This article was downloaded by: [University of Bath Library] On: 28 October 2008 Access details: Access Details:

[subscription number 773568398] Publisher Psychology Press Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713683105

The relationship of movement time to hand-foot laterality patterns

Dorota Olex-Zarychta a; Joachim Raczek a a Academy of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland First Published on: 31 May 2008

To cite this Article Olex-Zarychta, Dorota and Raczek, Joachim(2008)'The relationship of movement time to hand-foot laterality

patterns',Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition,13:5,439 455

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/13576500802134623 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13576500802134623

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

LATERALITY, 2008, 13 (5), 439455

The relationship of movement time to hand foot laterality patterns

Dorota Olex-Zarychta and Joachim Raczek
Academy of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

Asymmetries in movement times of the hands in 60 healthy participants with different patterns of handfoot dominance were investigated. Handedness and footedness were assessed by means of questionnaires and verified by simple motor tasks. Psychomotor performance was evaluated by the use of selected tests from the computerised Vienna Test System (VST, Vienna, Austria). Movement time (MT) was assessed separately for dominant and non-dominant hands in a unimanual simple reaction task. Participants performed significantly better with their preferred hand, and differences in performance between right- and left-handers were not significant, neither was there a main effect of foot dominance on MT of the hands. However there was a significant effect of laterality pattern in handfoot combination on hands MT: participants with cross-lateral dominance patterns of hands and feet performed significantly better than those with congruent handfoot dominance. No significant interaction with sex was found. These results provide evidence for a lack of independence of hand and foot dominance in motor performance, suggesting the functional significance of limb laterality pattern in the motor control system. The results support the hypothesis that the quality of human hand movements may be influenced not only by central information processing (hemispheric specialisation) but also by other structures and processes of motor control, such as central pattern generators (CPGs) and biomechanical factors.

The problem of differences in performance in manual aiming movements between preferred and non-preferred hands was introduced over a century ago. In 1899, P. S. Woodworth published the results of an experimental series focusing on differences in speed and accuracy of hands (Woodworth, 1899). He posed the fundamental question about the source of asymmetry in upper limb performance, suggesting its relation to motor control systems. Today there is still no clear answer to that question (see Elliot & Heath, 1999, for review). Much research has focused on movement asymmetry and related topics*handedness, footedness, brain laterality, and characteristics of
Address correspondence to: Dorota Olex-Zarychta, Department of Human Motor Behaviour, Academy of Physical Education, Ul. Mikolowska 72a, 40 065 Katowice, Poland. E-mail: d.olex@awf.katowice.pl # 2008 Psychology Press, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business http://www.psypress.com/laterality DOI: 10.1080/13576500802134623

440

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

motor performance in the limbs*but the aetiology of motor performance asymmetry in human is still unclear (Agnew, Zeffiro, & Eden, 2004; Denckla, 1973; Flowers, 1975; Francis & Spiriduso, 2000; Lage et al., 2007; McManus, 2002; Olex, 2000; Peters, 1991; Springer & Deutsch 2004). Asymmetry in neuromotor performance is assumed to be linked to brain laterality connected with hemispheric specialisation (Gasser, Rousson, Caflish, & Largo, 2005; Springer & Deutsch, 2004). The greater involvement of the contralateral hemisphere while performing various motor tasks has been shown in some experiments with positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) (Agnew et al., 2004; Babiloni et al., 2003; Haaland, Elsinger, Mayer, Durgerian, & Rao, 2004). As the task becomes more complex, the brain activation becomes more bilateral (Lage et al., 2007). It has been suggested that different neurophysiological processes are involved in phylogenetically old motor behaviours (like rhythmic movements) and discrete movements like grasping or reaching (Schaal, Sternad, Osu, & Kawato, 2004).

