Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec 21;13(12):e0208696.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208696. eCollection 2018.

The relationship between behavioral language laterality, face laterality and language performance in left-handers

Affiliations

The relationship between behavioral language laterality, face laterality and language performance in left-handers

Lise Van der Haegen et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Left-handers provide unique information about the relationship between cognitive functions because of their larger variability in hemispheric dominance. This study presents the laterality distribution of, correlations between and test-retest reliability of behavioral lateralized language tasks (speech production, reading and speech perception), face recognition tasks, handedness measures and language performance tests based on data from 98 left-handers. The results show that a behavioral test battery leads to percentages of (a)typical dominance that are similar to those found in neuropsychological studies even though the incidence of clear atypical lateralization (about 20%) may be overestimated at the group level. Significant correlations were found between the language tasks for both reaction time and accuracy lateralization indices. The degree of language laterality could however not be linked to face laterality, handedness or language performance. Finally, individuals were classified less consistently than expected as being typical, bilateral or atypical across all tasks. This may be due to the often good (speech production and perception tasks) but sometimes weak (reading and face tasks) test-retest reliabilities. The lack of highly reliable and valid test protocols for functions unrelated to speech remains one of the largest impediments for individual analysis and cross-task investigations in laterality research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Reaction time lateralization indices for the laterality tasks.
Reaction time lateralization index (LI) distributions for the picture visual half field (VHF), word VHF, Optimal Viewing Position (OVP), dichotic listening and face VHF tasks. LIs are sorted from most negative to most positive scores per task. Note that only the dichotic listening chart has a deviating scale on the y-axis to improve visibility because LIs were based on left/right ear matches and not reaction times.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Percentage participants categorized as showing typical, bilateral or atypical lateralization based on their reaction times.
Reaction time distributions expressed as percentages and divided in a typical, bilateral and atypical category for the picture visual half field (VHF), word VHF, Optimal Viewing Position (OVP), Dichotic Listening (DL) and face VHF tasks. Panel A classifies the participants based on raw differences between the left and right visual field or ear. The data in Panels B and C are based on lateralization indices (LIs) that represent a mean reaction time difference of 10 ms (same values as in Panel A for the DL task) and 0 ms respectively.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Scatter plots contrasting two tasks.
Data points represent individual lateralization indices (LIs) based on reaction times. VHF = Visual Half Field; OVP = Optimal Viewing Position; DL = Dichotic Listening. Note that only the dichotic listening chart has a deviating scale on the y-axis to improve visibility because LIs were based on left/right ear matches and not reaction times.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Knecht S, Drager B, Deppe M, Bobe L, Lohmann H, Floel A, et al. Handedness and hemispheric language dominance in healthy humans. Brain. 2000;123:2512–8. - PubMed
    1. Mazoyer B, Zago L, Jobard G, Crivello F, Joliot M, Perchey G, et al. Gaussian Mixture Modeling of Hemispheric Lateralization for Language in a Large Sample of Healthy Individuals Balanced for Handedness. Plos One. 2014;9(6). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pujol J, Deus J, Losilla JM, Capdevila A. Cerebral lateralization of language in normal left-handed people studied by functional MRI. Neurology. 1999;52(5):1038–43. - PubMed
    1. Van der Haegen L, Cai Q, Seurinck R, Brysbaert M. Further fMRI validation of the visual half field technique as an indicator of language laterality: A large-group analysis. Neuropsychologia. 2011;49(10):2879–88. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.06.014 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Willems RM, Van der Haegen L, Fisher SE, Francks C. On the other hand: including left-handers in cognitive neuroscience and neurogenetics. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2014;15(3):193–201. 10.1038/nrn3679 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types