We have proposed a model of motor lateralization, in which the left and right hemispheres are specialized for different aspects of motor control: the left hemisphere for predicting and accounting for limb dynamics and the right hemisphere for stabilizing limb position through impedance control mechanisms. Our previous studies, demonstrating different motor deficits in the ipsilesional arm of stroke patients with left or right hemisphere damage, provided a critical test of our model. However, motor deficits after stroke are most prominent on the contralesional side. Post-stroke rehabilitation has also, naturally, focused on improving contralesional arm impairment and function. Understanding whether contralesional motor deficits differ depending on the hemisphere of damage is, therefore, of vital importance for assessing the impact of brain damage on function and also for designing rehabilitation interventions specific to laterality of damage. We, therefore, asked whether motor deficits in the contralesional arm of unilateral stroke patients reflect hemisphere-dependent control mechanisms. Because our model of lateralization predicts that contralesional deficits will differ depending on the hemisphere of damage, this study also served as an essential assessment of our model. Stroke patients with mild to moderate hemiparesis in either the left or right arm because of contralateral stroke and healthy control subjects performed targeted multi-joint reaching movements in different directions. As predicted, our results indicated a double dissociation; although left hemisphere damage was associated with greater errors in trajectory curvature and movement direction, errors in movement extent were greatest after right hemisphere damage. Thus, our results provide the first demonstration of hemisphere specific motor control deficits in the contralesional arm of stroke patients. Our results also suggest that it is critical to consider the differential deficits induced by right or left hemisphere lesions to enhance post-stroke rehabilitation interventions.

No abstract

Handedness is most often measured by questionnaires that assess an individual’s preference for using a particular hand to perform a variety of tasks. While such assessments have proved reliable, they do not address the underlying neurobehavioral processes that give rise to the choice of which hand to use. Recent research has indicated that handedness associated with hemispheric specializations for different aspects of sensorimotor performance. We now hypothesize that an individual’s choice of which hand to use for a given task should result from an interaction between these underlying neurobehavioral asymmetries with task conditions. We test this hypothesis by manipulating two factors in targeted reaching movements: 1) Region of workspace and 2) visual feedback conditions. The first manipulation modified the geometric and dynamic requirements of the task for each arm, whereas the second modified the sensorimotor performance asymmetries, an effect predicted by previous literature. We expected that arm choice would be reflected by an interaction between these factors. Our results indicated that removing visual feedback improved the relative performance of the non-dominant arm and increased the choice to use this arm for targets near midline, an effect that was enhanced for targets requiring larger movement amplitudes. We explain these findings in the context of the dynamic dominance hypothesis of handedness and discuss their implications for the link between hemispheric asymmetries in neural control and hand preference.

While cerebral lateralization has previously been well documented for many neurobehavioral functions, recent research has shown that as people age, formerly lateralized processes recruit more symmetric patterns of neural activity. Such findings provide the foundation for the model of hemispheric asymmetry reduction in older adults, or “HAROLD” (Cabeza, 2002). Previous studies that have measured reaction time and movement time have suggested that aging does not affect manual asymmetries. However, whether these findings can be extended to kinematic variables associated with motor coordination remains largely unknown. The purpose of the current study is to determine whether asymmetries in intralimb coordination are also reduced during the aging process. We examined multidirectional reaching in two different right handed age groups, a younger group from 20 to 40 years of age, and an older group, from 60–80 years of age. Measures of final position accuracy, precision, and trajectory linearity showed robust asymmetries between the left and right arm groups of young adults. However, the trajectories and accuracies of the older subjects were symmetric, such that our dependent measures were not significantly different between the right and left arm groups. Our findings extend the HAROLD model to motor behavior, suggesting that aging results in decrements in motor lateralization.

Our previous studies of interlimb asymmetries during reaching movements have given rise to the dynamic-dominance hypothesis of motor lateralization. This hypothesis proposes that dominant arm control has become optimized for efficient intersegmental coordination, which is often associated with straight and smooth hand-paths, while non-dominant arm control has become optimized for controlling steady-state posture, which has been associated with greater final position accuracy when movements are mechanically perturbed, and often during movements made in the absence of visual feedback. The basis for this model of motor lateralization was derived from studies conducted in right-handed subjects. We now ask whether left-handers show similar proficiencies in coordinating reaching movements. We recruited right- and left-handers (20 per group) to perform reaching movements to three targets, in which intersegmental coordination requirements varied systematically. Our results showed that the dominant arm of both left- and right-handers were well coordinated, as reflected by fairly straight hand-paths and low errors in initial direction. Consistent with our previous studies, the non-dominant arm of right-handers showed substantially greater curvature and large errors in initial direction, most notably to targets that elicited higher intersegmental interactions. While the right, non-dominant, hand-paths of left-handers were slightly more curved than those of the dominant arm, they were also substantially more accurate and better coordinated than the non-dominant arm of right-handers. Our results indicate a similar pattern, but reduced lateralization for intersegmental coordination in left-handers. These findings suggest that left-handers develop more coordinated control of their non-dominant arms than right-handers, possibly due to environmental pressure for right-handed manipulations.