MOTOR PERFORMANCE AND HANDEDNESS

Asymmetry in manual motor actions is assumed to be linked with handedness. Better results of the dominant (preferred) hand have been found in repetitive and alternating motor tasks (Denckla, 1973) as well as in tapping (Carlier, Dumont, Beau, & Michel, 1993). Lateral differences in motor performance are reported to be task specific and most visible in skilled task performance (Plamondon & Alimi, 1997). Many findings supported the hypothesis of no correlation between limb functional preference in motor actions and muscle strength or muscle fatigue in different tasks, which strongly suggests independency of limb preference and force parameters of performance. The dominant hand is not always the stronger one and strength is not an indicator of hand proficiency in precision performance (Elliot & Heath, 1999; Kauranen, Siira, & Vanharanta, 1999; Olex-Mierzejewska & Raczek, 2001; Walter & Swinnen, 1990; Zijdewind & Bosch, 1990). Motor asymmetry is reported to be very distinct in tasks requiring speed, accuracy, and fast reaction time. Right-handed participants typically complete manual aiming movements more rapidly and more accurately when aiming with their right (dominant) hand (Annett, 1992; Elliot & Heath, 1999; Hore, Watts, Tweed, & Miller, 1998; Kabbash, MacKenzie, & Buxton, 1993; Peters, 1991, Plamondon & Alimi, 1997; Tan & Kutlu, 1991). More precise performance with the dominant hand was also found in left-handers. Peters and Ivanoff (1999) found that right-handed people performed faster with their right hand (as expected), and left-handed people had similar speed of movement in both hands. The dominant hand

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

441

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

advantage was also shown in some rhythm-adapting tasks of various frequencies of signals (Jancke et al., 2000; Olex, 2000) and visuomotor reaction time (Riolo-Quinn, 1991). Some findings confirmed the left-handed participants better results in this aspect of performance (Teixeira, Gasparetto, & Sugie, 1999). Taking into consideration that the right hemisphere controls the left hand, and the left hemisphere controls the right hand, researchers assumed that the left hand should show faster reaction times in tasks involving spatial relationships (such as pointing at a target). The results of Boulinquez and Barte le my (2000) and Barte le my and Boulinquez (2001 and 2002) supported that idea. Bryden (2002) observed only right-handed people and found that task difficulty did not affect the reaction time difference between the left and right hands. Reaction time (RT) for bimanual symmetrical movements is reported to be shorter than for unimanual and bimanual non-symmetrical tasks in children (Barral, Debu, & Rival, 2006). In movement time (MT) the advantage of dominant hand performance was observed, with no differences between men and women. MT is also reported to increase progressively with ageing (Nicoletti et al., 2005). Gender-related differences in asymmetry of aiming with the dominant and non-dominant hand have been reported. In tasks requiring both speed and precision women tend to trade-off speed for accuracy: in some experiments they slowed movement to achieve the required level of precision (Barral & Debu, 2004). In right-handed participants the dominant hand advantage in accuracy was observed only in men, while in women no differences in terminal accuracy of hand performance were observed. In left-handed females the decrease in preferred hand accuracy was observed as hand speed increased (Tan, 1993). In left-handed men the dominant hand accuracy did not depend on speed. The majority of experiments reported faster reaction times in males than females, which was distinct even after training (Adam et al., 1999; Dane & Erzurumluoglu, 2003; Der & Deary, 2006; Noble, Baker, & Jones, 1964; Welford, 1980).

MOTOR PERFORMANCE AND FOOTEDNESS

Asymmetry in lower extremities and foot performance even in walking has been found as a normal phenomenon (Maupas, Paysant, Martinet, & Andre, 1999). However, the feet are reported to be weakly asymmetric in performance. Some authors explained this phenomenon by the fact that bipedal activities typical for humans (walking, standing) are abundant (Gasser et al., 2005). The pattern of foot preference is assumed to have an obvious relevance for sports such as football (Carey et al., 2001). Foot preference is defined as the ability of a limb to execute a manipulative or mobilising action while the other, non-dominant one provides stabilising

442

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

support, i.e., during kicking a ball (Gabbard & Hart, 1996; Gabbard & Iteya, 1996). A strong relationship between preferred foot and motor performance in unilateral and bilateral tasks has been found (Hart & Gabbard, 1998). The majority of the population prefer the right foot in motor performance* more than 75% (Carey et al., 2001). Some findings supported the hypothesis that footedness may be a better predictor of brain lateralisation than handedness, i.e., language function lateralisation (Elias & Bryden, 1998). Footedness is assumed to be less influenced by some dextral social pressures than handedness, which probably makes it a sensitive index of hemispheric specialisation (Chapman, Chapman, & Allen, 1997) The motor control of foot performance is still unclear (Foundas, Hong, Leonard, & Heilman, 1998). It has been suggested that motor performance of the upper limbs is influenced only by central information processing, while the effect for the lower limbs is also influenced by peripheral motor control (Kato & Asami, 1998).

