Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among

Normal Individuals
Bhagat Singh*
Meerut College, Meerut
Affiliated to Ch.Charan Singh University, Meerut (UP)

Abstract
The objective of the present research was to study the handedness, footedness and familial
sinistrality among normal individuals. 700 subjects were selected randomly from the normal population.
The mean age of the respondents was 33.98 years with S.D. of being 18.70 years. Steenhuis and Bryden
(1989)s five point scale handedness questionnaire was used to collect the data. Some items were also
included like the arm crossing, leg crossing, leg used to kick a ball and eye used to see a far distance
object. Each subject was tested individually. Chi-square and Correlation analysis were used to test the
different hypothesis. Results showed that out of 700 subjects, only 32 subjects were left handed. There
were 668 right hander, out of which 18.3% (122) have either one (16.8%), two (1.2%) or three left
handed (0.3%) member in their family, while out of 32 left hander, there were only 6.3% (2) left handers
who have one left hander in their family. There was a significant correlation (r = 0.817) between
handedness and footedness. There was a significant difference (2 = 491.365) between handedness and
footedness. On the basis of the results and discussion it can be concluded that there are 4.6% left hander
in normal Indian population which is very low in comparison to world left hander's percentage i.e. 810%. Handedness is also significantly correlated with other asymmetries like footedness. Left hander
uses their left leg to kick a ball and same case is with the right hander. There is no relationship between
Handedness and familial sinistrality.
Key Words: Handedness; Footedness; Familial Sinistrality (FS)

The English word sinister comes

from the Latin word for Left. The layperson
tends to focus upon Handedness as the sole
factor of sidedness. It is important to realize
that left-eyedness, left-footedness and leftearedness also exist. Therefore, sidedness is a
function of all these factors and scientists use
questionnaires that measure sidedness. Because
handedness is not just about hands, it is useful
to talk more generally about Laterality, which is
the specialization of a particular side of the
body to perform a particular task. Many people
are all right sided or all left-sided for many
functions, others have a combination of left and
right dominance. Hand dominance also can

vary depending on the task. Some people write

with the pen in their right hand, but throw,
swing a tennis racket, unscrew the lid of a jar
and do virtually everything else left-handed.
Hand preference is usually defined as the
tendency to perform several tasks with one
hand rather than the other and handedness
shows substantial individual variability. Hand
preference
has
been
measured
by
questionnaires developed by several researchers
(Annett, 1970; Oldfield, 1971; Raczkowski et
al., 1974; Bryden, 1977; Chapman and
Chapman, 1987).
There are various theories related to
handedness. Genetic theorists (Levy and

Author: *Bhagat Singh, Meerut College, Meerut, Affiliated to Ch.Charan Singh University, Meerut (UP)

32

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among Normal Individuals- Bhagat Singh

Nagylaki, 1972; Annett, 1978, 1979, 1981,

1985, 1994, 1998; McManus, 1985, 1985b,
1985c, 1998 & McManus et al, 1999) say that
there is gene for handedness and many studies
support this model but the results of
monozygotic twin studies goes against this
model. Hormonal theorists (Geschwind and
Galaburda, 1987) say that male hormone
Testosterone, play an important role in the
determinant of handedness while pathological
model (Satz, 1972, 1973) says that it is due to
the birth stress and other problems during
pregnancy and birth. But all these theorists give
credits to the social and cultural pressure in the
use of hand preference. Handedness is also
explained in terms of learning. Collins (1970)
argued that handedness is transmitted from one
generation to next through cultural and
environmental bases. The recent advancement
in explaining handedness in terms of
environmental factors has taken place in GeneCulture model of handedness (Laland, et.al.,
1995). It tends to explain that handedness is
only a facultative trait (effected by genes),
which, unlike genetical models explanation, has
no underlying genetical variation. The
variations in handedness are mainly determined
by the developmental and cultural factors. With
the invention of new techniques for study of
human body it can be assumed that in the recent
future there will be a universal theory of
handedness and brain asymmetry.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
There exist many studies of the incidence of
left-handedness in diverse cultures. Seddon and
McManus (1993) have reviewed 100 such
studies and concluded that the world wide
evidence of left-handedness is 8.75%, with a
significant sex difference but no cultural effect.
In contrast, Dawson (1977) has argued that the
incidence of left-handedness is high in those
cultures in which parent-child relationship is
highly permissive, such as the Alaskan Inuit,
and very low in those cultures in which parentchild relations are authoritarian such as the
Hong Kong Boat people. Other data suggest
that the incidence of left-handedness is
particularly low among Orientals (Teng et al.,

