手性指数实际任务(HI20):一种评估手性偏好的经济行为措施。

IF 0.9 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Laterality Pub Date : 2022-05-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-10 DOI:10.1080/1357650X.2021.1990312
Sonja Kuderer, Martin Voracek, Sylvia Kirchengast, Christoph E Rotter
{"title":"手性指数实际任务(HI20):一种评估手性偏好的经济行为措施。","authors":"Sonja Kuderer,&nbsp;Martin Voracek,&nbsp;Sylvia Kirchengast,&nbsp;Christoph E Rotter","doi":"10.1080/1357650X.2021.1990312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>ABSTRACT</b>Because self-report hand preference measures are limited to investigating cognitive aspects of manual laterality, valid, easy-to-administer and economic behavioural methods are needed for capturing the motoric component of handedness. Therefore, this study introduces the Handedness Index Practical Task (HI<sub>20</sub>) and tests it in a sample of 206 students (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 23.79 years, <i>SD</i><sub>age</sub> = 3.01 years), half of whom were self-specified left-handers. After confirming good reliabilities at the subscale and total scale levels, <i>k</i>-means cluster analysis allowed an empirically based partitioning of test subjects into left- (<i>n</i> = 72), mixed- (<i>n</i> = 23) and right-handers (<i>n</i> = 111). To validate this categorization and the HI<sub>20</sub> index, data were compared with the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI), EHI-short, HI<sub>22</sub> and hand grip strength. The congruency between the HI<sub>20</sub> clusters and alternative categorizations ranged from 95.6% to 84.0%, while the clusters explained large portions of variance in grip strength differences. The HI<sub>20</sub> sub- and total scores showed strong correlations with other measures of lateral preference. Altogether, the freely available HI<sub>20</sub> emerges as a reliable and valid alternative for behavioural handedness assessment, whose power lies in explaining differential hand use patterns and enabling fine-grained examinations of handedness.</p>","PeriodicalId":47387,"journal":{"name":"Laterality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Handedness Index Practical Task (HI<sub>20</sub>): An economic behavioural measure for assessing manual preference.\",\"authors\":\"Sonja Kuderer,&nbsp;Martin Voracek,&nbsp;Sylvia Kirchengast,&nbsp;Christoph E Rotter\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1357650X.2021.1990312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>ABSTRACT</b>Because self-report hand preference measures are limited to investigating cognitive aspects of manual laterality, valid, easy-to-administer and economic behavioural methods are needed for capturing the motoric component of handedness. Therefore, this study introduces the Handedness Index Practical Task (HI<sub>20</sub>) and tests it in a sample of 206 students (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 23.79 years, <i>SD</i><sub>age</sub> = 3.01 years), half of whom were self-specified left-handers. After confirming good reliabilities at the subscale and total scale levels, <i>k</i>-means cluster analysis allowed an empirically based partitioning of test subjects into left- (<i>n</i> = 72), mixed- (<i>n</i> = 23) and right-handers (<i>n</i> = 111). To validate this categorization and the HI<sub>20</sub> index, data were compared with the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI), EHI-short, HI<sub>22</sub> and hand grip strength. The congruency between the HI<sub>20</sub> clusters and alternative categorizations ranged from 95.6% to 84.0%, while the clusters explained large portions of variance in grip strength differences. The HI<sub>20</sub> sub- and total scores showed strong correlations with other measures of lateral preference. Altogether, the freely available HI<sub>20</sub> emerges as a reliable and valid alternative for behavioural handedness assessment, whose power lies in explaining differential hand use patterns and enabling fine-grained examinations of handedness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laterality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laterality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2021.1990312\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/11/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laterality","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2021.1990312","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

由于自我报告的手偏好测量仅限于调查手侧性的认知方面,因此需要有效,易于管理和经济的行为方法来捕获手性的运动成分。因此,本研究引入了利手性指数实践任务(HI20),并在206名学生(年龄= 23.79岁,年龄= 3.01岁)中进行了测试,其中一半是自定义的左撇子。在确认了子量表和总量表水平上的良好信度后,k-means聚类分析允许根据经验将测试对象划分为左撇子(n = 72)、混合撇子(n = 23)和右撇子(n = 111)。为了验证这一分类和HI20指数,我们将数据与爱丁堡利手性量表(EHI)、EHI-short、HI22和握力进行了比较。HI20集群与其他分类之间的一致性范围为95.6%至84.0%,而集群解释了握力差异的大部分方差。HI20分值和总分与其他横向偏好指标有很强的相关性。总而言之,免费提供的HI20作为行为用手性评估的可靠和有效的替代方案,其力量在于解释不同的手使用模式,并允许对用手性进行细致的检查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Handedness Index Practical Task (HI20): An economic behavioural measure for assessing manual preference.

ABSTRACTBecause self-report hand preference measures are limited to investigating cognitive aspects of manual laterality, valid, easy-to-administer and economic behavioural methods are needed for capturing the motoric component of handedness. Therefore, this study introduces the Handedness Index Practical Task (HI20) and tests it in a sample of 206 students (Mage = 23.79 years, SDage = 3.01 years), half of whom were self-specified left-handers. After confirming good reliabilities at the subscale and total scale levels, k-means cluster analysis allowed an empirically based partitioning of test subjects into left- (n = 72), mixed- (n = 23) and right-handers (n = 111). To validate this categorization and the HI20 index, data were compared with the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI), EHI-short, HI22 and hand grip strength. The congruency between the HI20 clusters and alternative categorizations ranged from 95.6% to 84.0%, while the clusters explained large portions of variance in grip strength differences. The HI20 sub- and total scores showed strong correlations with other measures of lateral preference. Altogether, the freely available HI20 emerges as a reliable and valid alternative for behavioural handedness assessment, whose power lies in explaining differential hand use patterns and enabling fine-grained examinations of handedness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Laterality
Laterality Multiple-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition publishes high quality research on all aspects of lateralisation in humans and non-human species. Laterality"s principal interest is in the psychological, behavioural and neurological correlates of lateralisation. The editors will also consider accessible papers from any discipline which can illuminate the general problems of the evolution of biological and neural asymmetry, papers on the cultural, linguistic, artistic and social consequences of lateral asymmetry, and papers on its historical origins and development. The interests of workers in laterality are typically broad.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信