MOTOR PERFORMANCE AND LATERALITY PATTERN IN HANDFOOT COMBINATION

Associations between hand and foot preference behaviour have been investigated in different aspects of human performance. The four main laterality patterns in the limbs are typically identified: two congruent patterns RH/RF, LH/LF (right hand/right foot, left hand/left foot) and two cross-lateral ones RH/LF, LH/RF (right hand/left foot, left hand/ right foot), (Day & MacNeilage, 1996; Elias & Bryden, 1998; Gabbard, 1992; Olex, 2000). Gabbard (1992) also introduced some mixed patterns (i.e., right hand/mixed foot), taking into consideration ambidexterity in participants limbs. The proportion of crossed handfoot preference is reported to be higher in men than women (7.4% vs 2.5%), and higher in left-handers than right-handers (16.3% vs 4.1%). The overall frequency of crossed preferences between hand and foot was shown as 5% (Dargent-Pare, Agostini, Mesbah, & Dellatolas, 1992). The relationship of lower limb dominance to handedness is reported to be significantly different in right- and left-handers, and more consistent for right-handed participants. In an experiment conducted by Beling, righthanded participants showed greater consistency of lower limb use for difficult unilateral motor tasks (Beling, Wolfe, Allen, & Boyle, 1998). In rhythm capability, a significant effect of handfoot laterality pattern was found in unilateral hand performance with the preferred hand, but not in bilateral tasks (Olex, 2000). Maupas et al. (1999) suggested no relation of asymmetry in lower limb performance to handedness or other lateral dominance. It is well established in the literature that on most tasks the

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

443

degree of asymmetry expression in motor performance is attributed to several factors: task complexity, hand training, participants gender and age, and processing characteristics of the motor control systems (i.e., whether the movement is produced to sensory or central input), (Francis & Spiriduso, 2000; McManus, 2002; Plamondon & Alimi, 1997; Provins, 1997). Taking into consideration previous findings, motor control research could take advantage of limb laterality pattern analysis in motor performance studies. In this study we investigated asymmetries in movement time of hand performance in men and women with different limb laterality patterns. The main objective was to find the effect on hand MT of limb laterality pattern. Our results are expected to contribute to the discussion on motor control of human voluntary movements. A number of investigators have postulated that physiological asymmetries or genetic mechanisms account for manifestation of side preference and performance in humans (Annett, 1992, McManus, 2002, Springer & Deutsch, 2004). At present it cannot be rejected that laterality in motor performance, in connection with the neural mechanisms of motor control, is attached to signal processing and transmission in the nervous system. These processes have great significance in rapid aimed movements (Kandel, Schwartz, & Jessel, 1991). According to contemporary research, the inner structure of rapid movement coordination could be determined by neurosensory factors connected not only with central steering mechanisms (i.e., hemispheric specialisation) but also with the influence of some peripheral factors (effectors network activity, signal transmission in peripheral nerves) and their interactions, in relation to environmental factors. We hope our results support the following hypothesis: Differences exist in neural mechanisms of movement control among different laterality patterns. Asymmetry of motor performance could be connected with asymmetry of motor control not only on the central but also on the peripheral level. We assume that quality of movements is in special relation with limb laterality pattern, and some neuromuscular factors influence the effect of performance asymmetry in the limbs. Any effect of foot dominance on hand performance, and/or significant differences in motor performance among various laterality patterns, could be new evidence for lack of independence of hand and foot in motor control of rapid aimed movements. It would suggest that quality of human movements (i.e., spinal cord reflexes, rhythmic motor patterns, voluntary movements) can be the effect of more complicated interactions involving different motor control levels: the central motor control structures and processes (hemispheric specialisation), central pattern generators of limb performance (CPGs), and also peripheral motor control factors. According to this hypothesis, limb laterality pattern could be the indirect predictor of not only cerebral laterality but also laterality of other motor control mechanisms.

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

444

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

METHOD Participants
A total of 60 healthy young adults took part in the experiment. The group consisted of 29 women and 31 men in the age range 2123 (M  21.8), divided into four sub-groups according to criteria of limb laterality patterns: two congruent domination pattern groups (LH/LF, n  17; RH/RF, n  15), and two cross-lateral domination pattern groups (LH/RF, n  13; RH/LF, n  15). The experimental group was chosen from 200 students who were volunteers tested for hand and foot dominance (see Procedure below). Students presenting no signs of ambidexterity in their limbs took part in the laboratory tests. All participants gave informed consent for their involvement in the experiment and were naive as to the purpose of the research.