1976; Porac et al., 1990). There are nearly 5%

left handers in Indian population (Singh &
Bryden, 1994; Singh & Manjary, 1995; Singh,
et al., 2001; Singh, B, 2006). While there were
6.5% left hander among rural illiterates and the
ratio between male and female left hander was
approximately 2:1 (Singh, B, 2011). While
there were 6.2% left hander in Muslim
population (Singh and Qureshi, 2011).
The aim of the study of Dollfus et al. (2012)
was to investigate the strength of manual
lateralisation in patients with first episode
schizophrenia, taking into account familial
sinistrality. The Edinburgh Inventory (EI)
allowed us to categorize 179 patients from the
EUFEST study and 189 controls presenting
"strong handedness" (SH: EI absolute value
between +81 and +100) or "weak-handedness"
(WH: EI value between -80 and +80). The
nominal logistic regression did not show an FS
effect, but a nearly significant interaction
between illness and FS (p =.07). There were
fewer participants without FS presenting SH
among patients (99/151: 65.6%) than among
controls (134/164: 81.7%, p =.001). In contrast,
the number of participants with FS presenting
SH was similar between controls (68%) and
patients (75%, p =.57). The presence of lefthanded relatives (FS + ) tended to reduce
manual lateralization, but only in controls. This
supports the notion that reduced manual
lateralisation in schizophrenia is related to the
illness rather than to familial left-handedness.
McKeever and VanDeventer, (1977) assessed
the relationship of familial sinistrality and
degree of left-handedness among 71 normal
left-and 80 right-handed subjects. No general
relationship of degree of left-handedness,
defined by four handedness tasks, to familial
sinistrality obtained. Only one of the tasks
(finger tapping speed) significantly differed
between familial and non-familial left-handers,
the familial left-handers being more strongly
left-handed on the task. Porac (as reviewed in
Coren, 1992) completed a three year study of
459 Canadian families. Results were similar to
eleven former studies ranging from 1913 to
1982. If neither parent is left handed nor if only

Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

33

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among Normal Individuals- Bhagat Singh

the father is left handed, the child has a 1:10

chance of being left handed. However, if only
the mother is left handed, the ratio is 2:10.
Finally, if both parents are left handed, the
chance rises to 4:10. Therefore, as Porac stares,
even
under
genetically
optimal
circumstances, the chance of right handedness
is still much greater than the chance of left
handedness. Left-handers with familial lefthandedness are more likely to show right-sided
lateralization. The presence of familial
sinistrality increases the probability of being
left-handed (Salmaso and Longoni, 1983). In a
study it was observed that in the group of righthanders, the laterality quotient (LQ) distribution
was significantly lower, if at least one firstdegree left-handed relative was found. In other
words, there is a lower percentage of strongly
(LQ>80) right-handedness in the presence of
familial sinistrality (Cobianchi, et al. 1998).
Yetkin, Y. (2001) conducted a study, the
principal objective of this study was to
investigate the reality of sinistrality in lefthanded subjects. In the study, it was found that
the subjects have had at least one left-handed
person in their family or among their relatives.
Some subjects had shifted their left hand
preference in favor of their right hands.
Nevertheless, the left-handers have been found
as a presence with their own peculiarities.
The occurrence of asymmetrical handedness
has been found to be closely related with other
asymmetries: eyedness, footedness and
earedness. Bryden (1982) argued that because
handedness may be influenced by social
teaching cultural variation and motor habit
influence or interference, other forms of
asymmetry, such as eyedness, footedness and
earedness may be more reliable measures of
functional laterality. Dargent- Pare, et al.
(1992), studied age, sex and handedness effect
in foot and eye preferences by questionnaire, in
large samples of normal adult populations from
five different countries (total sample, n = 5064).
Foot and eye preference were significantly
associated with handedness in all the ten sexby- country samples for foot and in nine
samples for the eye. Overall frequencies of

