Talk:Handedness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

nonsense[edit]

70-90% right handed, 10% lefthanded. 30% both. Shame.

at least say stas are divided.


WikiProject Biology (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Handedness is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia.
Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Neuroscience (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Anatomy (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article has been classified as relating to neuroanatomy.
 

Shared material with left-handed[edit]

Moved to Talk:Laterality#From Talk:Handedness.23Shared material with left-handed. Please go there to continue merger discussion.
The removed material spans 10:25, 25 Jan 2005 to 03:12, 11 February 2006, and was moved from here at 10:27, 11 March 2006.

Proposed merger [edit]

Moved to Talk:Laterality#Merger proposal. Please go there to continue merger discussion.
The removed material spans 02:55, 11 February 2006 to 10:16, 11 March 2006, and was moved from here at 2006-03-11 10:27:30

/* Genetic factors */ deletion due to failed verification[edit]

This statement does not correlate with the citations provided.

"Other mechanisms may play a role in handedness, for example hormone signalling. Medland et al.[21] found a CAG repeat length variant in the androgen receptor gene (AR) that is positively correlated with left-handedness in females, and negatively correlated in males. This same variant is positively correlated with testosterone levels in males, and negatively correlated in females." This may help to explain why there are more left-handed men than women (around 12% in men versus 10% in women globally).[3] However, another study has found that this variant is instead associated with mixed-handedness in males (and not left-handedness), conflicting with the original results.[22]

One citation provided is a meta-study, that doesn't give explanation on why "left handedness" is more prevalent in males, just that it is more prevalent in males, the other citation provided states the exact opposite of the above text:

Behav Genet. 2005 Nov;35(6):735-44. Opposite effects of androgen receptor CAG repeat length on increased risk of left-handedness in males and females.

"Likelihood of left handedness increased in those individuals with variants of the androgen receptor associated with lower testosterone levels"

Formation section[edit]

@Jdcrutch: The purpose of adding a section called Formation to Handedness is so that other people will add information to it later when they find it. I don't know anything about how it formed so I didn't add to it myself. Blackbombchu (talk) 21:17, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I guess my objection is that "Formation" is not really a term I generally associate with handedness, so the section heading doesn't suggest what might be written to fill the empty section. I associate "formation" with things that have a form, like volcanoes or the inner ear. In the context of handedness, I gather you mean something like, origin, development, or causes? Rather than creating an empty section and hoping somebody will fill it in (though I have done the same thing myself in one case), let me suggest that you either propose the section here on the talk page, or, better yet, if you can, do some research and write the section yourself. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 23:13, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

No section for Cross-dominance?[edit]

I am cross-dominant, meaning I use my left hand for some tasks and my right hand for others. There is an entire article dedicated to this, and yet it's not even mentioned on this page? I think it should be mentioned, or maybe even merged into one article. War wizard90 (talk) 06:24, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

handedness: what's going on?[edit]

So, in some activities it would seem that 'right-handed' individuals almost exclusively use their left hand for what seems to be the harder job. Guitar playing is an example: the dominant hand gets to do the relatively repetative strumming, whilst the 'cack' hand gets to do the seemingly more complicated fingering. So I thought, rather than 'better hand vs. less good hand' it might be something more complicated, like 'hand that's good at performing one single task' (throwing, hammering, writing) vs. 'hand that's better at co-ordinating multiple movements' (guitar fingering, for example).

So, came here to read the article and can't find anything. I'll go off and look and dump anything that i find here in the article, but, if i don't find anything, if anyone knows anything about this? Maybe a section on dual-handed stuff (guitar playing, knife-and-fork eating, etc) would lead us towards putting something pertinant about the division of labour in there? --Arkelweis (talk) 19:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Interesting questions. You might want to try asking them on Quora.com, and if you find any WP:RS, add them to the Wikipedia article here. Cheers! Reify-tech (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Notice the quotation from Scientific American: "A study of musicians in professional orchestras found a significantly greater proportion of talented left-handers, even among those who played instruments that seem designed for right-handers, such as violins." It is a odd to assert that violins favor right-handers, when all the complicated fingering, and vibrato, is done with the left hand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.81.184 (talk) 03:51, 22 April 2015 (UTC)