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

Procedure
The hand and foot dominance of each participant was established by means of a questionnaire (selection from the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory; Oldfield, 1971), with adaptation for foot dominance (some added questions connected with precise sporting foot performance, e.g., hurdles; all participants were PE students involved with different forms of sport activity) verified by simple motor tasks. Self-reported handedness and footedness (treated as additional information) were also recorded. The level of psychomotor performance of each participant was evaluated by the use of selected tests from the computerised Vienna Test System (Raczek, Waskiewicz, & Juras, 1997). In Europe the VTS is a one of the most widespread batteries of computer-aided tests of diagnosis in the field of the neuropsychological and physiological basis of movement. This diagnostic tool has been described and verified with regard to validity and reliability, and its usefulness has been presented in earlier publications (Raczek, Mynarski, & Ljach, 1998; Raczek et al., 1997). The VTS (dr G.Schuhfried GmbH, Mo dling, Austria) consists of computer-supplemented tests constructed to diagnose the neurophysiological basis of human movement. It consists of the main system (PC, interface, managing system MENUE, and operation system RSX) and peripheral panels (configurable and adjustable), using which the test can be performed. The peripheral device used in this experiment was the battery of Reaaktiongera t (RG) tests. The RG enables assessment of reaction to visual and auditory stimuli. Testing procedure in this experiment included a simple reaction parametric block. There was a row of five coloured lights on the board panel as well as two buttons below the lights: a stand-by button and a reaction button 10 cm away from each other vertically. The participant was sitting by the panel. Movement

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

445

time (MT) was measured for the right and left hand of each participant by recording the time between releasing the stand-by button and pressing the reaction button when the visual stimulus appeared (yellow light). The 10 randomised visual stimuli were given in about 6 minutes, and the participant was instructed to react as quickly as possible each time. The dominant hand was tested first. The variables included hand movement time, recorded in milliseconds (ms).

Statistical analysis
An analysis of movement time (MT) was carried out separately for dominant and non-dominant hand. The statistics included arithmetic mean (M), standard deviation (SD), and mean squared deviation (QD) as a qualitative indicator of the MT results homogeneity in research groups. A variance analysis (ANOVA) was used as a main statistical method to find differences in hand MT among participants presenting different limb laterality patterns. The time needed for the motor task should depend on handedness (whether the dominant or the non-dominant hand is used), but in the light of our hypothesis should also depend on the limb laterality pattern. It was desirable to have one statistical model incorporating not only the effect of single predictors but also the effect of combinations of predictors. In our experiment an almost equal number of women and men took part (29 women and 31 men) so we decided to take gender into consideration in the statistical design despite the smaller statistical power in this aspect. A linear mixed model ANOVA was used, incorporating the main effects of hand dominance (HD), foot dominance (FD), and gender as well as their interactions. The selected model contained the three main effects, and the three two-way interactions (HD*FD, gender*HD, gender*FD). The one three-way interaction was also recorded (gender*HD*FD). The Bonferroni method in post-hoc testing was also used in more detailed analysis of MT differences in groups with different laterality patterns. All statistics were calculated by means of the Statistica software 7.1. by Statsoft.
Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

RESULTS Handedness effect

A difference in MT in performance with dominant and non-dominant hand was found. Participants generally performed better with the preferred hand, with a mean MT of 114.719 29.62 (mean9 SD), and handedness showed a significant main effect on hand performance, F(2, 57)  4.09, p  .023. Left-

446

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

handed participants performed slightly better with the dominant hand than did right-handed participants (110.939 24.2 ms and 118. 509 31.6 ms) but with no statistical effect. In what was a rather astonishing result, the minor differences between results obtained with the dominant and non-dominant hand were found in right-handers (Figure 1).

Footedness effect
No main effect of footedness on hand MT was found (p  .36). However, the analysis of mean squared deviation (QD) of left and right hand performance (treated as an qualitative indicator of the results homogeneity in research groups) indicated that left-footed participants were significantly more homogeneous in hand MT than right-footed participants, F(2, 55)  5.972, p  .003 (see Figure 3).

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

Laterality pattern effect

The statistical analysis indicated that the model of handfoot laterality pattern was an important interaction influencing the level of hand performance, which required fast simple movement time. The mixedmodel ANOVA analysis showed significant differences in MT among groups of participants with different laterality patterns, F(2, 55)  5.964, p  .004. Participants presenting the cross-lateral limb domination patterns (RH/LF, LH/RF) performed better than those with congruent domination patterns. The model of right-side-congruent limb dominance (RH/RF) in our study was related to the slowest movement time in the research group, for right hand (dominant) as well as left hand performance. Further statistical analysis using the Bonferroni method, shown in Figure 2, confirmed differences in performance between samples of right-handed participants (groups of RH/RF and RH/LF), as statistically significant results for left hand performance at the level of .01 (p  .004) and for right hand MT at the level of .05 (p  .034). In left-handers no statistical effect between cross-lateral and congruent laterality patterns was found. This seems to confirm the greater homogeneity of non-right-handers in motor functions suggested previously in the literature (Peters & Ivanoff, 1999); however, previous studies did not take the footedness effect into consideration. Our results may be due to the effect of greater homogeneity of left-handed persons in everyday motor performance, which may reflect strong social pressure as far as hand performance is concerned (it would be interesting to check this effect on precise foot performance).

