90048-5.
Twenty-five self-professed left-handers and 21 self-professed right-handers were given a variety of performance tests to assess handedness, along with a preference inventory and a dichotic listening test of language lateralization. The performance tests included the Annett pegboard task, that Tapley and Bryden dot-filling tasks, and two procedures, the long pegboard and long dots tasks, that were intended to assess the point in space at which a particular unimanual movement became sufficiently awkward for one to shift to the other hand. All four of these performance tests differentiated between left-handers and right-handers, although the differences between handedness groups were somewhat larger when handedness was defined in terms of the preference inventory rather than on the basis of self-report. When the difference between preferred and non-preferred hands was examined, the best predictor of hand preference was the long pegboard task. Such a finding is consistent with the view that the long pegboard provides a behavioral measure of hand preference, while the pegs and dots tasks are more closely linked to specific skills. In addition, the correlations between individual preference items and the dichotic right-ear advantage suggest that language lateralization is related to rather different handedness measures than those usually used to define handedness. This finding would suggest that handedness and language lateralization are determined by somewhat different mechanisms.
对25名自称左利手和21名自称右利手的人进行了一系列性能测试,以评估利手情况,同时还进行了偏好量表测试和语言侧化的双耳分听测试。性能测试包括安妮特钉板任务、塔普利和布赖登点填充任务,以及两个程序,即长钉板任务和长点任务,旨在评估在空间中的某个点,特定的单手运动会变得足够别扭,以至于人们会切换到另一只手。这四项性能测试都区分了左利手和右利手,不过,当根据偏好量表而非自我报告来定义利手时,不同利手群体之间的差异要大一些。当考察优势手和非优势手之间的差异时,长钉板任务是手偏好的最佳预测指标。这一发现与以下观点一致,即长钉板提供了一种手偏好的行为测量方法,而钉板和点任务则与特定技能联系更紧密。此外,各个偏好项目与双耳分听右耳优势之间的相关性表明,语言侧化与通常用于定义利手的测量方法所涉及的利手情况有相当不同的关联。这一发现表明,利手和语言侧化是由 somewhat different mechanisms 决定的。 (注:原文中“somewhat different mechanisms”未明确具体含义,直接保留英文)