Factor analysis of the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory: Inconsistent handedness yields a two-factor solution

Christman, Stephen D.; Prichard, Eric C.; Corser, Ryan

doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2015.06.005

Cited by 33 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, according to the item-by-item analysis, we found there were 23 participants that reported performing the activity writing only with the left hand; the same participants (except for one) also indicated drawing only with the left hand. Our data suggests that there is a possibility of social pressure to be right-handed, in line with several studies (e.g., Christman, Prichard, & Corser, 2015;van Strien, 2002), which state that hand preference may be related to culture/environment, and that low numbers of lefthanders could be explicable by cultural and biological differences among samples (Salmaso & Longoni, 1985). As a result, the present data indicates the conformity pressures, brain, and behavioral lateralization may have grown under social selection pressures (Ghirlanda & Vallortigara, 2004;Payne, 1987).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Preliminary validation of the Portuguese Edinburgh Handedness Inventory in an adult sample

Espírito‐Santo

Pires

Garcia

et al. 2017

Applied Neuropsychology: Adult

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI) is persistently the most used inventory to evaluate handedness, being neuropsychological investigation and clinical practice. Despite this, there is no information on how this instrument functions in a Portuguese population. The objective of this study was therefore to examine the sociodemographic influences on handedness and establish psychometric properties of the EHI in a Portuguese sample. The sample consisted of 342 adults (157 men and 185 women), assessed with a battery of neuropsychological tests. The mean EHI Laterality Quotient was 63.52 (SD ¼ 38.00). A much high percentage of ambiguous-handedness compared to left-handedness was detected. An inconsistency was found between the preference for formal education activities (writing-drawing-using scissors) and the remaining EHI activities. From sociodemographic variables, only age, area, and regions of residence showed significant influence on EHI scores. The reliability and temporal reliability of EHI were adequate. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated a one-factor model (� 2 /df ¼ 2.141; TLI ¼ 0.972; CFI ¼ 0.979; RMSEA ¼ 0.058). The inconsistency between formal education and nonformal activities could be an indicator of social pressure. The present data give support for the notion that handedness measured by EHI is potentially sensitive to sociodemographic and cultural influences. KEYWORDS Edinburgh handedness; hand preference; handedness; inventory; psychometric properties 65 handedness) (Dragovic, Milenkovic, & Hammond, 2008). To evaluate handedness, the two methods most commonly used include observation of the use of the dominant hand and the application of inventories answered by the individual (Barbieri & Gobbi, 2009). 70 The three most popular inventories (van Strien, 2002) are by Crovitz and Zener (1962 Q5), Annett (1970), and Oldfield (1971). The Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI; Oldfield, 1971) is the most used from the previous three (Fazio & Cantor, 2015; Veale, 2014). The EHI 75 offers the advantage of being a simple and brief method of evaluating laterality using a quantitative scale (Oldfield, 1971). The first version of the Oldfield Inventory was based on a modified version of the Humphrey inventory with 80 20 items (Büsch, Hagemann, & Bender, 2010). There is

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Preliminary validation of the Portuguese Edinburgh Handedness Inventory in an adult sample

Espírito‐Santo

Pires

Garcia

et al. 2017

Applied Neuropsychology: Adult

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Toledo group of researchers (Prichard et al, 2013;Christman & Prichard, 2016;Christman et al, 2015), in particular, distinguish between high scores on a handedness questionnaire (indicating a strong or consistent preference for a particular hand, usually the right, and scores indicating a relatively reduced preference for one hand) based on the median score on a hand preference inventory. We looked at our data from this perspective but, similar to Beaton et al (2015), found no effect of consistency of handedness irrespective of direction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Christman et al (2015) have recently shown that whereas factor analysis of scores of consistent righthanders on (a slightly modified version of) the EHI yields a single factor solution, a two-factor solution emerged from the scores of inconsistent righthanders. This is an interesting finding since the EHI, despite the criticism that its instructions are frequently misunderstood (Fazio, Coenen & Denney, 2012), is far and away the most widely used handedness inventory in the literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fractionating negative and positive affectivity in handedness: Insights from the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality

Beaton

Mutinelli

Corr

2016

Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. (1975), was administered to a sample of 177 participants alongside the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ) which measures two factors of defensive negative emotion, motivation and affectivity -the behavioural inhibition system (BIS) and the fight-flight-freeze system (FFFS) -and one positive-approach dimension related to reward sensitivity, persistence and reactivity -the behavioural approach system (BAS). Permanent repository linkWe sought to clarify the nature of negative, and positive, affectivity in relation to handedness. ANOVAs and multiple regression analyses converged on the following conclusions: left-handers were higher on the BIS, not the FFFS, than right-handers; in right-handers only, strength of direction was positively correlated with the FFFS, not the BIS. The original assessment method proposed by Annett was also used to assess handedness, but associations with RST-PQ factors were not found. These findings help to clarify existing issues in the literature and raise new ones for future research.

show abstract

“…We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and imaging studies of 43 cerebral AVMs patients, who underwent fMRI for preoperative evaluation between January 2013 and April 2015. Selection criteria were as follows: 1. all patients were right-handed, demonstrated by the Edinburgh handedness inventory (8); 2. all lesions were located in the left hemisphere and involved the language cortex, including the Broca (inferior frontal and middle frontal gyri, including Brodmann area 44, 45, 9, 46) and Wernicke (supramarginal, angular, and superior temporal gyri, including Brodmann area 22, 21, 39, 40) areas (5); 3. patients underwent surgical resection under neuronavigation. None of these patients were included in our previous study (9).…”

Section: Patient Demographicsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Does right-sided language lateralization on bold-fmri affect postoperative language outcome for avm patients?

Zhi

Deng²,

Cao³

et al. 2016

Turkish Neurosurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Factor analysis of the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory: Inconsistent handedness yields a two-factor solution

Cited by 33 publications

References 44 publications

Preliminary validation of the Portuguese Edinburgh Handedness Inventory in an adult sample

Preliminary validation of the Portuguese Edinburgh Handedness Inventory in an adult sample

Fractionating negative and positive affectivity in handedness: Insights from the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality

Does right-sided language lateralization on bold-fmri affect postoperative language outcome for avm patients?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About