↓ Skip to main content

Attentional asymmetries – cause or consequence of human right handedness?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Attentional asymmetries – cause or consequence of human right handedness?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01587
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gavin Buckingham, David P. Carey

Abstract

It is well established that the vast majority of the population favors their right hand when performing complex manual tasks. However, the developmental and evolutionary underpinnings of human manual asymmetries remain contentious. One often overlooked suggestion is that right handedness may stem from an asymmetrical bias in attention, with the right hand being allocated more attentional resources during bimanual tasks than the left hand (Peters, 1981). This review examines the evidence for attentional asymmetries during a variety of bimanual tasks, and critically evaluates the explanatory power of this hypothesis for explaining the depth and breadth of individual- and population-level manual asymmetries. We conclude that, while the attentional bias hypothesis is well-supported in adults, it requires further validation from a developmental perspective to explain the full breadth of adult manual laterality.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 39 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 26%
Student > Master 8 19%
Researcher 4 10%
Lecturer 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 26%
Neuroscience 7 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Sports and Recreations 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 8 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 December 2020.
All research outputs
#4,814,807
of 26,391,552 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,139
of 35,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,646
of 364,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#147
of 402 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,391,552 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,294 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 402 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.