Synchronization Error in Bilateral Simultaneous Flexion of Elbows

Nakamura, R.; Taniguchi, Reiji; Oshima, Yuki

doi:10.2466/pms.1975.40.2.527

Cited by 14 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the same subjects, flexion of the left arm is faster than that of the right arm. Similar results are reported in Nakamura et al (1975). Kimura and Vanderwolf (1970) reported that the left hand is superior on a finger-flexion task for both left-and right-handers.…”

Section: And M Cite the Data Ofsupporting

confidence: 87%

On the biological basis of human laterality: II. The mechanisms of inheritance

1978

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the inheritance of human handedness and cerebral lateralization within the more general context of structural biological asymmetries. The morphogenesis of asymmetrical structures, such as the heart in vertebrates, depends upon a complex interaction between information coded in the cytoplasm and in the genes, but the polarity of asymmetry seems to depend on the cytoplasmic rather than the genetic code. Indeed it is extremely difficult to find clear-cut examples in which the direction of an asymmetry is under genetic control. As one possible case, there is some evidence that the direction, clockwise or counterclockwise, of rotation of the abdomen in certain mutant strains of Drosophila is controlled by a particular gene locus, although there appears to be some degree of confusion on this point. By contrast, it is much easier to find examples in which the degree but not the direction of asymmetry is under genetic control. For instance, there is a mutant strain of mice in which half of the animals display situs inversus of the viscera. The proportion has remained at one half despite many years of inbreeding, suggesting that the mutant allele effectively cancels the normal situs and allows the asymmetry to be specified in random fashion.Although this account does not deny that the right hemisphere of humans may be the more specialized for certain functions, it does attribute a leading or dominant role to the left hemisphere (at least in most individuals). We suggest that so-called “right-hemisphere” functions are essentially acquired by default, due to the left hemisphere's prior involvement with speech and skilled motor acts; we note, for instance, that these right-hemisphere functions include rather elementary perceptual processes. But perhaps the more critical prediction from our account is that the phenomenon of equipotentiality should be unidirectional: the right (lagging) hemisphere should be more disposed to take over left-hemisphere functions following early lesions than is the left (leading) hemisphere to take over right-hemisphere functions. We note preliminary evidence that this may be so.

show abstract

Section: And M Cite the Data Ofsupporting

confidence: 87%

On the biological basis of human laterality: II. The mechanisms of inheritance

1978

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…and R.U., the results in both experiments show more different than common features, one might ask whether there exists a modality-independent motor path. It is remarkable, in this context, that in another double response study (Nakamura et al, 1975), a dependency of RT difference upon the specific experimental condition was also observed. Nakamura et al required their subjects to respond by rapidly flexing their forearms bilaterally while the EMG onsets in the biceps muscles were recorded as indicators of RT.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 52%

“…If the two motor delays ML and MR should correlate positively (negatively), Equation 3 underestimates (overestimates) the true value of var(M). Some researchers (Bartlett & White, 1965;Nakamura & Saito, 1974;Nakamura, Taniguchi, & Oshima, 1975) used this double response paradigm to study handedness and movement synchronization for voluntary and signal-triggered movements. In those studies, subjects had to respond with both hands upon the occurrence of a stimulus.…”

Section: Stimulus Encoding and Preparation Of Motor Commandmentioning

confidence: 99%