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
Clinical Trial
. 2002 Nov;88(5):2408-21.
doi: 10.1152/jn.00901.2001.

Handedness: dominant arm advantages in control of limb dynamics

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Handedness: dominant arm advantages in control of limb dynamics

Leia B Bagesteiro et al. J Neurophysiol. 2002 Nov.

Abstract

Recent findings from our laboratory suggest that a major factor distinguishing dominant from nondominant arm performance is the ability by which the effects of intersegmental dynamics are controlled by the CNS. These studies indicated that the dominant arm reliably used more torque-efficient patterns for movements made with similar speeds and accuracy than nondominant arm movements. Whereas, nondominant hand-path curvatures systematically varied with the amplitude of the interaction torques transferred between the segments of the moving limb, dominant hand-path curvatures did not. However, our previous studies did not distinguish whether dominant arm coordination advantages emerged from more effective control of dynamic factors or were simply a secondary effect of planning different kinematics. The purpose of this study was to further investigate interlimb differences in coordination through analysis of inverse dynamics and electromyography recorded during the performance of reaching movements. By controlling the amplitude of intersegmental dynamics in the current study, we were able to assess whether systematic differences in torque-efficiency exist, even when differences in hand-path shape were minimal. Subject's arms were supported in the horizontal plane by a frictionless air-jet system and were constrained to movements about the shoulder and elbow joints. Two _targets were designed, such that the interaction torques elicited at the elbow were either large or small. Our results showed that the former produced large differences in hand-path curvature, whereas the latter did not. Additionally, the movements with small differences in hand-path kinematics showed substantial differences in torque patterns and corresponding EMG profiles which implied a more torque-efficient strategy for the dominant arm. In view of these findings we propose that distinct neural control mechanisms are employed for dominant and nondominant arm movements.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

fig. A1.
fig. A1.
Two-segment link planar arm model.
FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Experimental setup.
FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.
Representative trials made with the nondominant and dominant arms to _target 1. A: individual arm graphs (shoulder, elbow, and hand trajectories. B: individual hand paths (starting circles displayed in the same midline position). C: individual velocity profiles.
FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.
Kinematic comparisons for dominant and nondominant arm movements to _target 1 across subjects. A: initial hand path direction deviation. B: tangential velocity maxima. C: hand-path deviation from linearity. D: final position accuracies. E: shoulder/elbow ratio at maximum tangential hand velocity location. Results from post hoc analysis (Bonferroni-Dunn) are significant (**).
FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.
Nondominant and dominant joint torques for _target 1 movements. A: individual elbow and shoulder torque profiles. B: elbow and shoulder muscle torque impulses (across subjects).
FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.
Dominant and nondominant electromyography (EMG) recordings for elbow muscles (left: biceps brachii and triceps brachii) and shoulder muscles (right: pectoralis major and posterior deltoid) for movements performed to _target 1.
FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.
Representative trials made with the nondominant and dominant arms to _target 2. A: individual arm graphs (shoulder, elbow, and hand trajectories). B: individual velocity profiles. C: individual hand paths (starting circles displayed in the same midline position).
FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.
Kinematic comparisons for dominant and nondominant arm movements to _target 2 across subjects. A: tangential hand velocity maxima. B: handpath direction deviation at Vmax. C: hand-path deviation from linearity. D: final position accuracies. E: shoulder and elbow movement excursions. F: shoulder/elbow ratio at maximum tangential hand velocity location.
FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.
Nondominant and dominant joint torques for _target 2 movements. A: individual elbow and shoulder torque profiles. B: elbow and shoulder muscle torque impulses (across subjects).
FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.
Dominant and nondominant EMG recordings for elbow muscles (left: biceps brachii and triceps brachii) and shoulder muscles (right: pectoralis major and posterior deltoid) for movements performed to _target 2.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abbott BC and Wilkie PR. The relation between velocity of shortening and tension-length curve of skeletal muscle. J Physiol(Lond) 120: 214–223, 1953. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Annett J, Annett M, and Hudson PTW. The control of movement in the preferred and non-preferred hands. Quart J Exp Psych 31: 641–652, 1979. - PubMed
    1. Annett M Spatial ability in subgroups of left- and right-handers. Br J Psychol 83(Pt 4): 493–515, 1992. - PubMed
    1. Caplan PJ and Kinsbourne M Baby drops the rattle: asymmetry of duration of grasp by infants. Child Dev 47: 532–534, 1976. - PubMed
    1. Carson RG, Chua R, Goodman D, Byblow WD, and Elliott D. The preparation of aiming movements. Brain Cogn 28: 133–154, 1995. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources

  NODES
twitter 2