crossed frequencies were 5% between hand and

19.5% between hand and eye. In right handers,
a gradual shift towards the right with increasing
age was systematically observed both for
footedness and eyedness. The proportion of
crossed hand foot preference was higher in
men than women and higher in left-handers.
Mandal, et al. (1993) measured the lateral
asymmetry in eye, foot and ear preference by
using a 15 item questionnaire administered to
442 subjects. Degree and magnitude of
asymmetry were greatest for eye, followed by
foot and ear. Inter-correlation of lateral
preferences was all positive and significant.
Two primary factors, eyedness and earedness,
were established. In a study Singh and Qureshi
(2011) studied the relationship among many
side of laterality i.e. handedness, footedness,
eyedness and jawedness. Correlation analysis
shows that handedness, footedness, eyedness
and jawedness are positively & significantly
correlated to each other. Correlation analysis of
data shows a highly positive correlation
(r=0.958) between writing hand and kicking leg
i.e. handedness and footedness. (Singh, B,
2012). Thus it is clear that the relationship
between handedness and familial sinistrality
have strong support of research but there is still
controversy on it. So the purpose of this study
was to measure the handedness, footedness and
familial Sinistrality of normal individuals from
Indias population.
Objectives:To measure the hand preference of the subjects.
To measure the footedness (leg preference)
of the subjects
To measure the relationship between
handedness and footedness of the subjects.
To measure the relationship between
handedness and familial sinistrality.
Hypothesis:
The incidence of left handedness is
expected to be 5% of the total population.
Leg used to kick a ball (footedness) is
positively correlated with handedness.
There is a significant difference between
the handedness and footedness.

Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

34

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among Normal Individuals- Bhagat Singh

Results and Discussion

The incidence of left handedness is high in

left handed families in comparison to right
handed families.

TABLE 1 No. & % of Left and Right handedness

Method

Handedness
Right
668

Total

Total count

Left
32

% of total

4.6 %

95.4 %

100 %

700

TABLE 2 No. & Percentage of Left and Right

hander in relation to their Familial Sinistrality

Handedness
Left Count
% of Total
Right Count
% of Total

Total No. of Left Hander in Family

00
01
02
03
30
02
00
00
93.8
6.2 %
%
546
112
08
02
81.7
16.8
1.2 %
0.3 %
%
%

Total
32
100 %
668
100 %

Fig 1 Percentage of Left and Right handed subjects

120

100
95

80

Percent

Participants:In this study researcher select 700 subjects

randomly from the normal population.
Researcher tried to include all section of
society. The mean age of all the respondents
was 33.98 years with S.D. of being 18.70 years.
Materials:
In this study Researcher used the Steenhuis and
Bryden (1989)s five point scale handedness
questionnaire. Some items were also included
like the arm crossing, leg crossing, leg used to
kick a ball and eyedness. There were 18 items
in this questionnaire related to the handedness
like with which hand do you use to hold
Spoon, Soap, Match stick, knife, umbrella,
open a door, slapping, throw a ball, flip a coin,
hammer, scissor etc. and 4 items were that of
arm crossing, leg crossing and eyedness. Thus a
total of 22 items were included in this
questionnaire.
Procedure:
Each subject was tested individually. In hand
preference assessment, subject was asked to
imagine the situation related to the use of hand
in simple task like holding spoon, holding
match stick, holding soap during bath, holding
knife to cut vegetables, combing hair, holding
umbrella, throwing a ball, slapping, picking a
small and heavy objects, kicking a ball etc. and
was asked to fold the arm, to sit (to see the leg
crossing position) and to see a far distance
object with one eye. The items were read loudly
in Hindi as all the subjects knew Hindi very
well. The response of the rural subjects for each
item was recorded by the researcher while the
urban subjects were told to circle the
appropriate response on the questionnaire. In
addition to this subjects were asked information
regarding their age, sex, birth order, no. of
brother and sister, any left hander in family and
handedness. The responses of the subjects were
marked on the response sheet.

60

40

20
0

LEFT

RIGHT

Handedness

Fig 2 Frequency of Left and Right handed subjects

Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

35

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among Normal Individuals- Bhagat Singh
Fig 4 Percentage of Left and Right handers across
leg used to kick a ball

800

120

700

110

668

600

90

400

80

PERCENT

Count

100
500

300
200
100

70
60
50
40

LEFT

RIGHT

Handedness

30
20

Handedness

Left

10
0
left always

Right
left usually

TABLE 3 Correlations between Handedness and

Footedness (leg used to kick a ball)
Handedness
Pearson
Correlation
Handedness

Footedness

1.000

0.817**

Sig. (2-tailed)
N

700

equally

right usually

right always

Leg used to ki ck a ball

TABLE 4 Chi- square analysis between Handedness and

Leg used to kick a ball (footedness).

