{"title":"The impact of hand dominance on haptic and visual size comparisons.","authors":"Peter Wühr, Herbert Heuer","doi":"10.1007/s00426-026-02332-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present study investigated the impact of handedness on haptic and visual size comparisons. Moreover, we sought to determine whether strength differences between the hands are correlated with lateral differences between judged sizes. Therefore, 80 left-handed and 80 right-handed young adults (without additional constraints on individual characteristics except for those required by the experimental tasks) completed a bimanual haptic size-comparison task, a visual size-comparison task, and strength measurements of fingers, hands, and arms. In the haptic size-comparison task, we observed an impact of handedness: Both left- and right-handers underestimated the size of an object in their dominant hand relative to an object in their non-dominant hand. This hand-related bias was confined to the haptic modality; in the visual size-comparison task, we observed a small overestimation of stimulus size in the right visual hemifield, as compared to the left visual hemifield, in right-handers, but not in left-handers. The strength measurements revealed the expected superiority of the dominant effector over the non-dominant effector, but the strength asymmetries were not correlated with the bias in haptic size-comparisons. The observed impact of handedness on haptic size judgments represents a case of embodied perception in the haptic modality.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":"90 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13372956/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-026-02332-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The present study investigated the impact of handedness on haptic and visual size comparisons. Moreover, we sought to determine whether strength differences between the hands are correlated with lateral differences between judged sizes. Therefore, 80 left-handed and 80 right-handed young adults (without additional constraints on individual characteristics except for those required by the experimental tasks) completed a bimanual haptic size-comparison task, a visual size-comparison task, and strength measurements of fingers, hands, and arms. In the haptic size-comparison task, we observed an impact of handedness: Both left- and right-handers underestimated the size of an object in their dominant hand relative to an object in their non-dominant hand. This hand-related bias was confined to the haptic modality; in the visual size-comparison task, we observed a small overestimation of stimulus size in the right visual hemifield, as compared to the left visual hemifield, in right-handers, but not in left-handers. The strength measurements revealed the expected superiority of the dominant effector over the non-dominant effector, but the strength asymmetries were not correlated with the bias in haptic size-comparisons. The observed impact of handedness on haptic size judgments represents a case of embodied perception in the haptic modality.
期刊介绍:
Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.