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

447

124

122

120

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

118 movement time (ms)

116

114

112

110

108

right handed

left handed

hand dominance

right hand MT left hand MT

Figure 1. Mean movement time and hand dominance in participants.

Gender effect
The next step of our analysis was to compare hand MT results between males and females presenting different limb laterality patterns. Generally, male participants had an advantage in MT for both right and left hand, and

448
160 150 140
movement time (ms)

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

130 120 110 100 90 80

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

RH/RF

LH/LF

RH/LF

LH/LF

laterality pattern

MT RH MT LH

Figure 2.

Mean values 90.95 condence intervals of movement time (MT) in four laterality patterns.

minor differences in performance of the dominant and non-dominant hand were observed in the group of men, but all with no statistical support. No significant gender effect on MT results in groups of participants with different limb laterality patterns was found (p  .19).

DISCUSSION Handedness effect

The value of MT tests in hand dominance assessment has been introduced previously in the literature (Nicoletti et al., 2005; Plamondon & Alimi, 1997). Our results generally confirm the dominant hand advantage in this aspect of hand performance. The minor differences in performance of the dominant and non-dominant hand observed in the group of men indicated the strongest lateralisation of women in motor functions, which was suggested previously by Peters (1991). The results of this experiment do not support Boulinquez and Barte le mys idea of superiority of the left hand in reaction time, which contradicts the theory of contralateral hemispheric influence as an exclusive motor control mechanism of hand movements (Barte le my & Boulinquez, 2001, 2002; Boulinquez &

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

449

50

45

40

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

35

30

25

20

15

10

RH/RF

LH/LF

RH/LF

LH/RF

laterality pattern

QD R QD L

Figure 3. Mean squared deviations of right (QD R) and left hand (QD L) movement time9 condence intervals in relation to limb laterality pattern.

Barte le my, 2000). In our study right-handed participants presented greater homogeneity of results obtained with the dominant and non-dominant hand, which is in contrast to other findings suggesting that left-handers

450

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

show weaker lateral preferences in motor tasks (Oldfield, 1971; Peters & Ivanoff, 1999). Taking into consideration the complex aetiology of handedness, it is supposed that the structure of this phenomenon is very sensitive to the sample structure and depends on participant selection (Doyen & Carlier, 2002). In our experiment we did not measure intragroup differences in performance, taking into consideration the mean values of each group of participants. Left-handers are reported to be a very heterogeneous group, especially in non-preferred hand performance (Doyen & Carlier, 2002).

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

Footedness effect
In our experiment footedness did not show a main effect on hand performance quality. We only found left-footed participants to be more homogeneous in motor performance than right-footed ones, with no influence of sole foot dominance on the values of MT in hand performance. Footedness has been suggested in some previous experiments to be an important factor predicting the level of motor preparation, not much influenced by dextral social pressures, which makes it a sensitive index of hemispheric specialisation (Chapman et al., 1997; Elias & Bryden, 1998; Elias, Bryden, & Bulman-Fleming, 1998) however, the motor control of foot performance is still unclear (Foundas et al., 1998). Our results on hand MT demonstrate the more complex character of the motor preparation system in humans, where footedness does not play a major role in hand performance but has an influence on the result of motor action, as part of the inner structure of the motor control system.

Laterality pattern effect

This research provides insight into the relationship between hand motor performance and limb laterality pattern. Our results demonstrate how the level of MT not only reflects hand dominance, but also seems to be strongly influenced by the limb laterality pattern. In our study the cross-lateral pattern of handfoot dominance was related to a higher level of hand MT, in comparison to participants with a congruent handfoot dominance pattern. The pattern of right-side-congruent limb dominance (RH/RF) was connected with the slowest MT in the research group, for both left and right hand performance. Our results confirm those obtained by Beling et al. (1998), suggesting the existence of a relationship of lower limb dominance with handedness in right- and left-handers. Significant differences in motor performance among various laterality patterns lead to the question of why