.000

Handedness

700

Left

Right

Left always

22

25

Left usually

Equally

Right usually

16

16

Right always

646

651

32

668

700

Value

Df

Asymp.
Sig.

491.365*

0.000

Total

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Fig 3
Percentage of Left and Right handers across their
Familial Sinistrality.
100

Leg
used
to
kick a
Ball

90
80

PERCENT

70
60

Total

50
40
30

Handedness

20

Left

10

Right

0
.00

Chi- square

1.00

2.00

No. of Left Handers in Fami ly

3.00

The data was analyzed using the SPSS

programme for statistical calculation. The data
obtained in the present study was on the
normative scale so the Non- Parametric method
i.e. Chi-square and Correlational analysis, were

Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

36

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among Normal Individuals- Bhagat Singh

used to test the different hypothesis. Table 1

shows the number and percentage left and right
handedness in total sample. Bar diagram (Fig. 1) shows the percentage of left and right handed
subjects in total sample which is 5% and 95%
percent respectively. Fig. - 2 shows the
frequency of left and right handed subjects (32
& 668) in total sample. Fig. 3 shows the
percentage of left and right handers across their
Familial sinistrality.
There are 668 right handers out of which 18.3%
(122) have either one (16.8%), two (1.2%) or
three (0.3%) member in their family (Table
2), while out of 32 left handers there are only
6.3% (2) left hander who have one left hander
in their family (Table 2). Fig. 4 shows the
percentage of left and right handers across leg
used to kick a ball i.e. footedness. The
correlation analysis (r = 0.817) between
handedness and leg used to kick a ball is given
in Table 3. The chi-square value for df 4 is
491.365, which is significant at 0.01 level of
significance. (Table 4). Out of 700 subjects
studied 32 were left handers. These were 4.6 %
of the total sample. The present study confirms
the results of previous studies (Singh & Bryden,
1994; Singh & Manjary, 1995; Singh, et. al.,
2001; Singh, B, 2006) which state that there are
about 5 % left handers in the Indian Population.
So we accept our first hypothesis. This
percentage of left handers in Indian population
is low as compared to the percentage of left
handers in world population i.e. 8% (McManus,
1991; Seddon & McManus, 1993; Reiss and
Reiss, 1999, 2002). Sociological pressures in
the Indian society may be primarily responsible
for this difference. The social pressure is so
high that a large number of left handers use
their right hand for eating, writing and religious
activities but they use their left hand for rest of
the activities. This social pressure is muchmuch higher for females than males. Most
studies and theories related to familial
sinistrality give strong evidence in support of it.
The presence of familial sinistrality increases
the probability of being left-handed (Salmaso
and Longoni, 1983). The present study rejects
the results of many other studies (Salmaso &

Longoni, 1983; Porac, 1986; Cobianchi et al.

1998, Fry, 1990; Coren, 1992; Yetkin, 2001;
Szaflarski et al. 2002) which state that left
handed subjects have high percentage of left
handers in the family in comparison to the right
handers. Our study is in congruence with the
results of the study by McKeever et al. (2000).
So we reject our fourth hypothesis.
The results showed a significant difference and
correlation between handedness and the leg
used to kick a ball i.e. footedness. So we accept
our second and third hypothesis. Left handed
people mostly use their left leg and right
handed people mostly use their right leg to kick
a ball. Broadly speaking, lefties not only use
their left hand preferentially but also their left
leg to kick a ball while right handers prefer
their right hand for working, right leg to kick a
ball. Like other studies (Dargent-Pare et.al.
1992; Mandal et. al. 1993; Kang & Harris,
2000) this study also confirms that sinistrality
or asymmetry extends to the entire body of an
individual and is not restricted to the arms
alone.
Conclusion:
On the basis of the results and discussion we
conclude that there are 4.6% left handers in
Indian population which is very low in
comparison to world left hander's percentage
i.e. 8-10%. Handedness is also significantly
correlated with other asymmetries like
footedness. Left hander uses their left left leg to
kick a ball and same case is with the right
handers and there is no significant relationship
between handedness and familial sinistrality.

Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

37

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among Normal Individuals- Bhagat Singh

References
Annett, M. (1970). A classification of hand
preference by
association analysis. British
Journal of Psychology, 61, 303 321.Annett, M.
(1978). Genetic and Nongenetic Influences on
Handedness. Behavior Genetics, 8, 227-249.
Annett, M. (1979). Family handedness in three
generations predicated by the Right shifted
theory. Annals of Human Genetics, 42, 479-491.
Annett, M. (1981). Familial handedness and sex
differences in strength of hand preference.
Cortex, 17, 141 146.
Annett, M. (1985). Left right hand and brain: the
right shift theory. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Annett, M. (1994). Handedness as a continuous
variable with dextral shift: Sex, generation and
family handedness in subgroups of left and right
handers. Behavioural Genetics, 24 (1), 51 63.
Annett, M. (1998). Handedness and Cerebral
dominance: The right shift theory. Journal of
Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 10
(4), 459 469.
Bryden, M.P. (1977). Measuring handedness with
questionnaire. Neuropsychologia, 15, 617 624.
Bryden, M.P. (1982). Laterality: functional
asymmetry in the intact brain. New York:
Academic Press.
Chapman, L.J. and Chapman, J.P. (1987). The
measurement of handedness. Brain and
Cognition, 6, 175-183.
Cobianchi, A.; Giaquinto, S. and Giovanni, B.
(1998). Positive potential evoked by First
Syllable of spoken words in right and left
handers. Journal of Contemporary Neurology, 3,
1081-1118.
Collins, R.L. (1970). The sound of one paw clapping;
an inquiry into the origins of left-handedness. In
G. Lindzey and D.D. Thiessen (Eds.)
Contribution of Behaviour-Genetics analysis.
The mouse as prototype. New York: Appleton
Century Crofts.
Coren, S. (1992). The Left-Hander Syndrome- The
Causes and Consequences of Left- handedness.
New York: Free Press.
Dargent-Pare, C.; de Agostini, M.; Meshbah, M. and
Dallatolas, G. (1992). Foot and eye preferences
in adults: relationship with handedness, sex and
age. Cortex, 28, 343 351.
Dollfus S, Alary M, Razafimandimby A, Prelipceanu
D, Rybakowski
JK, Davidson
M, Galderisi
S, Libiger J, Hranov L.G, Hummer M, Boter
H, Peuskens J, Kahn R.S, Fleischhacker W.W
and EUFEST Group. (2012). Familial sinistrality

and handedness in patients with first episode

schizophrenia: the EUFEST study. Laterality;
17(2):217-24.
Dawson, J.L.M. (1977). Alaskan Eskimo- hand, eye,
auditory dominance and cognitive style.
Psychologia: an International Journal of
Psychology in the orient, 20, 121 135.
Fry, C.J. (1990). Left-handedness: association with
college major, familial sinistrality, allergies, and
asthma. Psychological Report, 67(2), 419-433.
Geschwind, N and Galaburda, A.M. (1987). Cerebral
lateralization, Cambridge, M.A. M.I.T. Press.
Kang, Y. and Harris, L.J. (2000). Handedness and
footedness in Korean college students. Brain and
Cognition, 43(1-3), 268-74.
Laland, K.N.; Kumm, J.; Van Horn, J.D. and
Feldman, M.W. (1995). A gene-culture model of
human handedness.
Behavioural Genetics,
25(5), 433 445.
Levy, J.; and Nagylaki, T. (1972). A model for the
genetics of handedness. Genetics, 72, 117-128.
Mandal, M.K.; Pandey, G.; Singh, S.K. and Asthana,
H.S. (1993) Degree of asymmetry in lateral
preferences: eye, foot, and ear. The Journal of
Psychology, 126(2), 155 162.
McKeever W.F. and Van Deventer A.D. (1977).
Familial sinistrality and degree of lefthandedness. British Journal of Psychology, 68
(4), 469-471.
McKeever, W.F.; Cerone, L.J. and Cheryl ChaseCarmichael. (2000). Laterality: Asymmetries of
Body. Brain and Cognition, 5(2), 99-110.
McManus, I.C. (1985). Handedness, language
dominance and aphasia: a genetic model.
Psychological
Medicine,
Monograph,
Supplement 8, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
McManus, I.C. (1985b). Right and left hand skill:
Failure of the right shift model. British Journal of
Psychology, 76, 1 16.
McManus, I.C. (1985c). On testing the right shift
theory: a reply to Annett. British Journal of
Psychology, 76, 31 34.
McManus, I.C. (1991). The inheritance of lefthandedness. Ciba Foundation Symposium, 162,
251-67; discussion 267-81.
McManus, I.C. (1998). Handedness, cerebral
lateralization and the evolution of language.
British Journal of Psychology, 12, 71-73.
McManus, I.C.; Amir, T.; Singh, M. and Ida, Y.
(1999). Cultural and historical differences in the
incidence of left handedness are due to the
differences in gene frequency not direct social
pressure. Paper presented in Annual conference

Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

38

Handedness, Footedness and Familial Sinistrality Among Normal Individuals- Bhagat Singh
of International Neuropsychological Society.
Denvour, U.S.A.
Oldfield, R.C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of
handedness:
the
Edinburgh
inventory.
Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.
Porac, C.; Coren, S. and Searleman, A. (1986).
Environmental factors in hand preference
formation: Evidence from attempts to switch the
preferred hand. Behavioural Genetics, 16, 251261.
Porac, C.; Izaak, M. and Rees, L. (1990). Age trends
in handedness: an environmental approach.
Paper presented at the meeting of the Canadian
Psychological Association, Ottawa.
Raczkowski, D.; Kalat, J.W. and Nebes, R. (1974).
Reliability and validity of some handedness
questionnaire items. Neuropsychologia, 12, 4347.
Reiss, M. and Reiss, G. (1999). Current aspects of
handedness. Wien Klin Wochenschr, 111(24),
1009-18.
Reiss, M. and Reiss, G. (2002). Medical problems of
handedness. Wien Medical Wochenschr, 152(56), 148-152.
Salmaso, D, and Longoni, M.A. (1983). Hand
preference in an Italian sample. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 57, 1039-1042.
Satz, P. (1972). Pathological left- handedness: an
explanatory model. Cortex, 8, 121-135.
Satz, P. (1973). Left handedness and early brain
insult: an explanation. Neuropsychologia, 11,
115-117.
Seddon, B. and McManus, I.C. (1993). The incidence
of left handedness: A Meta analysis. Unpublished
manuscript, University College, London, U.K.
Singh, B. (2006). A study of relationship between
sex, handedness and health problems among
normal individuals. Readings in Applied
Psychology, 253-259.
Singh, B. (2011). The incidences of handedness and
health problems between illiterates male and
female of rural areas. Shodh Prerak, 1 (3), 138144.
Singh, B. (2012). Incidences of Handedness and
Footedness in Hindu and Muslim community.
Indian Journal of Psychological Science, 3(1), 17.

Singh, B & Qureshi, A.N. (2011). The many sides of

laterality: Do they correlate to each other A
survey on Muslim undergraduates. Journal of
Humanities & Social Sciences, 3(1), 56-58.
Singh, M. and Bryden, M.P. (1994). The factor
structure of handedness in India. International
Journal of Neuroscience, 74, 33-34.
Singh, M. and Manjary, M. (1995). Observed hand
preference among elementary school children.
Journal of the International Neuropsychological
Society, 1, 179.
Singh M, Manjary M, Dellatolas G. (2001). Lateral
preferences among Indian school children.
Cortex, 37(2): 231-41.
Steenhuis, R.E. and Bryden, M. P. (1989). Different
dimensions of hand preference that relate to
skilled and unskilled activities. Cortex, 25, 289
304. Szaflarski, J.P.; Binder, J.R.; Possing, E.T.;
McKiernan, K.A.; Ward, B.D. and Hammeke,
T.A. (2002). Language lateralization in lefthanded and ambidextrous people: fMRI data.
Neurology, 59(2), 238-244.
Teng, E.L.; Lee, P.; Yang, K. and Chang, P.C.
(1976). Handedness in a Chinese population:
biological, social and pathological factors.
Science, 193, 1148-1150.
Yetkin, Y. (2001). Do environmental and hereditary
factors affect the psychophysiology and left-right
shift in left-handers? International Journal of
Neuroscience, 110(3-4), 109-134.

Journal of Contemporary Psychological Research ISSN 2349-5642 Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2015

39