An Evaluation of Determination of Handedness Using Standard Osteological Measurements*

Abstract

Numerous studies have assessed side dominance assuming arm bones on the side of handedness will be larger, but concerns over sample size or replicability of measurements usually emerged. Attempting to improve upon these limitations, this investigation analyzes patterns of side difference for standard length and transverse dimensions of the scapula, clavicle, humerus, ulna, and radius for 137 individuals of known handedness. The results showed that with few exceptions, the right side of the skeleton was consistently larger in most individuals regardless of side dominance. Combinations of other measurements previously suggested to be indicative of handedness as well as the use of discriminant analysis also failed to provide reliable estimators. These findings are likely related to the fact that activities of modern individuals are generally not sufficiently unilateral in their stresses to cause asymmetrical development in the arm bones. Therefore, it is recommended that other means be developed to assess side dominance.

The anatomy of the clavicle

“…Several different measurement protocols have been described. Mays et al () and Danforth et al () measured the width only at the midshaft. Andermahr et al () measured the diameter in three locations and Parsons in five locations.…”

More than 500,000 years of right-handedness in Europe

“…Using a sample of known right-and left-handers, Danforth and Thompson (2008) studied differences in standard measures for the clavicle, scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna. Their univariate and multivariate analyses found no ''reliable estimators'' for determining hand preference.…”

Can Handedness be Determined from Skeletal Remains? A Chronological Review of the Literature

“…Schultz (3,4) and Van Dusen (5) both presented early evidence suggesting that handedness could not be predicted reliably from skeletal asymmetry. Later, three key articles, Schulter‐Ellis (81), Glassman and Dana (82), and Danforth and Thompson (85), offered clarification of the extent to which handedness can be assessed from skeletal remains in a forensic context. All three articles documented asymmetry in the skeleton but, citing the complex factors involved, could not sufficiently relate it to handedness to support diagnostic use in a forensic context.…”

“…In 2008, Danforth and Thompson (85) reported on their study of 137 individuals (both sexes) of known handedness in the Bass donated collection at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, and in the forensic databank also maintained by the University of Tennessee. Their sample included 115 right‐handed individuals and 22 left‐handed individuals.…”