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

451

the lack of independence of hand and foot in motor control of rapid aimed movements occurs. Within the current context, our findings partly contradict models and theories based on hand performance lateral asymmetries as an effect of exclusively central motor control. It has been suggested so far that motor performance of the upper limbs is influenced only by central information processing, while the effect for the lower limbs is influenced only by peripheral motor control (Kato & Asami, 1998). Asymmetry in neuromotor performance is assumed to be linked with brain laterality connected with hemispheric specialisation (Gasser et al., 2005; Springer & Deutsch, 2004). However, studies in the area of motor control have consistently generated contradictory results on the correlation between left hemisphere laterality and right hand leading when comparing left and right hand reaction times in relation to hand dominance (Barthe le my & Boulinguez, 2001, 2002; Carson, Chua, Elliot, & Goodman, 1990). However, other mediating factors may contribute to hand performance. According to our hypothesis one distinct possibility is that quality of discrete limb movement in humans is the effect of interactions on different motor control levels, where the central motor control structures and processes (hemispheric specialisation), locomotor centres of limb performance (CPGs), and also peripheral motor control factors may be involved simultaneously. We assume that the whole movement-producing system receives inputs not only from higher cortical areas (brain hemispheres) and possibly other structures within the central nervous system, but also from peripheral sensors (in particular, visual receptors, vestibular receptors, and proprioreceptors). The complexity of motor laterality can be the effect of asymmetries of neuromuscular activity and movement generation processes (the aetiology of such asymmetries is a different problem*genetic and/or environmental factors can be involved). The effect of laterality pattern on hand performance could be influenced by afferent and efferent signals in the neural system, where lateral limb preferences play a modifying role in motor programming and execution. Our hypothesis brings support to some other findings suggesting the role of peripheral factors in rapid movements performed with the hands (Jaric, 2000; Schaal et al., 2004). This effect confirms the urgent need for research on upper and lower limb laterality in light of differences in neurological mechanisms involved in motor control, as suggested by Peters (1990, 1991). Although the simplicity of psychomotor performance tests makes them an attractive means of assessing motor laterality, a more involved research process is likely necessary to confirm or reject our hypothesis. Limb performance measures should be associated with brain-imaging techniques and more sophisticated neurophysiologic examination of motor and sensory functions of peripheral nerves. Viewing laterality in motor performance as an effect of a motor

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

452

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

control internet may be the key to understanding the mechanisms of asymmetry in human movements.
Manuscript received 31 May 2007 Revised manuscript received 6 March 2008 First published online 31 May 2008

REFERENCES
Adam, J., Paas, F., Buekers, M., Wuyts, I., Spijkers, W., & Wallmeyer, P. (1999). Gender differences in choice reaction time: Evidence for differential strategies. Ergonomics, 42, 327. Agnew, J., Zefro, T., & Eden, G. (2004). Left hemisphere specialization for the control of voluntary movements. Neuroimage, 22, 289304. Annett, M. (1992). Five tests of hand skill. Cortex, 28, 583600. Babiloni, C., Carducci, F., Del Gratta, C., Demartin, M., Romani, G. L., Babiloni, F., et al. (2003). Hemispherical asymmetry in human SMA during voluntary simple unilateral movements. An fMRI study. Cortex, 39, 293305. Barral, J., & Debu, B. (2004). Aiming in adults: Sex and laterality effects. Laterality, 9(3), 299312. Barral, J., Debu, B., & Rival, C. (2006). Developmental changes in unimanual and bimanual aiming movements. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29(3), 415429. Barthe le my, S., & Boulinguez, P. (2001). Manual reaction time asymmetries in human subjects: The role of movement planning and attention. Neuroscience Letters, 315(1), 4144. Barthe le my, S., & Boulinguez, P. (2002). Orienting visuospatial attention generates manual reaction time asymmetries in target detection and pointing. Behavioral Brain Research, 133(1), 109116. Beling, J., Wolfe, G. A., Allen, K. A., & Boyle, J. M. (1998). Lower extremity preference during gross and ne motor skills performed in sitting and standing postures. Journal of Orthopaedic Sports Physical Theraphy, 28, 400404. Boulinguez, P., & Barthe le my, S. (2000). Inuence of the movement parameter to be controlled on manual RT asymmetries in right-handers. Brain and Cognition, 44(3), 653661. Bryden, P. (2002). Pushing the limits of task difculty for the right and left hands in manual aiming. Brain and Cognition, 48(23), 287291. Carey, D., Smith, G., Smith, D. T., Shepherd, J., Skriver, J., Ord, L., et al. (2001). Footedness in world soccer. An analysis of France 98. Journal of Sport Sciences, 19, 855864. Carlier, M., Dumont, A. M., Beau, J., & Michel, F. (1993). Hand performance of French children on a nger-tapping test in relation to handedness, sex and age. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 931940. Carson, R. G., Chua, R., Elliot, D., & Goodman, D. (1990). The contribution of vision to asymmetries in manual aiming. Neuropsychologia, 28, 12151220. Chapman, J. P., Chapman, L. J., & Allen, J. J. (1997). The measurement of foot preference. Neuropsychologia, 25(3), 579584. Dane, S., & Erzurumlugoglu, A. (2003). Sex and handedness differences in eyehand visual reaction times in handball players. International Journal of Neuroscience, 113(7), 923929. Dargent-Pare, C., De Agostini, M., Mesbah, M., & Dellatolas, G. (1992). Foot and eye preferences in adults: Relationship with handedness, sex and age. Cortex, 28(3), 343351. Day, L. B., & MacNeilage, P. F. (1996). Postural asymmetries and language lateralization in humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 110, 8896. Denckla, M. B. (1973). Development of motor coordination in normal children. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 16, 729741.
Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

453

Der, G., & Deary, I. J. (2006). Age and sex differences in reaction time in adulthood: Results from the United Kingdom health and lifestyle survey. Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 6273. Doyen, A. L., & Carlier, M. (2002). Measuring handedness: A validation study of Bishops reaching card test. Laterality, 7, 115130. Elias, L. J., & Bryden, M. P. (1998). Footedness is a better predictor of language lateralization than handedness. Laterality, 1, 4151. Elias, L. J., Bryden, M. P., & Bulman-Fleming, M. B. (1998). Footedness is a better predictor than is handedness of emotional lateralization. Neuropsychologia, 36, 3743. Elliot, D., & Heath, M. (1999). Goal-directed aiming: Correcting a force specication error with the right and left hands. Journal of Motor Behaviour, 31(4), 309325. Flowers, K. (1975). Handedness and controlled movement. British Journal of Psychology, 66, 39 52. Foundas, A. L., Hong, K., Leonard, C. M., & Heilman, K. M. (1998). Hand preference and magnetic resonance imaging asymmetries of the central sulcus. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychology in Behavioral Neurology, 11, 6571. Francis, K., & Spiriduso, W. (2000). Age differences in the expression of manual asymmetry. Experimental Aging Research, 26(2), 169181. Gabbard, C. (1992). Associations between hand and foot preference in 3- to 5-year-olds. Cortex, 28, 497502. Gabbard, C., & Hart, S. (1996). A question of foot dominance. Journal of General Psychology, 123(4), 289296. Gabbard, C., & Iteya, M. (1996). Foot laterality in children, adolescents and adults. Laterality, 1, 199205. Gasser, T., Rousson, V., Caish, J., & Largo, R. (2005). Age, laterality and gender in neuromotor performance. Retrieved April 15, 2007, from www.biostat.uzh.ch/research/manuscripts Haaland, K., Elsinger, C., Mayer, A., Durgerian, S., & Rao, S. (2004). Motor sequence complexity and performing hand produce differential patterns of hemispheric lateralization. Journal of Cognitive Neurosciences, 16, 621636. Hart, S., & Gabbard, C. (1998). Examining the mobilizing feature of footedness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 13391342. Hore, J., Watts, S., Tweed, D., & Miller, B. (1998). Overarm throws with the non-dominant arm: Kinematics and accuracy. Journal of Neurophysiology, 76(6), 36933704. Jancke, L., Peters, M., Himmelbach, M., Nosselt, T., Shah, J., & Steinmetz, H. (2000). The fMRI study of bimanual coordination. Neuropsychologia, 38, 164174. Jaric, S. (2000). Is movement symmetry predominantly affected by neural or biomechanical factors? In J. Raczek, Z. Waskiewicz, & G. Juras (Eds.), Current research in motor control (pp. 3743). Katowice, Poland: University School of Physical Education. Kabbash, P., MacKenzie, I. S., & Buxton, W. (1993). Human performance using computer input devices in the preferred and non-preferred hands. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems INTERCHI93 (pp. 474481). New York: ACM. Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H., & Jessel, T. M. (1991). Principles of neural science (3rd ed.). New York: Elsevier. Kato, Y., & Asami, T. (1998). Difference in stimulusresponse compatibility effect in premotor and motor time between upper and lower limbs. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 87, 939946. Kauranen, K., Siira, P., & Vanharanta, H. (1999). Strength training for 1 h in humans: Effect on the motor performance of normal upper extremities. European Journal of Applied Physiology & Occupational Physiology, 79(5), 383390. Lage, G., Gallo, L., Conc alves, M., Vieira, D., Schickler, D., Coelho, R., et al. (2007). Manual asymmetries and task complexity in aiming movements. Proceedings of International Society of Motor Control Conference, Progress in Motor Control VI, Santos, Brazil. Motor Control, 11(Suppl.), 42.

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

454

OLEX-ZARYCHTA AND RACZEK

Maupas, E., Paysant, J., Martinet, N., & Andre, J. (1999). Asymmetric leg activity in healthy subjects during walking, detected by electrogoniometry. Clinical Biomechanics of Bristol, 14, 403411. McManus, I. C. (2002). Left hand, right hand. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Nicoletti, G., Arabia, G., Pugliese, P., Torchia, G., Pucci, F., Gambardella, A., et al. (2005). Movement time and ageing: A normative study in healthy subjects with the Movement Time Analyser. Aging Clinical Experimental Research, 17(3), 207210. Noble, C. E., Baker, B. L., & Jones, T. A. (1964). Age and sex parameters in psychomotor learning. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 19, 935945. Oldeld, R. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97113. Olex, D. (2000). Rhythm capability in uni and bilateral performance of upper and lower extremities: Relation to laterality pattern in limbs and sex. In J. Raczek, Z. Waskiewicz, & G. Juras (Eds.), Current research in motor control (pp. 158162). Katowice, Poland: University School of Physical Education. Olex-Mierzejewska, D., & Raczek, J. (2001). The human laterality phenomenon: Is the functional dominance on an equality with the strength dominance in upper limbs? Biology of Sport, 18, 237244. Peters, M. (1990). Neuropsychological identication of motor problems: Can we learn something from the feet and legs that arms will not tell us? Neuropsychological Review, 1(2), 165183. Peters, M. (1991). Laterality and motor control. CIBA Foundation Symposium, 300311. Peters, M., & Ivanoff, J. (1999). Performance asymmetries in computer mouse control of righthanders, and left-handers with left- and right-handed mouse experience. Journal of Motor Behavior, 31(1), 8694. Plamondon, R., & Alimi, A. (1997). Speed/accuracy trade offs in target directed movements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 279349. Provins, K. (1997). The specicity of motor skill and manual asymmetry: A review of the evidence and its implications. Journal of Motor Behaviour, 29, 183192. Raczek, J., Mynarski, W., & Ljach, V. (1998). Theoretical and empirical basis for developing and diagnosing of co-ordination motor abilities. Katowice, Poland: Academy of Physical Education. [In Polish, English summary.] Raczek, J., Waskiewicz, Z., & Juras, G. (1997). Raum-, zeitliche- und dynamische Aspekte koordinativ-motorischer Leistungsvoraussetzungen ein Objektivierungsversuch der Diagnostik. In P. Hirtz & F. Nuske (Eds.),Bewegungskoordination und sportliche Leistung integrativ betrachten. Schriften der Deutschen Vereinigung fu r Sportwissenschaft. Czwalina Verlag, Hamburg, 87, 293300. Riolo-Quinn, L. (1991). Relationship of hand dominance to accuracy on thumb positioning task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 73, 267273. Schaal, S., Sternad, D., Osu, R., & Kawato, M. (2004). Rhythmic arm movement is not discrete. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 11361143. Springer, S., & Deutsch, G. (2004). Left brain, right brain. Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (5th ed). Warsaw: Pro szynski i S ka. Tan, U. (1993). Speed and accuracy of aimed hand movements in left-handed human subjects: Sexrelated differences in motor control. International Journal of Neuroscience, 72, 235243. Tan, U., & Kutlu, N. (1991). Right and left hand skill in relation to cerebral lateralization in righthanded male and female subjects: The prominent role of the right brain in right-handedness. International Journal of Neuroscience, 64, 125138. Teixeira, L. A., Gasparetto, E. R., & Sugie, M. M. (1999). Is there asymmetry in movement preparation? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89, 205208.

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008

MOVEMENT TIME AND HAND-FOOT LATERALITY

455

Walter, C. B., & Swinnen, S. P. (1990). Asymmetric interlimb interference during the performance of a dynamic bimanual task. Brain and Cognition, 14(2), 185200. Welford, A. T. (1980). Choice reaction time: Basic concepts. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction times (pp. 73128). New York: Academic Press. Woodworth, R. S. (1899). The accuracy of voluntary movement. Psychological Review, 3(Monograph suppl.), 1119. Zijdewind, C., & Bosch, W. (1990). Electromyogram and force during stimulated fatigue tests of muscles in dominant and non-dominant hands. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 60(2), 127132.

Downloaded By: [University of Bath Library] At: 15:14 28 October 2008